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.

Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (4472)	8/29/2001 12:03:29 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 33421

Hi Lee, Thanks for the rant. First drawer stuff. If I might quibble a bit though (you didn't think I'd let you off that easy, now did you?), I was not at all impressed with your logic regarding the cost of labor in the U.S. I think that it is important, on a democratic forum such as this thread, to keep a sense of perspective. Is the U.S. blue collar worker paid too much? I hardly think so. Should he be forced to compete with grossly underpaid workers in 3rd world sweatshops? I hardly think so. And just who is foisting this unfair competition on the American worker? Why, it's the same self-serving class of economic parasites who are, according to the AFL-CIO, raping the worker and failing to reward the shareholder: Inequality between the shop floor and the executive suite is at an all-time high. According to Business Week, the average CEO made 42 times the average blue-collar worker’s pay in 1980, 85 times in 1990 and a staggering 531 times in 2000. aflcio.org The greed of this class is astonishing as well as reprehensible in a free society. As I see it, they have no moral or ethical compass, no sense of fair play and no understanding of the utterly corrosive nature of their grasping. Why, it's enough to make me lose faith in the system. That said, why in the world would you think GWB would care to come across as a feel good President? Since he represents the interests of the executive suite and the boardroom, there is absolutely no motivation whatsoever to care about psychologically propping up the spirit of the average consumer. As we can see, the rewards to the executive suite have become de-linked to performance there. Profits can go down, unemployment rise, shareholders can get shorn and yet executive pay and perks continue to rise. No, GWB will give us all a good dose of sackcloth and ashes, while the goodies keep flowing to his cronies and thus back to him. All under the cover of a high toned moralizing about the need for the guilty in the economy to heal themselves. Me? I'd rather party. -Ray

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (4472)	8/29/2001 7:23:07 PM
From: John Pitera	Respond to of 33421

Hi Lee, you got lots of good material in that rant -g- Sorry I rant here but I cant seem to get this as concise as I want to as tired as I am and tend to rant no matter how many times I type it. I think we can really see this concept of the inextricable link between Popular Mass Mood and the Workings of the Economy. After all, several have said that the Banking System continues to function due to the faith in the System. When Times are good, it sounds silly that the Financial System works due to the believe of Us collectively that it will, when we get to out periods of economic despair, then we can glimpse how important belief in the system is. It is amazing that the mood of the population can affect the economy so much. When looking at past boom bust cycles, it isn't hard to see that much didn't change FA wise other than mood. Happy go lucky prompts spending thus up cycles and then the hangovers cause the crashes and returns to the norms. Over stretching credit spurs growth despite being bad for the debtor. History will likely show that the past 18 year boom was mainly a feel good phenomenon and the whole new economy theory and productivity increase was a sham but what is important is that it made many wealthy and did create some good things in technology Maybe not so much of a sham, as just overstated and a bit overloved. John