On 2002-02-04 11:20, madscientist wrote:

Anarchism always arises in a dynamist (Second or Fourth) turning, while it lays dormant in a stasist (First or Third) turning.

Anarchism has not been rare at all for the Third Turning, especially not your looser definition of anarchism. In fact the basic tenets, being espoused by Gen-X culture, have dominated Generation X since the Third Turning began at which point Gen X found its culture (as explained here). We Nomads are the most liberty-loving of all the types around today.

On 2002-02-11 07:34, voltronx wrote:

On 2002-02-04 11:20, madscientist wrote:

Anarchism always arises in a dynamist (Second or Fourth) turning, while it lays dormant in a stasist (First or Third) turning.

Anarchism has not been rare at all for the Third Turning, especially not your looser definition of anarchism. In fact the basic tenets, being espoused by Gen-X culture, have dominated Generation X since the Third Turning began at which point Gen X found its culture (as explained here). We Nomads are the most liberty-loving of all the types around today.

True.

On 2002-02-04 06:21, msm wrote:
"statist conservatism" is also a contradiction in terms, madscientist! Conservatives are opposed to the trend of greater power of the State.

*exasperated*

This is true in the U.S. but what I know of the rest of the English-speaking world makes me doubt that this is universal. Toryism, the philosophy of the Conservatives in both England and Canada, is a big-government conservatism. The Progressive Conservatives in Ontario are particularly intrusive, reorganizing local governments almost at whim.

And I hesitate to think of what the Gaulists are like in France when it comes to state power!

------------
Bugger, I keep forgetting to put my .sig in here and I can't add it during editing! Oh, well, I'll add it manually:

"Dans cette epoque cybernetique,
Pleine de gents informatique."

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vince Lamb '59 on 2002-02-12 02:10 ]</font>

Vince Lamb wrote:

Toryism, the conservative philosophy of the Conservatives in both England and Canada, is a big-government conservatism. The Progressive Conservatives in Ontario are particularly intrusive, reorganizing local governments almost at whim.

The Australian Right has Tory elements, on some issues (moral and culture) the Tories are very intrusive. I can't find anyother explaintion why social security/welfare has been extended greatly in some areas in the Howard governments reign. I.e into areas such as family payments and elder benefits.

Dubya is about as "wet" a Tory as can be with his Reform on Education and ruling by decree with executive orders. The rhetoric is different but the results are much the same ...take the late "victory tour" with the Swimmer from Massachusetts to celebrate the new testing regime.

Ten years ago, I tested as an "INTJ" before turning into an "ISTJ". Most of my posts have been very "S" -- picky, detail oriented. Well, bear with me while I put on my "N" hat and look at a big picture.

I'm talking about the concept of turning. We have the first storm indicating a change in seasons, then a transition where the mood fluctuates between turning "archetypical" moods, then finally a "Social Moment" when people finally realize that THINGS ARE DIFFERENT and We're Not Going Back.

I think that is the core of much of our discussion on whether we were are still in 3T or in early 4T. (Note -- this does not apply to Marc Lamb's argument, which By the Numbers he argues that there are two many darn Silents for us to be in 4T. That is another issue). In some ways, it sure feels like more 3T but....

I'd like to look at past turnings. I'll start with the one that some people I know still remember -- the last 4T. From what I've read and heard, the Social Moment when people realized that We're Not Going Back was probably in 1932, when banks started failing and unemployment was very high. In 1930 and 1931, people were still hoping that Things Would Improve and we could go back to 1929. By 1932, people realized that 1929 was not coming back and they were ready for something new -- hence the New Deal FDR regeneracy.

From what I understand, after VJ Day, when Japan surrendered, people expected that when all the GIs returned home, unemployment would skyrocket and we'd return to a Depression. Of course, that's not what happened, but there must have been a couple of years when people waited for the shoe to drop before realizing that Good Times Were Here At Last. Any one for a vote on what event triggered "1T" (I nominate VJ Day) and when the "Social Moment" was when people realized that we're out of Crisis? (I nominate Harry Truman's re-election).

