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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ramsey Su who wrote (14315)	8/30/1998 3:29:00 PM
From: lazarre	Respond to of 152472

<<<The US all of a sudden find ourselves in a strange position that we may want to support "strong" leaders whose power came from non-democratic process.>>> Well, maybe. All Facists and even some so called " democrats " justified Mussolini's tenure by the infamous: " Well, at least he's making the trains run on time. " No matter what the train's cargo was nor where they were headed to. But I find myself --- alot surprised and somewhat ashamed --- feeling a bit nostalgic for Brezhnev ( wait!! did I really say that? ) but that is foolishness of the first order and dangerously simplistic. That sad lineage did little to propel mankind forward and did much to cause personal and financial squalor including our own---how much further the race to outdo the other militarily would have gone before all were bankrupt, no one can say. But maybe a little Pinochet wouldn't be that bad around now in a few key geographies ( albeit sans the obvious ). L

To: Ramsey Su who wrote (14315)	8/30/1998 6:16:00 PM
From: DaveMG	Respond to of 152472

Ramsey , Mqurice, John S., engineer et al: Ramsey, 'The problem with Krugman and other economics based analysis is that much of the world's economic problems have shifted to political" Might be true enough except that the source of a lot of this mess is economic, and nobody, least of all economists, agree on what to do. It seems that everyone is ready to call for strong medicine, but which one? And things are always political aren't they? " The US all of a sudden find ourselves in a strange position that we may want to support "strong" leaders whose power came from non-democratic process" In a funny way that aligns us with Japan, interested in stability more than anything. Whereas before all we cared about was growth, we may now have to settle for less. Democracy is only a concept but greenbacks, now those are real. Ironic how Russia may prove to be the straw that broke the camels' back, communist revenge. Mqurice, You're the resident Krugman expert. In this issue of Fortune he makes an argument for currency controls at the very moment when the efficacy of controls are being seriously tested all over the world. "Controls would allow Asian nations to keep their currencies steady, give them the breathing room to cut interest rates and get their economies moving again..exporters are required to sell forex earnings to the central bank at a predetermined rate, the bank then uses this currency to clear transactions with importers and foreign banks.politics usually plays a role in fixing exchange rates. Setting the rate artificially low boosts exports. Conversely states have been known to fix rates too high in the belief that a strong currency denotes a strong state" I should add that he call this Plan B, Plan A being the IMF bailout plan which restricts credit and supposedly props up local currencies in the hope of attracting foreign investment.A consesus seems to be emerging that this plan is not working. To me this sounds like a plan which would greatly restrict the flow of free trade around the world, especially when one considers the number of states that might be in need of this medicine, and a plan which would turn countries in upon themselves, negatives IMO. Commensurate with these controls would be reflation of the local economies, which under the circumstances sounds good. But how does a nation implement these policies without causing tremendous capital flight and consequential panic? It's beginning to look like the situation is becoming increasingly dependent on the behavior of key individuals around the world, ie Greenspan and Rubin, central bankers in Frankfurt. Not a particularly good time to be making the transition to the Euro or for Y2k is it? Any ideas on who will say what? I find it hard to believe that a cut in US rates will be much more than temporary psychological relief.. Maurice again. You touched again on this question of what happens to the money when GE drops from a mkt cap of 350 to 300bil in one day on trading volume of 2bil$. Are you sure this isn't simple evaporation, poof, a trip to money heaven as Ron Insana said the other day on CNBC. While it's true that every $ that exists and is in circulation must still exist that same day, isn't the total amount of money that exists something which is elastic? When asset values shrink, doesn't the potential money supply also shrink, after all, ones' ability to borrow certainly diminishes. When the mkt cap of your portfolio shrinks, if you're margined you have to sell just to maintain equilibrium. Maybe what we're experiencing right now is just a realignment between what potential money once existed and now exists?. RE BW article. Amazing how we keep reading similar versions of events. Seems we can finally put to rest the canard about working around Q patents, something which the record shows I too have been worried about. Time is definitely on Q's side, however the political pressure is clearly going to increase accordingly.Wonder how the tradeoffs between royalty rates and standards are viewed at Q, ie is it preferable to be IS95 compatible with lower rates or vice versa. IMO lower rates are the better alternative but I don't think that's how ETSI camp sees things. Engineer, Thanks for the nice link. I like Morgan S.DW. They let their differences hang out. BTW.. I'm spending too much time on the net and have to get back to my family. What a depressing world:) dave