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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (515065)	12/23/2003 3:49:50 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

>>>BTW, I rarely see anyone actually take on Ray on substance. It is usually just name-calling, which to me shows that the name-caller has no decent point to make or he would make it.<<< You know what? I've been around quite a bit, and I've never seen that either. Certainly nothing stands out in my memory. Shall we set the table for a great debate? Ray vs. ? (any GOPwinger volunteers?) Once a GOPwinger volunteers to step to the plate on this, he or she can ask Ray a question. Ray will then respond. One rebuttal each. Next Ray asks a question, the process repeats. Each of their posts should begin with the term "DEBATE:", so we'll all know which ones to follow in order to judge this great debate. Now, it's not up to me to volunteer Ray for this. But it'd be interesting to see which among you GOPwingers would be willing to go head to head with him. Any takers? (LOL!)

To: JBTFD who wrote (515065)	12/23/2003 4:00:59 PM
From: Logain Ablar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

wasted bandwidth Message 17666291

To: JBTFD who wrote (515065)	12/23/2003 4:08:14 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

BTW, I rarely see anyone actually take on Ray on substance. Do you consider his conspiracy theories about Bush being behind 9/11 (to enable a neo-fascist takeover, to destroy evidence in SEC investigative files, or any of his other "theories", take your pick) to have substance? I know some others here believe the same things, but knowing where you stand on such nonsense would help me judge whether I'm wasting my time discussing other subjects with you. Thanks in advance, Bob PS: Many of us have responded in all earnestness to arguments made by Lizzie, Amercian Spirit and others - even Ray-man. Usually they end with us being put on ignore (or pretend ignore) after definitively proving them wrong. They have no answer and don't want to concede the argument, so they have a tantrum, ignore the truth along with us, and then repeat their lies anyway. PPS: I have an answer on your GDP issue, if you're willing to actually read and consider it. Let me know.

To: JBTFD who wrote (515065)	12/23/2003 8:39:01 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I understand your point about the 8.2% being "real" if you restrict your discussion only to within US denomiation. But if you look at the larger picture, an argument can be made that it is all an exercise in numbers jugglery and we have in fact lost ground since a year ago. An argument HAS been made that "we've lost ground" by Dizzie - the numbers don't support her claim. What economic statistics do you think support such an argument? Oh, and AmSpin argued that we were all "20% poorer" due to the decline of the dollar (you think he knows it's only fallen 20% against the Euro, not a trade-weighted basket?). This sounds vaguely similar to your comments, but both of you are wrong and the reason is fairly simple. "We", in this discussion, refers to Americans, of course. Now, unless one is living and working abroad or is a consumer primarily of imported goods and services, one's living expenses are almost entirely for domestic goods and services - i.e. dollar denominated. Also, all but a relative handful of Americans earn their livings in dollars and hold the vast majority of their assets in the form of US real estate, US dollars or dollar-denominated securities. As dollar earners, dollar consumers and dollar savers, we have VERY little direct exposure to changes in currency exchange rates. Our income and expenses do not change as a result of a rising or falling dollar, and our assets, measured in dollars or in their tangible purchasing power here, are worth the same as before. We are NOT "poorer" and we have not "lost ground" just because the dollar has fallen relative to other currencies. We only become poorer if the dollar value of our assets or the dollar amount of our income falls, or if the purchasing power of our dollar assets or dollar income falls. We know that some asset prices have fallen over recent years - stocks, to be specific (though they've risen sharply this year, but for the sake of argument, let's talk longer-term). But most Americans hold much more of their assets in the form of real estate than anything else and those values have continued to rise. Fixed income investments have also done very well in recent years. And in any case, the fall in stock values since the bubble was NOT driven by exchange rates. So, let's dispose of the asset side of the "we're poorer, we've lost ground" argument. Likewise, the income side has held up well. While there have been four quarters out of the last eleven when disposable incomes fell, the last four quarters have been positive and the last three strong. Disposable income gains since Bush took office come 4.5% per annum or 12.8% on a cumulative basis. That leaves us with the question of our purchasing power. Now, on the marginal purchase of imports, we do lose a little bit of purchasing power as the dollar falls. That is, provided the dollar price of imports actually rises - often in the past our larger trading partners have held prices to avoid losing market share. Furthermore, you are likely to also see a rise in exports as the dollar falls (it IS happening), which results in higher profits and income for US businesses and workers - i.e. greater purchasing power. But again, imports make up a relatively small share of total consumption (I think it was around 15% of GDP last qtr, gross - less than 5% net of exports), so you have to look at prices on domestic goods and services to see if we are losing purchasing power. Well, I think everyone here with a handful of properly functioning brain cells knows that we've seen essentially NO inflation in the prices of goods and services, so the purchasing power of our dollar assets and incomes have not fallen. So, this leaves us with no possible conclusion except that the fall in the dollar has NOT left us poorer, nor have we "lost ground" in terms of GDP as you claimed. Bob