Re: Re: what's going to happen?
Devine, James wrote: >It's interesting that they're pessimistic. >Time to sell! See below (from the anonymous Observer diary on the op-ed page of the FT). >you weren't invited to the WEF? I actually covered it for The Nation. Which means I got to hang out in the press hotel, read press releases, watch closed-circuit TV, and listen to the occasional press conference. I did get to see Bono & [EMAIL PROTECTED], though. I better go write the piece now instead of telling PEN-L all about it. Doug PS: Surprise - Danny "Media Dissector" Schechter, proprietor of mediachannel.org and half the management team of Globalvision, was invited to the WEF. Financial Times; Feb 4, 2002 Why is the WEF so special? Maybe because it is almost always entirely wrong. In 1990, the theme was dealing with Japan's economic might. In 1994, everyone was talking about the coming triumph of Asian values. By 1999, the talk was of the future of the euro as a strong world currency. In 2000, it was the transforming effects of information technology and the internet on the world economy. Last year, everyone was sure the world would escape recession. This year's theme is "fragile times", which can only mean we are in for a remarkable period of global peace and prosperity.
Re: what's going to happen?
Doug writes:>A lot of folks at the WEF were saying it's going to be a W, or a U with an extremely saggy right tail. Krugman gave a synopsis of one of the brainstorming sessions that sounded rather downbeat I'm told. < you weren't invited to the WEF? It's interesting that they're pessimistic. Time to sell! (as if I had anything to sell...) >The thing about debt, though, is you never know what the killing level is. In the U.S., it's just kept rising, except for unpleasant but not disastrous periods like the early 1990s. You could recycle debt worries from 1975 or 1981 or 1989 almost word for word. Debt's a good explanation after something cracks, but you never know the timing. You never know when lenders will change their minds or why. < Obviously, the "killing level" for debt depends on the value of assets. With falling or stagnant asset prices, the debt is more likely to "kill" both consumers and corporations. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: what's going to happen?
Devine, James wrote: >For anyone interested, I just gave a talk on what's going to happen to the >U.S. economy to the Loyola Marymount University student economics society. >My notes can be found at: >http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/faculty/jdevine/talks/ESTalk020502.htm A lot of folks at the WEF were saying it's going to be a W, or a U with an extremely saggy right tail. Krugman gave a synopsis of one of the brainstorming sessions that sounded rather downbeat I'm told. The thing about debt, though, is you never know what the killing level is. In the U.S., it's just kept rising, except for unpleasant but not disastrous periods like the early 1990s. You could recycle debt worries from 1975 or 1981 or 1989 almost word for word. Debt's a good explanation after something cracks, but you never know the timing. You never know when lenders will change their minds or why. Doug
what's going to happen?
For anyone interested, I just gave a talk on what's going to happen to the U.S. economy to the Loyola Marymount University student economics society. My notes can be found at: http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/faculty/jdevine/talks/ESTalk020502.htm Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