For 1T to 2T, people like me who remember the mid-Sixties remember the optimism that persisted despite the loss of JFK. Of course, there were 2T like things happening too, such as the Civil Rights marches, etc... but I know an awful lot of nice liberals like my parents saw it as the continuation of the March of Progress that started with the fall of Naziism in Germany and the establishment of stable democracy throughout Western Europe and Japan.

So I'd say that 2T probably started on 11/22/63 (that's as good a date as any and it sure was dramatic) but the Social Moment probably didn't come until 1967-1968. Of course, it was ratified with the tossing out of LBJ's proxy, HHH and the election of Nixon.

The start of 3T has been argued. I think S&H err in using 1984 as the start, because I view it more as a Social Moment. I would view the Catalyst being either the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 or the passing of much of his legislative agenda -- specifically the tax cuts -- in 1981.

Which leads me to the 911 Attacks. After a catalyst, life can return to "normal" but Things Are Different. That is the case now. Brian Rush has pointed out that the furor over Enron is much more substantive -- how to we protect people's retirement savings rather than who got money from Enron. Life continues on, but I think we will realize around in 2004 that it ain't 1999 any more.

Of course, there have been Big Events mid-turn, such as World War I, Prohibition, Nixon's impeachment and resignation, the explosion of the Challenger, the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the McCarthy hearings, the Gulf War, etc... Maybe as Marc argues, 911 will fall into that list. But I don't think so.

Plain Dealer Feb 12 page A8
PASSENGER ARRESTED FOR LEAVING SEAT
An airline passenger who allegedly got up to go to the bathroom less than 30 minutes before landing became the first person arrested under a new federal flight regulation adapted for the Olympics. Richard Bizarro, 59, of Park City, Utah, could get up to 20 years in prison on charges of interfering with a flight crew. Bizarro waas on a Delta flight from Los Angeles on Saturday when he allegedly left his seat 25 minutes before landing, despite two warnings from the captain to the 90 passengers to stay put as required under the 30 minute rule adapted for Salt Lake City by the Federal Aviation Administration. Bizarro was jailed overnight and released on his own recognizance.

Six months ago, you would only be able to read these kind of stories in The Onion.

Grey is low-value Black, Jessie.

On 2002-02-12 06:45, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

Dubya is about as "wet" a Tory as can be with his Reform on Education and ruling by decree with executive orders. The rhetoric is different but the results are much the same ...take the late "victory tour" with the Swimmer from Massachusetts to celebrate the new testing regime.

Virgil, you must not speak ill of the king. Haven't you heard that he is the Word made flesh? It is bad form to actually use the brain the Good Lord gave you in order to distinguish between real and false prophets as the Good Book demmandeth. You are not permitted to note how the king's persistent top-down, "rule of man" words and deeds do not comport with the bottom-up, "rule of law" teachings of Jesus. You are behaving too much like Reagan ("Government is not the solution, it is the problem") or Goldwater ("Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue") or a paleo-conservative. You must join today's big government conservatives, say 'baaaaaaaa,' and let the Anointed One lead you to the slaughter.

On 2002-02-12 10:33, Tom Mazanec wrote:
Plain Dealer Feb 12 page A8
PASSENGER ARRESTED FOR LEAVING SEAT
An airline passenger who allegedly got up to go to the bathroom less than 30 minutes before landing became the first person arrested under a new federal flight regulation adapted for the Olympics. Richard Bizarro, 59, of Park City, Utah, could get up to 20 years in prison on charges of interfering with a flight crew. Bizarro waas on a Delta flight from Los Angeles on Saturday when he allegedly left his seat 25 minutes before landing, despite two warnings from the captain to the 90 passengers to stay put as required under the 30 minute rule adapted for Salt Lake City by the Federal Aviation Administration. Bizarro was jailed overnight and released on his own recognizance.

Six months ago, you would only be able to read these kind of stories in The Onion.

Bailiff, whack his pee-pee?????? :lol:

George Washington seems to think that America is headed for a cataclysmic 4T.

http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/prophesy.html

Ms. Genser writes,
"Of course, there have been Big Events mid-turn, such as World War I, Prohibition, Nixon's impeachment and resignation, the explosion of the Challenger, the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the McCarthy hearings, the Gulf War, etc... Maybe as Marc argues, 911 will fall into that list. But I don't think so."

