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: Ilaine who wrote (16197)	3/30/2007 7:46:49 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218475

that, cb, was firstly a serious question pre-emptive defense is not called for the perceived sarcasm at the end was gratuitous, if taken wrongly it may have been intended as a probing recon, but i forgot

To: Ilaine who wrote (16197)	3/31/2007 6:20:11 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218475

is this true Message 23416876

To: Ilaine who wrote (16197)	4/1/2007 5:10:35 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218475

To understand how the US relates to the outside world, you need to understand dual track. The US is an entity, that albeit having peaked, -peaked understood when compared with the US of 1962 in relationship with the rest of the world and the US of 2007- still commands a lot of economic and political power. At the same time it must be considered how the rest of the world changed from 1962 to 2006. The political track the US is following now, having peaked, is a more defensive track, rather that aggressive track of almost 1/2 century ago. Listen to Nicholas Burn talking and compare with the technocrats of Kennedy's administration. Remember the confidence the country had in its capabilities and the actions it wanted implemented, then, and how the country acts today. Give you an example. In the early 60's the US had the "Alliance for the Progress". A plan to lift all the boats. Today, it is much more defensive, more like: hey, if we lift those boats they will encroach on our space and on our fishing grounds. From a grand stand perspective, the 'memory' of that US stance, is still alive in many countries and they act as if they have to set some accounts. Russia, Venezuela, Cuba, Middle East. Other countries, more pragmatic, got over it and want to do business. Brazil, India and China. Most of the US actions today, take into consideration first group. Not the second group. The second group is the one that forces the US to keep looking over its shoulder for they want that part of the world business that was is the US's. On this track where China, India and Brazil are, things move fast and those countries want to move much faster. The US, wants to gain time and consider all and every angle to be able not to miss an important component and lose. There is nothing wrong with all that. It is very country making their moves following their self interest. SUMMARY: The US wants to gain time. Slow the pace of change. The other group wants to jump in the throttle and speed.