SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: techguerrilla who wrote (9758)11/23/2002 10:10:58 AM
From: T L Comiskey  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
On ne'er-du-well's...Doing Well

The Sons Also Rise

By Paul Krugman

America, we all know, is the land of opportunity. Your success in life depends on your ability and drive, not on who your father was.

Just ask the Bush brothers. Talk to Elizabeth Cheney, who holds a specially created State Department job, or her husband, chief counsel of the Office of Management and Budget. Interview Eugene Scalia, the top lawyer at the Labor Department, and Janet Rehnquist, inspector general at the Department of Health and Human Services. And don't forget to check in with William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, and the conservative commentator John Podhoretz.

What's interesting is how little comment, let alone criticism, this roll call has occasioned. It might be just another case of kid-gloves treatment by the media, but I think it's a symptom of a broader phenomenon: inherited status is making a comeback.

It has always been good to have a rich or powerful father. Last week my Princeton colleague Alan Krueger wrote a column for The Times surveying statistical studies that debunk the mythology of American social mobility. "If the United States stands out in comparison with other countries," he wrote, "it is in having a more static distribution of income across generations with fewer opportunities for advancement." And Kevin Phillips, in his book "Wealth and Democracy," shows that robber-baron fortunes have been far more persistent than legend would have it.

But the past is only prologue. According to one study cited by Mr. Krueger, the heritability of status has been increasing in recent decades. And that's just the beginning. Underlying economic, social and political trends will give the children of today's wealthy a huge advantage over those who chose the wrong parents.

For one thing, there's more privilege to pass on. Thirty years ago the C.E.O. of a major company was a bureaucrat ? well paid, but not truly wealthy. He couldn't give either his position or a large fortune to his heirs. Today's imperial C.E.O.'s, by contrast, will leave vast estates behind ? and they are often able to give their children lucrative jobs, too. More broadly, the spectacular increase in American inequality has made the gap between the rich and the middle class wider, and hence more difficult to cross, than it was in the past.

Meanwhile, one key doorway to upward mobility ? a good education system, available to all ? has been closing. More and more, ambitious parents feel that a public school education is a dead end. It's telling that Jack Grubman, the former Salomon Smith Barney analyst, apparently sold his soul not for personal wealth but for two places in the right nursery school. Alas, most American souls aren't worth enough to get the kids into the 92nd Street Y.

Also, the heritability of status will be mightily reinforced by the repeal of the estate tax ? a prime example of the odd way in which public policy and public opinion have shifted in favor of measures that benefit the wealthy, even as our society becomes increasingly class-ridden.

It wasn't always thus. The influential dynasties of the 20th century, like the Kennedys, the Rockefellers and, yes, the Sulzbergers, faced a public suspicious of inherited position; they overcame that suspicion by demonstrating a strong sense of noblesse oblige, justifying their existence by standing for high principles. Indeed, the Kennedy legend has a whiff of Bonnie Prince Charlie about it; the rightful heirs were also perceived as defenders of the downtrodden against the powerful.

But today's heirs feel no need to demonstrate concern for those less fortunate. On the contrary, they are often avid defenders of the powerful against the downtrodden. Mr. Scalia's principal personal claim to fame is his crusade against regulations that protect workers from ergonomic hazards, while Ms. Rehnquist has attracted controversy because of her efforts to weaken the punishment of health-care companies found to have committed fraud.

The official ideology of America's elite remains one of meritocracy, just as our political leadership pretends to be populist. But that won't last. Soon enough, our society will rediscover the importance of good breeding, and the vulgarity of talented upstarts.

For years, opinion leaders have told us that it's all about family values. And it is ? but it will take a while before most people realize that they meant the value of coming from the right family.

nytimes.com



To: techguerrilla who wrote (9758)11/23/2002 4:58:31 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Investors Are Embracing That 4-Letter Word: Tech

By ERIN SCHULTE
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE
Updated November 23, 2002 12:23 p.m. EST

In the last three months, Wall Street has taken a shine to that old four-letter word: tech.

Top-performing industries since September include once-shunned pariahs like wireless communications (up 31%, according to BigCharts.com), Internet services (up 40%), consumer electronics (up 16%) and telecommunications (up 17%).

