To: TobagoJack who wrote (13352 ) 1/12/2002 3:50:21 AM From: smolejv@gmx.net Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559 well, in my case it is more of the >>portfolio<< money management. Discipline. Risk asessment. Stop loss control. I cant do anything regarding consumers' behaviour inside my family (g). Have you read the latest Noland & Auerback?prudentbear.com prudentbear.com from Noland... ((bolds by dj) Interestingly, Fed chairman Greenspan’s “significant risks” speech today put the spotlight directly on the “stabilizing force” having been played by the household sector. He addressed specifically the key issue of mortgage finance and the “associated liquification of increases in home values,” stating that “cash-outs rose from an estimated annual rate of about $20 billion in early 2000 to a rate of roughly $75 billion in the third quarter…” in addition to “realized capital gains.” “The recent rise in home mortgage rates, however, is likely to damp housing activity and equity extraction.” ... And Wednesday we had some candid dialogue from Robert McTeer, President of Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas: “Those of you who studied money and banking at a time that they were emphasizing the monetary aggregates might say, “yea, we know about short-term interest rates but what about the money supply growth and all that stuff?” Well, it’s been uneven over the year, but it’s been very rapid. Both by short-term interest rate standards and money growth standards, Fed policy got very easy (inaudible) - peddle to the metal. ” Peddle to the metal indeed… ... from Auerback ...Where the Argentineans, Asians, and much of the developing world see cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy, the exponents of globalisation and neo-liberalism see a series of once-off problems, each to be ring-fenced with no broader implications to be derived from the lessons of the particulars. What's wrong with Disneyland or Nikes or the Whopper, they ask? We are just "giving people what they want." But, as writer Benjamin Barber has recently noted (“Beyond Jihad and McWorld – The Nation, Jan. 2002), “this merchandiser's dream is a form of romanticism, the idealism of neo-liberal markets, the convenient idyll that material plenty can satisfy spiritual longing so that fishing for profits can be thought of as synonymous with trolling for liberty.” The retreat of the new Argentinean government into a program of classic 1970s-style Peronism may indeed reflect a desperate and ultimately destructive reaction against aggressive markets in a free-trade world. But however misguided, this reaction is understandable in the context of a consensus that unthinkingly seeks to use market fundamentalism to colonise every aspect of human relations under the guise of “liberty” and “globalisation”, and then changes the rules of the game when things begin to come unstuck. It is not for supporters of free markets and liberal economic reforms to explain glibly why the Argentina experiment failed, without honestly addressing some of the very real flaws inherent in their own system with its multitude of contradictions: protectionism used as a means of securing “fast track authority” ostensibly to negotiate free trade agreements, market triumphalism in the context of crony capitalism. Until this gap between the ideal and reality is addressed honestly, we will likely see more Argentinean-style backlashes across the globe. Social injustice and an unregulated wild capitalism that leaves no space for pre-existing cultural and social mores not only create conditions on which terrorism feeds but invites overreaction in the name of rectification yr DJ