You are quite right that 9/11 is that "Social Moment" when people finally realize that THINGS ARE DIFFERENT and We're Not Going Back." But, first realize that the generational constellation now is the same as it was in 1917. Second, WWI, and the Red Scare that insued in it's wake, were a significant 'social moment' when people realized that things were different and "We're Not Going Back," for the Missionary's and the Lost at that time.

But what they would later achieve in WWII, proved impossible in 1917. Why?

Look around you, Ms. Genser. But, not at work there in Washington, but here within these threads, Ms. Genser: Indeed right here in this thread, Ms. Genser! Read their posts; Mr. Saari and Mr. Patton... Ms. Barb and Brian Rush... together, they, and not Bush's approval numbers, will decide how the war on terrorist shall be waged... and postponed till another day. Another day when their voice will become the voice of they're hero, H.L. Mencken.

With the Battle of the Buldge just about ready to commence in late 1944, Mencken, once the greatest voice of dissent in his generation, sat alone before his typewriter a frustrated and silent libertarian, "Their correspondence from the various fronts," he opined, "seldom undertakes to tell what is going on: it is simply rooting for the home team. I long ago gave up protesting against it... The American people are now wholly at the mercy of the demagogues, and it would take
a revolution to liberate and disillusion them. I see no sign of any such revolution, either in the immediate future or within the
next generation."

Perhaps, you would have to understand what a great voice Mencken had (WWI made him a household name in America), to realize what stilling that voice signified. But, I guess that's what understanding history is all about.

Bush, like Reagan, is man for his time, a man for this time. And for that I am thankful, whether he is a tory or not. At least he is an honest and decent tory, a "new tone" tory (for which really is a factor of division in America v.Clintonian America)... in a time, post-9/11, when we all know we can't go back, but when no one can yet see the The World of Tomorrow.

One step at a time, I guess. :smile:


p.s. Keep your eye on E2002K, Hoover's GOP lost many seats in 1930 midterms to "obfuscating" Democrats... so?




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc S. Lamb on 2002-02-12 13:32 ]</font>

On 2002-02-12 12:58, madscientist wrote:
George Washington seems to think that America is headed for a cataclysmic 4T.

http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/prophesy.html

(heavy sarcasm)George 43 would probably think that George 1 was high off his own hemp crop and send the Parents Drug Corps after him...

On 2002-02-12 13:21, Marc S. Lamb wrote:

You are quite right that 9/11 is that "Social Moment" when people finally realize that THINGS ARE DIFFERENT and We're Not Going Back." But, first realize that the generational constellation now is the same as it was in 1917. Second, WWI and the Red Scare that insued in it's wake were a significant "'Social Moment' when people finally realize that THINGS ARE DIFFERENT and We're Not Going Back," for the Missionarys and the Lost at that time. Why?

I'm intrigued by the idea that 911, like WWI is a Social Moment as opposed to a trigger. What do you mean by that?

Do you see WWI as the point in time when people realized that they were in a new mood (say, the Unravelling, not the Awakening, although nobody would have thought in those terms)? Since S&H have 3T starting in 1908, I suppose that's plausible. What do you think was the trigger for the WWI/Twenties 3T?

Carrying that analogy further implies that the trigger (catalyst) for a Turning Change (between 3 and 4 or between 2 and 3?) happened several years ago. When and what was that trigger and what Turning do you think it was for, since you believe By the Numbers that we are in the middle of 3T?

These questions aren't to attack your thesis, which I find compelling (although I respectfully disagree). Its just to understand it better.

Ms. Genser wonders,
"Do you see WWI as the point in time when people realized that they were in a new mood (say, the Unravelling, not the Awakening, although nobody would have thought in those terms)? Since S&H have 3T starting in 1908, I suppose that's plausible."

Well, one could write a book on this very question (and I suppose that about four or five have already been written in these very threads already!), but I look at as one might look at autumn into winter every year. Autumn (less so today than before electricity etc...) in the seasonal sense can be very deceptive; with the sometime near perfect atmospheric conditions of Indian Summer to the exciting beauty of fall color; Autumn has always been my favorite time of the year... but, somewhere along the way, with the changing climate, reality sets in!