While strategists seem convinced the market scraped along the final valley of the bear market in early October, badly bruised investors can't help but wonder whether the latest technology binge -- with the Nasdaq up 32% from its low on Oct. 9 -- is finally the real thing, and whether it's wise to join the party.

The recent tech rally came even as top names issued ho-hum outlooks. Cisco Systemsrecently said it expected sales to drop 4% sequentially in the fourth quarter. Dell's cautious fourth-quarter outlook fell short of what Wall Street was expecting. Most recently, Hewlett-Packard's CEO Carly Fiorina said Wednesday that the company isn't seeing a meaningful increase in information-technology spending, though it seems to be "stabilizing."

Stable. That's not exactly a word that should inspire giddy paroxysms of hope about the future of tech spending, and yet, H-P shares leapt 14% during the next trading day, helping push the Dow industrials to their highest point since August. The Nasdaq sprung to its highest close since June, and the market rally stretched into a seventh glorious week.

See a calendar of earnings reports expected in the coming week.

See a calendar of economic reports expected in the coming week.



The technology sector is pulling back from the abyss, with analysts expecting earnings growth of 2% for the sector this year and 34% growth next year.

But earnings expectations keep getting ratcheted down -- for instance, analysts now hope for 17% earnings growth this quarter, compared with a much more generous 54% growth target at the beginning of the third quarter. The 17% might seem like a decent rebound, but comparisons from last year's fourth quarter aren't exactly tough. Meanwhile, analysts are already scaling back hopes for earnings in the first quarter.

And, tech stocks still aren't cheap, even after two years of painful selling. Steve Milunovich, global technology strategist at Merrill Lynch, says technology valuations are "fairly stretched" at 24 times 2003 earnings, measured by stocks included in the Merrill Lynch 100 Technology Index.

He adds that pricing is a problem -- while unit sales could tick up next year across the tech world, prices are low and top-line growth could suffer.

Bulls argue that Wall Street, an ever-forward-looking place, is banking on a rebound in the economy and, in turn, tech spending next year.

"Tech stocks are sniffing out the likelihood of a cyclical recovery," says Arnold Berman, technology strategist at SoundView Technology Group in Old Greenwich, Conn. "What's new is that the needs are increasing. [Next year] could be another really rotten year for tech spending, but if -- and only if -- it's a really rotten year for the economy."

Optimists say there is pent-up demand for technology products, which companies have put off upgrading or purchasing in the last years as their bottom lines have struggled to stay in the black. Once companies see the economy gain steam, they'll spend in the areas they've had to neglect. Many cite the "PC cycle" -- businesses usually replace computers every three years (though that gets put off if pennies are being pinched), and the last upgrade cycle was in 1999, when unfounded Y2K fears reigned.

Many seem hopeful for improved capital spending late in 2003. But the current enthusiasm for technology stocks will most likely wane early in the year.

Ray Rund, the head of research at Shaker Investments in Cleveland, notes than some big areas within technology often see seasonal weakness in the first quarter, which could scare investors out of the sector.

"The first quarter for semiconductors is traditionally a down quarter, and if people are expecting the seasonality maybe they won't be too upset, but if it's down more than people are expecting, you might find them selling off," says Mr. Rund.

In addition, he questions some of the "good news" the tech sector has allegedly reacted to the past few months. Earnings expectations were so reduced that anything short of horrible was considered a cause for celebration.

Getting into techs now could be good for turning a quick buck, but like last year, longer-term prospects for the sector remain hazy and January could be ugly.

Because the fourth quarter is seasonally a strong time for technology companies, Mr. Milunovich says, gains are further plumped by money managers chasing those returns. While he expects the rally to charge ahead through year's end because of those factors, the calendar's turn may come with a pullback.

"I don't see a fundamental basis for this to continue," Mr. Milunovich says. "I don't think capital spending is going to turn next year -- IT might be up a couple percent, but I think it will come back in 2004."

He notes that Wall Street saw a similar rally in the tech late last year as strategists began to predict an imminent turnaround, if a small one, in capital spending. That rally fizzled in late January.

Enjoy it while it lasts.

Write to Erin Schulte at erin.schulte@wsj.com