SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: smolejv@gmx.net who wrote (5088)6/18/2001 1:13:22 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559
 
More crime in France than in US:

english.hk.dailynews.yahoo.com

Satellite imaging demonstrates that most greenhouse gases are emitted in South America, Africa and Asia:

earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Click on "movie" or where it says "click here to start animation". In South America, caused by slash-and-burn agriculture in the Amazon, in Africa, by brush fires in the Sahel due to drought. In 2000, there were forest fires in Indonesia, not sure where else in Asia. So I don't know whether Asian CO2 is due to forest fires, humans using wood for fuel, or dirty industry.

There is a plume of CO2 from the US in early August, 2000, which coincides with a period of forest fires that burned on approximately 1 million acres across 12 western states.

One of the things that intrigues me the most about the animation is how much more CO2 is being emitted worldwide when the imaging begins in March, 2000, and how it declines rapidly except for the hot spots. I wonder if it was industrial in origin, and if the decline has is any connection to the worldwide economic slowdown? Or were there forest fires?

It sort of gives a new complexity to the debate about global warming if it's being caused by indigenous peoples, peasants, farmers, and forest fires, doesn't it? The billion people in India and the billion people in China cooking their daily meal and warming their tiny hovels?

Not politically acceptable - it must be caused by greedy capitalists in their SUVs.:)



To: smolejv@gmx.net who wrote (5088)6/18/2001 3:18:10 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Respond to of 74559
 
dj I read Bill Parish's "Microsoft Financial Pyramid". I think he's up a gum tree. He's also dishonest, which to me is a major indicator of lack of credibility. But even if I believe him, I read what he says Microsoft is doing and I say "So?"

Microsoft has big, real earnings and I suppose even pays a lot of taxes. Actual, real $$ going to the US government. The stock options business is not a debt to employees. Employees accept lower pay, figuring they'll make heaps on their shares.

The current Nasdaq crunch, MSFT included, will have softened the enthusiasm for shares instead of money when going to work.

Bill wrote <Bill Gates has publicly said that this is his favorite publication on finance and economics. It is also generally believed to be the leading such publication in the world. In an 8/7/99 cover story, The Economist noted that a proper accounting at Microsoft would result in a loss of $18 billion for 1998 rather than the reported earnings of $4.5 billion. If you are not an accountant, don't waste the time pretending you are, trust The Economist, the earnings are not real. Don't let yourself be intimidated or deceived by financial analysts, TV commentators, bullies on Internet forums or Microsoft's elaborate public relations campaign. Bill Gates trusts The Economist and you should too. Abbey Joseph Cohen and Rick Sherlund of Goldman Sachs have been sent this material numerous times over a 9 month period and neither has publicly divulged this situation.>

Me trust the Economist because $ill does? This is cult language. Don't think, trust me. I have the word. Anyway, $ill didn't say he trusts everything the Economist might say [assuming Bill has interpreted it correctly - I am not going to pursue this further as it lacks credibility]. Having a favourite magazine is different from accepting all it says and transferring that non-existent trust to a third person.

Abbey Cohen and Rich Sherlund probably chucked it in the trash. It's not that they refused to <publicly divulge this situation>.

The central theme that wild speculation on shares, including stock options instead of payment in money, is economically disruptive and destructive is reasonable. But it's not fraud or anything conspiratorial in my opinion.

A company doesn't write out huge cheques for taxes if they don't have to. Microsoft has obviously decided it's better to pay people in shares later, than in money now, even though paying in money now would go as a tax deduction and reduce their tax payments. The employees obviously agree. It sounds like two consenting adults to me.

I don't know why [other than envy, jealousy, alpha male envy, geek and nerd dislike by macho jocks] Microsoft attracts rabid [I think rabid about the right word] hatred [which I think is also the right word]. Judge Jackson, Joel Klein and Janet Reno wasted vast effort and money on harrassing probably the greatest company the world has ever seen. Judge Jackson is showing up as an emotional bully whose main purpose was to show that smart arse $ill Gates who's boss. JJ didn't dispassonately handle the case.

The JJJ Klan were the bad guys [Janet, Joel, Jackson].

$ill Gates is the good guy.
Mqurice

PS: I have no financial interest in MSFT and they are in fact a competitor I will bankrupt one day. My Eudora software, CDMA networks, etc etc will replace his bloatware. Actually, I suspect what will really happen is that WirelessKnowledge, $ill's Tablet and other co-operative enterprises will dominate and Microsoft and QUALCOMM will settle into happy symbiosis, for the most part, [like Intel and MSFT in the fixed computer world].

Mqurice