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: elmatador who wrote (29816)	3/20/2003 10:18:30 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Re: Paul Kennedy comments - How does his theory explain Hong Kong , Singapore, Japan, Switzerland, Costa Rica ? (relatively low resources, high wealth) How does it explain Mexico, Nigeria, Burma, Phillipines - lots of resources , not much wealth. Culture, behaviour and incentive matter. Look a Singapore under the leadership of Lee Kwan Yee - slimey jungle to world class city in about 30 years. If you want an example with the same geopgraphy, but different cultures separated in time, look at China - Cutural Revolution vs. the past 10 years.

To: elmatador who wrote (29816)	3/21/2003 8:01:57 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 74559

TeoTwawKi ... buy gold

To: elmatador who wrote (29816)	3/22/2003 9:30:01 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 74559

it may be argued that the geographical extent, population, and natural resources of the U.S. suggest that it ought to possess perhaps 16 or 19% of the world’s wealth and power, but because of historical and technical circumstances favourable to it, that share rose to 40% or more by 1945; and what we are witnessing at the moment is the early decades of the ebbing away from that extraordinarily high figure to a more ‘natural’ share.” If the US had 40% of the world's wealth and power in 1945, what percent does it actually have today? You'd think it would be lower today but I recall reading 43% in an article a week or so ago. What is it?