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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (11432)	11/27/2001 2:46:00 PM
From: Moominoid	Respond to of 74559

The problem is that we are abunch of exponential discounters while most people are hyperbolic discounters. Interesting article in the latest issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Latter is a great journal BTW for getting up to date on economic thinking in a fairly easy to read style - just undergrad level of econ needed really...

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (11432)	11/27/2001 3:37:29 PM
From: Mark Adams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

I imagine most folks on this thread at least are in that club already. I agree- those active here are already there or enroute. That means that we are in the position to actually consider these questions, and possibly even take part in shaping our shared future by discussing such things and building an increased awareness. It is possible that we are the vanguard, in a position to help educate the future generations on the importance of capital preservation and growth as a means of ensuring personal and familial survival. The industrial model, which provided a job for life for the loyal worker, allowed a consumption based mindset. Go ahead and spend that paycheck as another will be in the mail next week. Our children and grandchildren need to understand the importance of structuring their expenses and investments carefully. To allow for basic survival in the event their primary income stream is disrupted for some period, perhaps even requiring retraining or relocation to enable them to sell their services. And to eventually free society from the burden of providing them productive pursuits and an income stream. Our existing educational structure is improving in this respect, but much is learned by example in the home. DAK pointed out the importance of experiential learning on CFZ a few days back. What is required is a way of creating opportunities for that experiential learning, when the parents themselves are unsure of what needs to be taught or how to teach it, not having learned it themselves from their own parents. the problem I have with that is not the borrowing but simply how will it work without continued real growth and ever expanding markets. I don't know if they are limitless. With productivity improvements (think nanotech/biotech reducing the cost of industrial production by a factor of 10) it is possible to expand production, reduce unit cost and environmental impact. How to distribute this product to the now displaced workers? It seems we already have a surplus of labor- yet this is a phantom problem and a symptom of the underlying paradigm fault. The Kurzweil article Maurice and others have commented on recently, suggests that the transition may take place sooner than we think- due to the exponential traits of trends in progress and our preference for linear thinking. Greider's work doesn't provide a concise, complete picture of the problem and solution. I think that goes to the Einstein postulate that problems such as this require thinking at a level beyond that which created them. This isn't easy, so any handle on a possible transition path, however murky, is of great value. Say I work for a company and have some profit sharing plan which gives me stock in the company I imagine that will be part of my compensation so my disposable income is lower ? If the stock produces no dividend and we end up in a no growth environment will I be further ahead ? What advice would you give yourself in such a situation? Accept the stock (part of a profit sharing grant by your employer?), but diversify your holdings and future income stream. This is what needs to be taught to Gen X/Y and those who follow. Of course if your money's not working for you that's certainly not optimal. Very true. How many of us allow significant sums of money sit in low or no interest checking accounts, sometimes even paying a monthly fee to the bank for the privilege? We need to spend some effort, no matter how small our resource base, ensuring that our money is working as hard as we are. The idea that wealth is created by borrowing and taking risk is obvious to me now, but I take issue with Greider’s presumption that wealth cannot be created by working hard and saving. It is very difficult to do so- most suited for those of a Stoic mindset, and much easier without the responsibilities and costs of raising a family. But not impossible. I think it fair to say that an individual can accumulate a million dollars by working hard and saving, but that to make the leap to the multimillion level requires the use of financial leverage, and the embrace of debt for investment. So perhaps it's a matter of how an individual defines wealth.