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.

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

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (29930)	10/11/2003 11:09:31 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 89467

I really don't want to get caught up defending Nixon, because my folks first got to know and hate him when he ran for Congress in '48, but... he did go to China, and he started the EPA and OSHA, I believe. You may not like the latter two, but I am the liberal one, so I do. This guy, between the economy, the looting, the preemptive warfare,Patriot Act, the pirate energy policy (seize the oil and repel all boarders), etc, will be worse. WR

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (29930)	10/13/2003 8:19:31 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

On the hedonic deflator... here's interesting. theinquirer.net TWO REPORTS by John Crudele in the New York Post last week showed David A. Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merril Lynch, blowing his whistle at the investment community and casting a grim but potentially cleansing light on the U.S. computer and peripherals market. Among other things, Rosenberg reports that the money being spent on computers and other technology by U.S. corporations is nowhere near what is being reported by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis. While Washington reported corporate spending for technology to the tune of $133 billion, Rosenberg estimates the actual number is closer to $15 billion in his Sept.5th and Oct. 6th reports. That's about an 89% margin of error. The misleading numbers apparently are caused by a technique called "hedonic price indexing", which massages the investment figures to account for improvements in technology. Washington economists rationalize that while businesses are not actually spending more money on computers and peripherals, developments in computing technology give them "more bang for the same buck" and apparently doctor the numbers accordingly, in order to suggest higher growth than is actually occurring. If tech spending "accounted for 30 percent of the overall increase in GDP", Rosenberg's report implies that Washington is reporting GDP growth at nearly twice its actual rate of increase--not a cheerful thought for all of those who've recently re-entered the stock markets. But sanity might still take hold. A report from Reuters dated Sept 23 quotes Steven Landefeld, the director of the Bureau of Economic Analysis in saying "We're taking away the misleading components". Apparently the BoEA (not to be confused with BEA) is fed up with the "flap", but will this change in policy come in time to stem the flow of Lumpeninvestoriat rushing to purchase overpriced tech stocks? ... Further links from above article: nypost.com nypost.com reuters.com