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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oblomov who wrote (162026)	4/25/2002 9:51:49 AM
From: Ken98	Respond to of 436258

But what about this time? <<If long-term economic health is the goal, then the better course would be to let the uneconomic investments be liquidated. This happened to a large extent in the 1930's US, and it happened several times in the 19th century US, to a positive long-term effect.>>

To: Oblomov who wrote (162026)	4/25/2002 9:59:06 AM
From: reaper	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 436258

<<If you are a demagogue interested only in short-term economic well-being, then yes. >> Is there ANYBODY in a current leadership position (political or corporate) in this 'great' land of ours that is NOT only interested in the short-term and what the newspapers (or their bank accounts) say about them TOMORROW? Do self-indulgent baby-boomers give a rat's arse about the long-term? Do media outlets feed the unwashed masses any thoughtful commentary about the long term? I gave up on anybody of importance caring about the long-term quite a long-term ago. Cheers