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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (935497)	5/18/2016 6:41:00 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575403

In the case of Bangladesh, he forgets that a river runs thru it. Sure, but they have a river now, and they will have a river in the future. The difference is in the future they are likely to be wealthier. Doing things the same costs money, too. A major change in the way you do things normally costs more money, unless that change is an attempt to economize (which it isn't here). That's esp. true if you try to do things pretty quickly. Replacing infrastructure when its going to have to be replaced anyway is a lot cheaper then just shutting it all down and building new well before it wears out. So the cost can be reduced by not rushing things. But replacement ahead of time isn't the only driver of additional costs here. the longer we leave to take action, the more expensive it becomes Only if your assuming a specified date to have changes completed. If you take the same amount of time, but start later the cost is reduced in real terms (possibly even in nominal terms if the replacement technology improves enough).