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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (5033)	3/26/2006 7:30:33 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217750

TJ/Maurice/eplay: few countries have experience on handling collapses. None is a developed country. Developed countries, if faced with collapse, they will have to go to the IMF and ask for the knowledge on how to handle it. LATAM faced one once a decade and can handle another tomorrow morning.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (5033)	3/27/2006 10:28:39 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Respond to of 217750

The usual response to inflation is to raise interest rates. and once rates are raised high enough, demand is curbed and inflation subsides. as Volcker proved. the question is whether a CB has balls enough to strangle the economy for the sake of price stability. a country like the US can put off the inevitable longer than most, thanks to all the drug pushers (Asian mercantilists like Japan and China) who provide us with vendor financing. the US is a whale. by contrast, NZD is more like a minnow which is easily buffeted about in choppy waters. the unwinding of the carry trade easily affects these countries like NZ and Iceland and they will be forced to experience TL/EV long before US. that may be better in the long run. You could have picked the post crash QCOM low. Or, the Jan 1999 price. Or the average over 10 years, or 5. Why pick the peak? because it is very common in the financial world to consider "what have you done for me lately", with reference to a peak. hedge funds use this principle in the form of a "high water mark", which must be exceeded before hedge funds can partake in new profits. i measure my own performance based on my past peaks, and one of those coincided with QCOM's peak (when i was concluding a long period where i was 100% QCOM calls). luckily, i did not stay in QCOM much longer and subsequently went on to higher personal peaks. unluckily for QCOM followers who have been holding since Jan 3, 2000, QCOM is now at just 33% of the real value it had on that day. (luckily for me, my most recent peak was just last Friday.) what this shows us is that QCOM has been a very POOR store of value in the 21st century, despite QCOM's excellent results the past few years. gold, too, has been a terrible store of value since 1980, losing MUCH more than QCOM. so it is hard to say that gold is a store of value, even though it is called the ultimate store of value. what i'm really saying is the "store of value" is always changing. what worked 10 years ago doesn't necessarily work today, and what works today won't necessarily work in 10 years. but i would rather own something that is working (or that i think will work) than something whose main attraction is that it worked at some point in the past.