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: RealMuLan who wrote (36181)	7/17/2003 1:46:10 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Yiwu, it's criminally negligent for environmental protection authorities to allow lead to be used in petrol. It damages developing brains causing a reduction in intelligence, and no doubt other functions too. In my opinion, it was one of the great mistakes of the 20th century. BP Oil paid me a lot of money and petrol was my specific responsibility and lead in particular was the big issue. Initially I thought it couldn't be much of a problem, but after reading all the studies on the effects, I realized it was absurd to include lead in petrol. There was never a net economic benefit. I think there was a net economic loss [apart from brain damage]. People in China worry about cellphones damaging their brains. They should worry about 1000 times more, no make that 10,000 times more, about lead. They should also worry 10,000 times more about the benzene and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons coming out the exhaust pipes. They should start working on superconducting maglev cars with individual electronic control. These should fly in tubes with reduced air pressure. They could travel at 500 kph for longer distances at 100kph around town. Yes, I am completely obsessed and in love with cyberphones and It. My identity is absorbing into it. Soon, I will cease to exist other than as a cyberparticle. Such food as I mentioned is crayfish, corn, beans, apples, pears, tomatoes [potentate variety with high potassium ratio in the soil], snapper, cheese, peas, oranges, carrots, salmon, eggs [fowl and fish], avocados, macadamia nuts, almonds, cashews, rice, wheat, pumpkin, kumara, potato, paua, and many other yummy things. The USA did default completely on buying sheep from NZ [they set a low quota] and has cut their steel buying by introducing very high tariffs. That's their loss and China's gain. I don't know why the USA wishes to self-destruct, but that's what some people choose to do. They become introspective, isolated and depressed - they don't understand how the world works and become frustrated at their inability to control themselves and the world. Hopefully there are enough people in the USA who have a good understanding of and attitude to life that they will prevail. Yiwu, it's true that some raw materials are in short supply and therefore have a high price. But there's nothing to preclude China using as much oil as they like. They can synthesize it from air if they want to. It's all just dollars and sense. Wealth is unlimited. It's our brains which are limited. Our wealth is a function of our intelligence, imagination and energy. The raw materials which matter, such as aluminium, iron, silicon and carbon are effectively unlimited at current prices. Mqurice

To: RealMuLan who wrote (36181)	7/17/2003 2:15:23 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Hi Yiwu Zhang, But China should be really careful to take on further debt from the US. As long as China insists upon pegging their currency to the US$, they have no other choice than to invest/store their surplus accounts in US$ denominated assets. Removing the peg might be comparable to removing a large log that blocks the natural flow atop a swiftly moving river. Things will really start to move once the natural flow is returned. The problem is that no one knows who (if anyone) will benefit from the action. China (and the rest of Asia as well) fears that they will "lose". Europe senses that they (Europe) will "win". The USA could argue itself to be a "winner" or a "loser" depending upon how results are measured. My best guess is that the Chinese peg to the US$ will stay in place, at least until the Chinese officials feel that they have some sort of hedge against losing whatever inroads they feel they have made towards becoming an economic superpower. The best one might hope for is that the Chinese will revalue their currency to better reflect reality, but even that limited action might be months or years away. KJC