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: Raymond Duray who wrote (19066)	5/18/2002 2:27:58 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Hi Ray, Maurice, in truth, is an OK human being and is not pulling your extremities with that rant of his. This does not change the fact that he is sometimes suicidal in his investment approach:0) Now, for a bit of pulling and tweaking :0), this you wrote ... Message 17485412 <<taboo ... declared class war ... Fat cats ... screwed ... middle class ... Dubya's pals can own seventh and eight homes on Antigua and Barbados ... Mad as Hell>> Case in point for Argentina fractal-scaled up, however justified, spells trouble for capital, because democratic class wars and cleansing revolutions, subjects I do know something about from experience as opposed to text books, tends to not discriminate finely, and is bad for wealth of all flavors. These days, comments detrimental to Caribbean home owners may even be categorized as financial terrorism:0) Chugs, Jay

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (19066)	5/18/2002 2:30:03 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

<That was astonishingly out of character.> I assure you I remain in character. Your misperception of my character is what needs adjustment. Maybe you have a grab-bag of false beliefs about what things go together automatically; "Extreme wacko right wing maniacs like Winn are in favour of destroying the earth, killing 99.99% of species and enslaving the proletariat". That wasn't a leg pull [previous post]. BP paid me a lot of money to say stuff like that [over a period of a decade] and while I like a joke, and sometimes my jokes, which seem obvious to me, are taken as being serious comment by readers, that was serious comment. Actually, they didn't pay me to say only that [that was a relatively small part of what they paid me for] but they got it thrown in for no extra charge. I actually disagree with the idea that CO2 from people will fry the earth. I consider controls on CO2 a waste of money because I think that CO2 level increases are a good thing overall. If CO2 is controlled, BP will sell more fuel, to handle the processing of CO2 into sequestered form. For example, if CO2 from power stations is liquefied and stored under 400 metres of water, that'll require a lot more fuel to be burned to do it. So it doesn't surprise me that BP is okay with CO2 controls. They'll just go along with whatever political mania develops and public support is given. They won't oppose it, for fear of being seen as big, bad, corporates. A shame, but that's the price of manic environmentalism. We have moved from a time when the costs of pollution were unrecognized in the legal system and the economic benefits to a relatively few polluting people over-ruled the unpleasant effects on everyone else, to a time when the costs of uneconomic environmental actions are spread over everyone and wild-eyed environmentalists with no recognition of economics have their wicked way. It's the curse of democracy - diffuse costs and concentrated benefits in a fog of general ignorance. Mqurice