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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (34520)	10/25/1998 12:04:00 PM
From: Alias Shrugged	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Hello Mike Hey, where's my weekly Barron's Review from you?? I think you've been slacking off ever since your bank/airlines puts killing! I mean, all those great put suggestions were...uh, great, but what have you done for me lately?!?!?! I liked the interview with David Levy in Barron's, and not just because I happen to agree with him! What's your view of the country CEFs (APB, SAE, IAF, CH, etc. etc.) if the US goes into recession? Disaster already priced into them? Safe haven money will leave US and flow back into them? They represent such a small portion of your investment portfolio and you have only your first 3rd, so who cares as price is right? Re: Fixed Income Markets ex US Treasury: Who's going to step up to the plate and buy this stuff at this point in the cycle? Finally, re: gloating - seeing as how you fess up when you strike out, you are certainly entitled to some serious gloating when you hit the home runs. Mike

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (34520)	10/25/1998 9:09:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 132070

>>>>If production doubles, income does not double. Price goes down. If it declines less than 50%, then income increases, but it sure does not double. How an economist can ignore price is beyond me. He sounds like a chip analyst.<<<< Touche. Or maybe like an academic. Not someone who has ever run a business, anyway. CobaltBlue

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (34520)	10/26/1998 11:00:00 AM
From: HB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

The Krugman "argument" about $ demand possibly doubling when production doubles is certainly silly in a microeconomic context, but presumably the context was macroeconomic, where it's not necessarily so silly, in situations where Keynesian theory is appropriate (insufficient aggregate demand; recession). He wasn't necessarily talking boxmakers -g-. I'll try to get hold of the article Cobalt's citing from, and give it a read. You can count on Krugman's being "bright and at least semi-honest". He is one of the best, and appears not to pull any punches (perhaps exaggerating a tad for effect, though, in some of his pop articles, maybe). Yeah, he's a top academic pinhead and Council of Economic Advisors type geek. They ain't all so enamored of their theory that they can't deal with reality. If you want to hear him sounding some rather Burkean (Mike, not Edumnd) notes: pathfinder.com@@NMHu9wUAxiklY*CS/fortune/1997/971110/fst5.html That article doesn't seem to0 prescient about Asia (I'm trying to download a 1994 Foreign Affairs article he wrote, called "The Myth of Asia's Miracle", though, but the net to MIT seems gummed up. Anyway, lots of us missed that one -G-. Here's the guy's web site; well worth a visit: web.mit.edu Enjoy, everyone, and don't forget to sell a bit of your chip equipment holdings today! Cheers, HB P.S. I don't really care much about Clinton's lying about consensual sex, even under oath, but I'm rather bothered by the possibility that he was firing cruise missiles around mainly to distract from it. The New Yorker a few weeks back had an interesting article on that possibility. They also had an article by Buckley recently, and I gotta say Krugman smokes him, as a writer. The turgid floridity of his sentences works a lot better orally, where it goes so nicely with his inimitable, ah, accent.