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: Seeker of Truth who wrote (54235)	10/14/2004 9:36:48 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 74559

Collapse not. Return to its natural size. The US that we've seen post WWII was an anomally. Having 45% of the world's gross product was due a certain temporary set of circumstances. Those circumstances disapearing the US would return to its natural size. As it is doing right now. And there's nothing wriong with that. It is just the natural order of things.

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (54235)	10/14/2004 1:22:12 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Fight with Islam - it's not yet clear if the fight is with 1)selected terrorists (as Kerry appears to want), 2)all Islamic terrorists (as GWB talks about) 3)the Wahabi sect/faction 4)most of Islam The scope of the fight is at least one level larger than publicaly admitted. I'm using the word fight instead of war because much of what will happen may not fit traditional warfare definitions. If the US keeps having conventional ground war approaches, the cost will be very high. Different approaches, longer term approaches, can be cheaper. The bin laden crew has already managed to alienate part of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States, some of whom were supporters before. Turning this into an inter-Arab fight would be one useful tactic. Having the US reduce the level of support for certain Israeli positions, and/or push a settlement and then aid activitiy which would raise the Palestine standard of living and reduce harassment would have a large effect. Limiting investment, weapons and technology transfer to the agressive states can have some positive effects. Libya being a good case for this, Syria actually being another. ***** There is also the effects of "soft power" the best example being the attractions of the EU. Look at all the changes that Eastern Europe has undergone to join the EU, and changes Turkey is making to have a chance at the EU. Europe has interests in reducing aggresive Islamic threats, and expanding EU influence, even if formal membership is not extended. ***** Should the scope of this fight become larger, the US is likely to make major efforts to exagerate splits in Islam (Sunni /Shia/Sufi etc.) and possibly try to contain activity to Arab states only. This is already happening without US influence in Malaysia and Indonesia. ----------- Problem with extrapolation to crash is the asumption that the course will not change...

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (54235)	10/14/2004 11:13:14 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Malcolm, the end has been nigh and the rapture coming for a longggg time now, yet the world has not yet come to an end. Great Britain lost the empire, but living in London isn't a lot different for all that [though there are a LOT of colonials and their descendants running around now]. <Now it looks to me again that the US must collapse. > I'm not holding my breath. I'm betting that it won't. I'm investing in it not doing so. Mqurice PS: People around the world are buying my CDMA by the million and soon to be billion. That's nice. I'm recolonizing the world, but under a different political group, Yanks instead of Poms. People in the USA get most of the money - I just get the dividends and any capital gains, but that's okay. QUALCOMM is hiring lots of Indians and Chinese too, as good colonizers do.

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (54235)	10/15/2004 10:47:19 AM
From: AC Flyer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

>>In 1969, I predicted that the US would collapse by 2000.<< An irrational prediction influenced by your opposition to the war in Vietnam, no doubt. >>Incidentally, at the time I exchanged letters with Buffett and he, rather curtly, said he disagreed with me. He was right and I was wrong......Now it looks to me again that the US must collapse.<< Connect the dots, Malcolm. >>I extrapolated the trends and correctly forecast that by that year more than 30% of the births would be out of wedlock.<< True, but now half of those births are to women aged 25 and over - these births are lifestyle choices, not teenage accidents. As in all other arenas, the US is leading the world in its innovation of non-traditional family structures. You (as a man) are no longer necessary and required in a family, Malcolm. sdi.gov >>......the US must collapse<< I am genuinely curious what you mean by this, Malcolm. What, exactly, do you mean by collapse? Can you please elaborate.