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 : CYRIX / NSM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pravin Kamdar who wrote (22170)	12/19/1997 10:20:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 33344

Pravin Personally, I think we should shut down the WTO and let the chips fall where they may. They are just protecting the exporting interests of the big multi-national corporations, while at the same time forcing asian countries to let the super rich western investers to own more of the futures of anian country's assets. It is a money grap at the tax payer's expense. But, what's new. I'm surprised the media can't see this. I think the reason these countries are in trouble is because they basically shut out foreign investors. Instead of allowing foreign investors come in, invest and keep some kind of accountability at least to the shareholders of foreign multinanionals, these kittens (formerly tigers) mostly banned foreign ownership of assets. The only way they let investors participate is through joint ventures ran by cronies of local politicians. And the local politicians still operate under the mindset of 18the and 19th century European states. Progress in their eyes is if the country manages to hoard a lot of gold (or other assets) by exporting stuff to foreign counties and restricting imports. The reason they don't like foreign ownership is because if the foreign enterprise is profitable, they might do the unthinkable - take a little of the hoarded stuff (which they consider to be the wealth of the nation) and distribute it to the investors. To make their countries "wealthier", they restricted domestic consumption, forced local citizens to save. These savings were "invested" in industries favored by local governments. Over time, they managed to build up pretty large industrial capacity, some of it even profitable. Seeing some profits, authors of these "industrial policies" startd to favor relatively inexpensive foreign borrowing, mostly short term. They figured the if a little bit of investment was good, a lot more of it, in the same industries must be even better. So more "investments" were made, more capacity created, without the invisible hand of the market getting a chance to bring discipline. Now the invisible hand has turned into a fist and smashed most of the SE Asia. Joe PS, sorry for being so long winded.