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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ian@SI who wrote (46493)	5/9/2001 3:03:48 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Even someone with a SAT score of 1000 or less can always become a multi millionaire if they excel at some sport such as baseball, football, hockey or golf. Ian I agree with your characterization of hockey players--i would give them average SAT of 500. But I take exception to golf. Tiger went to Stanford.<ggg> mike

To: Ian@SI who wrote (46493)	5/9/2001 3:11:53 PM
From: willcousa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Essentially, people earn in the private sector by supplying society with something it wants. That seems to be a pretty noble undertaking.

To: Ian@SI who wrote (46493)	5/9/2001 4:17:27 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 70976

Taiwan foundries saw sales slide in April By Sun Pai-yi EE Times (05/09/01 11:32 a.m. EST) TAIPEI, Taiwan — Sales at the world's top two semiconductor foundries continued to slide in April, dropping 12 percent at United Microelectronics Corp. and 21 percent at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. The results confirmed many expectations that the second quarter would begin with a whimper and then painfully limp forward as the foundries try to keep operating margins from evaporating. TSMC offered no additional guidance for May beyond what its chairman, Morris Chang, said last week at an investors conference. After explaining gloomy first-quarter results, Chang said he believed the semiconductor industry slump would hit bottom in April or May. With TSMC's fab utilization rate expected to hover around 50 percent in the second quarter, analyst Eric Wang with ABN AMRO said Chang may be right. "Now is the realization of the worst," Wang said. "I expect a mild recovery in the third quarter, and a relatively strong rebound in the fourth." But Gartner Dataquest is forecasting a modest recovery in 2002. On Tuesday (May 8), the research firm once again revised its estimate of industry performance, saying a 17 percent decline was likely for this year, followed by a slow uptick. "In the third and fourth quarters TSMC's sales will be a little bit higher," said Henry Wang, an analyst at Entrust Securities. "But . . . there will be only a moderate recovery." April's numbers marked the fourth month of declining or flat revenues for TSMC. Sales for the month totaled $281 million, down from $358 million in March, but up 4 percent from a year ago. At UMC, sales totaled $177 million in April, down from $200 million in March and off 21 percent from a year ago. Both companies have predicted that sales in the second quarter would decline roughly 25-to-30 percent from the first quarter.

To: Ian@SI who wrote (46493)	5/9/2001 5:57:26 PM
From: Sam Citron	Respond to of 70976

Ian, I basically agree with your views on entitlements. However I would concede that Cary's point may have some validity also. I learned some time ago that for any given change in public policy there will be winners and losers and that sometimes the best approach is for the winners to help compensate the losers. If the winners still come out ahead and everyone still wants to play the game then it is a pareto optimal solution. By all means we should include in our cost-benefit analysis of free trade an attempt to identify groups and sectors that may be vulnerable and see if anything can be done to help. My own view is that the benefits are so enormous that we should help, for example, with education and retraining efforts.

To: Ian@SI who wrote (46493)	5/9/2001 10:51:56 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

RE: "...entitlement vs earned benefits..." and "...an equal share..." I agree that there is NO entitlement to an equal share. I believe, as you do, that someone is entitled to what they earn. I believe that what someone earns is partially determined by supply and demand within a complex international economic system. If effort were the only determinant of what someone is able to earn, I would be inclined to believe that someone is entitled ONLY to what they earn. Since effort is NOT the only determinant, I believe that someone who puts forth reasonable effort is entitled to a share sufficient to live a decent life.