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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (107031)	6/6/2001 6:45:07 PM
From: Mark Adams	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Reading between the lines, what he appears to say, is that capital not required in one country found better uses in other countries and free flow of this capital allowed growth on a global basis to approach optimum when compared to a closed nation-state system with capital restrictions. I'm still in the camp that believes strict adherence to the Gold Standard limits growth below what is sustainable. That Gold was part of the picture is a moot point, IMO. Found this at liquidity trim tabs this pm; FED STUDY SHOWS NEGATIVE SAVINGS RATE MISLEADING. LOWER BRACKETS SAVINGS INCREASING. UPPER BRACKET SELLS LOTS OF STOCK EACH YEAR. The Federal Reserve published a study in April (A Cohort Analysis of Household Saving in the 1990's by Maki and Palumbo) showing that all but the highest income bracket actually increased real savings rates over the past few years. However, the top bracket of income types had a negative savings rate. Why? They sold lots of stock. They didn't necessarily consume anything. Rather they sold huge amounts of stock, in many cases using the funds for business purposes. In other words, when insiders sell large numbers of original shares, that sale shows up as consumption, regardless of what the money was used for. trimtabs.com