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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (280990)	3/20/2006 4:17:44 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573123

RE: "You should regardless. I've got a couple of non-US mutual funds" No, you miss my meaning - I already have international investments. What I'm talking about is shifting money that is in a US bank or US brokerage firm in the USA, to another country where the USA would not have control over it if after a person pays taxes and then decides to gain citizenship elsewhere. It's the future of the USA that concerns me. The boomers demographically are't saving enough money, they tend to have the attitude that the next generation will not only help them out but will also magically make up for their poor spending habits, along with the govt deficit, etc. I really think there's a potential the country could make a turn for the worse if it doesn't get its future financial act in gear, and if it continues to discount science and the importance of research. Without the later two in place, you really don't have much of a future prospect for a country's finances, at which point, the demographics with the most voting power has the power to dictate strange things to the rest of the country. If a ship is sinking, do you think people are going to work together to fix a problem, or start fighting over a shrinking pie? How can a problem be fixed together when the boomers are already beginning to retire, prior to creating a solution? Here's the real problem: the leaders in Congress are very out of touch with global competition and they have an attitude of complacency where they think "the USA is great and will always be great." It's the complaceny of Congress, that really concerns me, along with Bush's deficits and the lack of savings. Congress formula of success is simply to encourage 1.5m uneducated illegal aliens while discouraging a measly 60,000 PhD candidates from entering this country - if you were a venture capitalist would you invest in that formula? Guess what, for the first time in this country's history, more FDI (foreign direct investments) went to China than the USA. Unheard of. [Though I concur that China's growth is not a stable growth and could very likely implode.] It's the deficits and trade imbalance that are of great concern. Buffett thinks the trade imbalance could create a serious internal political threat to the USA. The imbalance will increase if we don't invest in the future RND, where we can export and sell stem cell solutions (and other hightech solutions) to other foreign countries. If we lose science, we lose it all. Congress is too complacent in thinking that our scientific inventions will generate enough wealth to pay off the deficit and fix the trade imbalance. It won't, not unless Congress acts to support science, decrease deficit spending, and encourage savings.