So I don't think of a "trigger" per se as to when autumn begins... but as it progresses, this reality may come in slow increments to many of the more mature and dutiful folks, those that pay attention and are prudent, but to others it is the first jolt of a cold artic blast in November that provides the chilling truth that this is serious stuff.

At any rate, I have, for some time now, been thinking of beginning a thread on the pure seasonal aspects (that S&H mysteriously failed to mention in Generations) of turnings. Perhaps, as we begin to move from winter into spring, now would be a good time to do that? Stay tuned... :smile:




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc S. Lamb on 2002-02-12 17:39 ]</font>

On 2002-02-12 07:26, Jenny Genser wrote:
Ten years ago, I tested as an "INTJ" before turning into an "ISTJ". Most of my posts have been very "S" -- picky, detail oriented. Well, bear with me while I put on my "N" hat and look at a big picture.

I'm talking about the concept of turning. We have the first storm indicating a change in seasons, then a transition where the mood fluctuates between turning "archetypical" moods, then finally a "Social Moment" when people finally realize that THINGS ARE DIFFERENT and We're Not Going Back.

I think that is the core of much of our discussion on whether we were are still in 3T or in early 4T. (Note -- this does not apply to Marc Lamb's argument, which By the Numbers he argues that there are two many darn Silents for us to be in 4T. That is another issue). In some ways, it sure feels like more 3T but....

I'd like to look at past turnings. I'll start with the one that some people I know still remember -- the last 4T. From what I've read and heard, the Social Moment when people realized that We're Not Going Back was probably in 1932, when banks started failing and unemployment was very high. In 1930 and 1931, people were still hoping that Things Would Improve and we could go back to 1929. By 1932, people realized that 1929 was not coming back and they were ready for something new -- hence the New Deal FDR regeneracy.

From what I understand, after VJ Day, when Japan surrendered, people expected that when all the GIs returned home, unemployment would skyrocket and we'd return to a Depression. Of course, that's not what happened, but there must have been a couple of years when people waited for the shoe to drop before realizing that Good Times Were Here At Last. Any one for a vote on what event triggered "1T" (I nominate VJ Day) and when the "Social Moment" was when people realized that we're out of Crisis? (I nominate Harry Truman's re-election).

For 1T to 2T, people like me who remember the mid-Sixties remember the optimism that persisted despite the loss of JFK. Of course, there were 2T like things happening too, such as the Civil Rights marches, etc... but I know an awful lot of nice liberals like my parents saw it as the continuation of the March of Progress that started with the fall of Naziism in Germany and the establishment of stable democracy throughout Western Europe and Japan.

So I'd say that 2T probably started on 11/22/63 (that's as good a date as any and it sure was dramatic) but the Social Moment probably didn't come until 1967-1968. Of course, it was ratified with the tossing out of LBJ's proxy, HHH and the election of Nixon.

The start of 3T has been argued. I think S&H err in using 1984 as the start, because I view it more as a Social Moment. I would view the Catalyst being either the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 or the passing of much of his legislative agenda -- specifically the tax cuts -- in 1981.

Which leads me to the 911 Attacks. After a catalyst, life can return to "normal" but Things Are Different. That is the case now. Brian Rush has pointed out that the furor over Enron is much more substantive -- how to we protect people's retirement savings rather than who got money from Enron. Life continues on, but I think we will realize around in 2004 that it ain't 1999 any more.

Of course, there have been Big Events mid-turn, such as World War I, Prohibition, Nixon's impeachment and resignation, the explosion of the Challenger, the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the McCarthy hearings, the Gulf War, etc... Maybe as Marc argues, 911 will fall into that list. But I don't think so.

Good points about life seeming to almost return to normal for a brief period (a year or two at the most) following a catalyst event - until people come to realize that there is, in fact, no going back. As to whether we are in late 3T or early 4T, only time will tell (by 2004?)

Jenny Genser said "The start of 3T has been argued. I think S&H err in using 1984 as the start, because I view it more as a Social Moment. I would view the Catalyst being either the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 or the passing of much of his legislative agenda -- specifically the tax cuts -- in 1981."

