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: GST who wrote (129420)	8/1/2001 11:11:51 AM
From: H James Morris	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

GST, can you help me to understand why the pimps on Wall Street are getting such a bad reputation since the 'bubble' burst? >In the latest blow to the image of Wall Street stock analysts, federal regulators said Tuesday that more than one-quarter of analysts they surveyed had purchased shares of companies at low prices before recommending the stocks to investors. latimes.com

To: GST who wrote (129420)	8/1/2001 11:23:20 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

>>SB: Can you help us to understand how chain weighted dollar measurements are used in the gdp calculation and what the supposed logic is?<< chain weighted dollars are a statistical mirage (iow, not real dollars) intended to boost gdp (and productivity) beyond what it would be otherwise. alan and co. didn't believe productivity was being accurately measured using a more close approximation to economic (read, real dollars) gdp. please recall that changing gdp while leaving employment hours static results in an increase in productivity. why did he believe this? he believed that computers were drastically improving productivity. unfortunately, the magnitude of change in productivity left a lot to be desired IF his premise was true. in classic dilbert management style, greenspan didn't examine the numbers and find out why the expected results differed from his personal paradigm. rather, he just changed the numbers wrt computer sales without proving why or how productivity was mysteriously lost. it is paradigm paralysis - defined as a terminal disease of certainty. alan knew the answer going in and so when the feedback system told him differently, the feedback system was deemed wrong. the problem is that alan.com's paradigm paralysis is terminal for the nation. i've gone through enough problem solving processes in my life to know that this approach is dumber than door nails. i've approached problems where i felt strongly that i knew the root cause. however, when i test my hypothesis and the DATA tells me i'm wrong, i learn from the exercise and begin devising different ways to confirm or contradict the result and/or begin investigating elsewhere. I DON'T CHANGE THE FREAKIN' DATA! i'd expect to get FIRED if i approached the situation in such an unethical manner. the application of chain weighted dollars goes something like this (the whole rig-a-morol is quite complex) - a computer sold for $1k this year has a processor twice as fast as last year's $1k model. therefore, it is really worth $2k, not the $1k sales price. let's dump $2k into gdp to represent these sales. i've taken the liberty to grossly generalize, but this covers the general concept. they are not measuring the economics of the computer, rather they are measuring the characteristics of the computer based on their personal opinion. like i said, the concept can be used for ice cream, too. since ice cream 0tastes twice as good in summer, let's add a chained dollar to each sale of a dollar ice cream during the summer (taste w/b the characteristic measured). here's a link that goes into chain weighted dollars (and other statistical manipulations - which, btw, ALWAYS produce some kind of benefit for the govt ;-). you have to go down a bit to get to the economic articles. mwhodges.home.att.net