To: pat mudge who wrote (27853 ) 10/27/1997 2:45:00 AM From: Andrew Won Respond to of 31386
Pat, It's almost impossible to get onto the Hong Kong stock quote web sites tonight. It seems that a lot of people are trying to anticipate how the U.S. markets might open tomorrow based on what is happening in Asia. I have heard the Hong Kong market is down today, as is the Japanese market. The next couple days could be rough until people come back to their senses. Anyway, I don't have the URLs handy, but you can run searches on Yahoo using "Hong Kong" and "Nikkei" to find the Asian stock sites. I wouldn't worry too much about inflation being a problem. For a good explanation about why inflation should not pose too much of a problem, I suggest reading Lester Thurow's The Future of Capitalism. The bottom line is that most U.S. companies are global with operations all over the world. If labor costs rise in any given country, companies can quickly shift production to other countries where supplies of labor and other inputs are not tight. This and the now widespread resort to outsourcing keeps costs in line. Take a look at how companies like Cisco, 3Com and Bay Networks operate. They manufacture stuff all over the world, favoring countries that offer tax incentives and pools of well-educated and well-trained but cheap labor like Singapore, Ireland, Scotland, etc... In most cases, there is a Solectron or Sanmina contract manufacturing plant located right next door to drive productions costs even lower. The bottom line is that the Phillips Curve inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation is, or rather was, a graphical representation of the scarcity of labor and other resources in the US economy. Now that most businesses are global and the resources of the entire world, rather than just the resources of the US, can be tapped, our economy can run a lot longer (really indefinitely) before it over heats. In short, we now have a much bigger radiator to cool our economic engine. The Boeing situation is really just an aberration. In my view, the company just hogged orders, ignoring its own capacity limitations, in order to starve Airbus of orders and to keep it from getting the additional 10 percent world market share needed to be viable. It's not a bad move considering the fact that most European governments are hurting and need to constantly revisit the issue of cutting off the subsidies that keep Airbus alive. Of course, Boeing's acquisition of McDonnell Douglas means that Boeing will be able to fill all its aircraft orders using its newly acquired resources. If this isn't enough, they will just sub out stuff to Northrop and other former defense contractors. Andy