I agree that S & H have a weak case as to what the "catalyst" was there, and that the first election of Reagan seemed more momentous than the second. I suspect that S & H would respond that 1980 was "too early" for the same reasons Marc Lamb says we're still in 3T.

The best way to look at this, in my opinion, is to question whether identifiable "catalyst" events are at all neccessary, and to focus on the generations.

If the generational situation is "primed" for a switch, a catalyst MIGHT happen to set it off (perhaps a little early), but if there is no catalyst, the switch will eventually happen anyway.

Believing that catalysts MUST occur is too deterministic and unscientific (not that the entire theory is not rather unscientific anyway; it IS.)

I can't help but wonder if the sheer volume and number of posts on this one thread alone, as compared to the others, might say something about the significance of 9/11 as a possible catalyst for a 4T, in and of itself. It sure indicates something!

The Economy
Crisis of Confidence

By Rebecca Thomas
February 6, 2002
Enronized


StockCompare

See how the stocks on this page stack up


Stock-Watching Tools

? Map of the Market
An interactive view of 600 stocks.
? Your Portfolio
Track up to 500 stocks in 10 portfolios.
? Tear-Off Watchlist
Track your stocks wherever you go on the Net.
? Daily Briefing
Hot stocks, earnings, analyst ratings and economic reports.
? Breaking News
In-depth stories on today's top business news.
? Updated Market Overview

User Options

? View Archive
? Send Us Your Comments
? Email This Story
? Print This Story
? SAVE THIS
Today on SmartMoney


Stock Screen
? Burdened Borrowers
Now What?
? Love & Money: The Second Time Around
One-Day Wonder
? Rockin' to the Top of the Charts
Stock Close-Up
? FedEx Delivers the Goods
Special Report: Avoiding the Next Enron
? Are Those 10-Ks A-OK?

HOW MANY rotten apples does it take to spoil the whole bag? That's the question investors are asking themselves these days as corporate America divulges one accounting scandal after another. None has been nearly as devastating ? or as nefarious ? as the Enron (ENRNQ) debacle, of course, but fear continues to ripple through the marketplace nonetheless.

If, in the days ahead, new revelations show that more corporations have systematically concealed (criminally or otherwise) the true state of corporate revenues and profits, confidence could be shattered ? spelling even more trouble. As the perception of risk rises, markets would insist on more compensation for shouldering that added risk. Investors would be willing to pay less for each dollar of corporate earnings, which would mean broadly lower stock prices. And lenders would demand more return for parking their money in corporate bonds, which would mean higher interest rates. This tightening of the financial markets could constrict the flow of capital, shrink household wealth and raise borrowing costs. All that in turn could slow spending by both consumers and businesses, nipping the burgeoning economic recovery in the bud.

OK, that's the worst-case scenario. Still, the potential for an Enron-inspired domino effect is very much on the mind of behavioral economists, who study the relationship between psychology and finance. "We have an accounting crisis at the same time that we have record [price-to-earnings] multiples, and we're in a recession," says Robert Shiller, the author of "Irrational Exuberance" and a professor of economics at Yale University. "The market is vulnerable."

(How have concerns about corporate accounting practices affected your willingness to invest in stocks? Take our poll .)

The general investing malaise brought on by daily revelations of dubious corporate accounting practices ? what Wall Street has dubbed "Enronitis" ? has already helped spark a broad downturn in equities in the New Year. Since stocks peaked a month ago, the Standard & Poor's 500 is down 7.6%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is off 5.9%, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite is 12% lighter.

To some economists, the pullback reflects a healthy reassessment of marketplace risk. Companies that used overly aggressive accounting practices to inflate results will be taken to task, whereas the vast majority of companies that accurately report earnings will survive the shakeout relatively unscathed. "It's hard to believe that this is endemic," says Jeremy Siegal, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. "A number of companies, particularly in the tech sector, have stretched the concept of earnings in their favor.? But the vast majority of companies are clean."

