Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (122338)	4/1/2001 1:47:56 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

i vehemently disagree. all, and i repeat, 100% of all economic productivity is calculated in gdp without bastardizing the numbers... at least, nobody has made a cogent argument otherwise. here are some links to a lively discussion on the matter... Message 15593308 Message 15593355 Message 15593378 Message 15593508 Message 15593535 Message 15593813 Message 15594378 Message 15594399 Message 15594448 Message 15594471 Message 15595275

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (122338)	4/1/2001 1:51:29 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 164684

here's another discussion... siliconinvestor.com Message 15593795 Message 15593822 siliconinvestor.com pay special attention to the last sentence in the last post as that is the crux of the matter, imho. iow, if your efficiencies don't translate into dollar then the output of the nation has not increased. period. you can't buy more good without more dollars. if those efficiencies you see translate into more dollars then gdp picks it up. gdp worries about revenues, not profits. if you increase your profits within a nonchanging gdp condition, you have robbed peter to pay you. zero sum game from the macro point of view.