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 : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: yard_man who wrote (6649)	2/1/2004 12:41:53 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

A blast From the Past A good blast too! Someone tell me why this is not true today, still. This guy over Bill Gross any day. Here goes Mish pimco.com

To: yard_man who wrote (6649)	2/1/2004 12:59:48 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 110194

US$ tinyurl.com Compare now to Nov. Unless Europe cuts this could be toast. If Europe cuts perhaps we get a test of the 200MA. Bets either way are dangerous in front of G7 meeting Feb 6-7 Mish

To: yard_man who wrote (6649)	2/1/2004 1:43:43 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

A great read on "productivity" gold-eagle.com the reason we have such enormous productivity gains, while utilizing fewer factories, is because we are slowly becoming nothing more than the final assembly or distribution point for many components manufactured in China and other countries abroad. We snap the pieces together like LEGOs® and lay claim to the full unit production. If 20% of the components are now produced abroad, we snap them together and claim 100% of the productivity while actually only producing 80% of the end product. The amazing thing is that embedded in the bloated government "numbers", the "Puppet masters" actually claim credit for the production accomplished by the Chinese and others while touting the mega-advances in our productivity. Alan Greenspan said in his speech at the Securities Industry Association annual meeting in Boca Raton, Florida on November 6, 2003, "The combination of growing output and falling hours worked was made possible by a startlingly large rise in productivity." He was startled? Alan Greenspan worships at the altar of Productivity to shroud his interest rate and fiat money policies. In this recent speech, he went on to offer 3 different hypotheses, "One hypothesis is that some of the increase represents a temporary rise in the level of productivity…." I would have to say this job shift is looking pretty permanent as it's very hard to pry open the rusted factory shutters and retrain whole classes of skilled workers. He went on to suggest, "Another hypothesis is that the level of productivity has undergone a one-time permanent upward shift. This hypothesis builds on the idea that the heavy emphasis on exploiting new and expanding markets from 1995 to 2000 likely diverted some corporate management from the hard work of controlling costs." I have to agree, there's no more productivity left to be squeezed out of the American workers that still have jobs. Those that don't are feeling pretty much "exploited" as their jobs were moved into the "expanding" Chinese market. If we were somehow able to bring back the tens of thousands of jobs that produced towels, linens, clothing, and shoes---all low productivity/low dollar value goods---our Productivity numbers would actually go down. Would those workers that lost their jobs be upset by that? Sadly, using Greenspan's logic this would be a bad thing, because only the Productivity numbers matter. Those displaced workers lucky enough to find new jobs are working for much lower wages and benefits; and, then there's the 309,000 that recently just gave up. Does that mean they no longer exist?