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.

Technology Stocks : Semi-Equips - Buy when BLOOD is running in the streets! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (2890)	10/21/1997 8:33:00 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 10921

< I am not opposed to free trade, but I am disturbed by its contribution toward a have/have not society, and I believe that a democracy cannot exist when the interests of the majority are subjugated to the interests of a powerful minority.> Dont worry...in a couple generations it will all go away. DAK

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (2890)	10/21/1997 9:33:00 PM
From: Sam Citron	Respond to of 10921

Cary, (and Pankaj...feel free to chime in) <<I am not opposed to free trade, but I am disturbed by its contribution toward a have/have not society...>> I can not believe what you are saying, Cary. Free trade, whether in goods or in ideas, is beneficial to the welfare of all. Do you think autarchies are the ideal? Gini coefficients (disparity between rich and poor) are not what they should be, and it is right to question the status quo, but there is no big Free Trade Conspiracy. Are you afraid your job may be outsourced to a programmer in India? (Yes, Indians need jobs too, and the cost of living is much lower in Bangalore than Palo Alto.) Don't worry about it. Start your own company. Become an entrepreneur and help equilibriate worldwide wage disparities. Raise standards of living in poor countries and benefit consumers in rich nations. SC

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (2890)	10/21/1997 10:31:00 PM
From: Sam Citron	Respond to of 10921

Cary, Free trade in its simplest form means I voluntarily trade with you (goods, ideas, whatever) and you voluntarily trade with me. We each do this because we think it benefits us. Now if a net disadvantaged person argues that this trade is harmful to him because it is enriching us, is it correct that we should discontinue our fertile dialog? How should we respond? [Sorry if I have misunderstood or have offended you. You have taught me much about the stock market. But I passionately disagree with your view on world trade. I regard it as a bounty for all. Would you keep Walmart and low prices out to preserve the rural character of small villages?] SC

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (2890)	10/22/1997 1:59:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Respond to of 10921

Cary - Re:<<The Free Trade issue is an excellent example of a bipartisan agreement to move the country in a direction which harms many people, to fail to admit the harmful effects to the general public, and, most importantly, to fail to implement efforts which are needed to cope with the resulting distress.>> The problem is, either we start free trade now or we go down a sink hole compared to those countries that do use free trade. It's a dog-eat-dog world. And, we wouldn't know we were going down the sink hole until we were half way down, and it was very painful to get out of (witness Sweden, France, or Britian 15 years ago...). Agreed, the politicians weren't forthright about the effects of free trade (loss of wages for many blue collar workers), but if they were, it would never have passed, and in a generation we would have been stuck in the sink hole. << I am not opposed to free trade, but I am disturbed by its contribution toward a have/have not society, and I believe that a democracy cannot exist when the interests of the majority are subjugated to the interests of a powerful minority.>> Who is to say what the correct balance of wealth is? Is it that the top 20% control 25% of the wealth, or is it that the top 20% control 99% of the wealth. In any free society there is going to be an unequal distribution of wealth - it is this that incentivizes people. The question is what is the correct distribution to maximize productivity and freedom. Why is it that any move towards the wealthy contolling more is ALWAYS bad? Earlier in this century the wealth was considerably more concentrated than it is now (Billy G. is a comparative pauper), and yet it eventually resulted in an explosion of the standard of living for everyone (the phone, the steel mills, the railroads, ... at first made the rich richer, but 40 or 50 years later it resulted in a huge boom in the standard of living for everyone.) Given the uncertainty in the optimal balance point, I am not going to get upset over a few percent move in the balance of wealth. However, I'll admit that if it keeps going, we may need to do something about it. Clark PS Thanks for the clarification.

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (2890)	10/22/1997 12:41:00 PM
From: Teri Skogerboe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10921

Cary, Re: "...to cope with the resulting distress. I am not opposed to free trade, but I am disturbed by its contribution toward a have/have not society, and I believe that a democracy cannot exist when the interests of the majority are subjugated to the interests of a powerful minority." Would one of the first steps be: find mortal men/women who live in a manner that clearly shows they value integrity more than the almighty dollar to work in the highest positions in government. If so, could be a real problem, because this country just elected Bill Clinton twice and we didn't like Jimmy Carter and he has high integrity, in my opinion. How would "un-free" trade help to stop this "have/have not" process? I can't see that it would. However, it seems to me that as a country we sometimes lack compassion for people who may well just need training, in order to succeed and find their proper place in the world. Alot of them may need training and a babysitter. Isn't this problem as old as society and what has "cured" it in the past? Regards, Teri