To others, however, the retreat in equities represents an increasingly pervasive mistrust in the entire corporate-reporting system. Or, as Woody Dorsey, a behavioral market expert and the founder of research firm Market Semiotics, explains: "Enron has galvanized the markets to question accounting and profitability in general?. Every balance sheet now becomes a question mark, rightly or wrongly." To some extent, this has already started happening.

Although Tyco International (TYC) is perhaps the poster child of the new guilty-until-proven-innocent mentality (year-to-date, Tyco's stock is down more than 50% amid concerns over the conglomerate's muddy accounting practices and rising debt load), charges of suspect accounting have been leveled against a number of companies, including telecom provider Global Crossing (GBLXQ), struggling Irish pharmaceutical company Elan (ELN), PNC Financial Services Group (PNC) and Enterasys Networks (ETS), a maker of networking hardware and software. In addition, many companies are simply suffering from guilt-by-Enron-association (think Calpine (CPN) and Williams (WMB)) or overly complex balance sheets (General Electric (GE) comes to mind). Others, such as J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM) and Citigroup (C), are on the hook for billions of dollars in debt that may never get paid. "The financial markets are shot through with problems of asymmetric information," says Lawrence White, a professor of economics at New York University's Stern School of Business. "What you're going to see is companies falling all over themselves to be greater revealers."

It's the fear of exactly what these companies might reveal ? or keep concealed ? that now threatens market stability. "Most of us have no way of knowing which company will be next," says John R. Nofsinger, the author of "Investment Madness: How Psychology Affects Your Investing...and What to Do About It" and a finance professor at Washington State University.

This extreme form of uncertainty, is what markets hate most of all. American capitalism's strength has always been its comprehensive set of rules and regulations meant to protect shareholders from greedy corporate managers, explains Terrance Odean, assistant professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley. Although U.S. investors are willing to take on the risk that a business won't live up to its performance expectations, they've always believed that insider trading and full disclosure laws would prevent outright fraud. While Odean thinks we're "a long way from supposing that we can't trust companies not to defraud us," he concedes that the Enron scandal "is not a step in the right direction." Barton Biggs, Morgan Stanley's chief U.S. strategist, is blunter: "Investors know there will always be cheats and frauds, but they rely on the governance system of the Fed, the SEC, the exchanges and the accounting profession to protect them," he writes. "If the people begin to believe the stock market is a manipulated game for insiders, the wealthy and the hedge funds, they won't entrust their savings and pensions to it. That's a big deal."

For the most part, however, economists remain confident in the continued smooth functioning of the capital markets, whether or not the stock market continues to sink. Indeed, the pessimistic assumptions built into the bond market after Sept. 11 have been easing. To John Puchalla, an economist at Moody's Investors Service, that suggests that "things aren't falling apart." The spread, or difference in yields, between corporate bonds and U.S. Treasury securities is a sensitive indicator of how worried investors are about the state of the economy and the health of corporations, since it reflects the premium they demand for lending money to companies instead of parking it in risk-free government bonds. At 2.20%, the spread of investment-grade corporate bonds over Treasurys has remained virtually unchanged this year, and is down from a peak of 2.50% last fall, according to Standard & Poor's. Spreads on speculative bonds (bonds that pay a high yield to compensate for greater risk) over government debt have slightly widened over the past few weeks, to 10.12% from 9.80% in early January, but that's still down substantially from an October peak of 12.70%. "There's a problem, but it's a matter of degree," says David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's. "We don't think it's going to get much worse."

And it could be argued that any further Enron-related decline in equities ? so long as it's orderly and moderate ? might actually be healthy for individual investors and the market system in the long term. For investors, the lesson should be one of diversification. "To the extent that it alerts workers participating in 401(k) plans to the risk of holding high fractions of their money in company stocks...it's an eye opener," says David I. Laibson, assistant professor of economics at Harvard University. For the markets, the accounting debacle could have the perverse effect of restoring investors' confidence in the capital system, assuming government and corporate reforms lead to greater transparency and fairness. "The U.S. has led the world in regulation of capital markets," says Yale's Shiller. "I want to see us move and contain this crisis?. I think that's what will happen."

The Economy Archive

TRADE SMARTER







ADVERTISEMENT



Marketplace
Insurance Quotes
Debt Management
Mortgage Center


SmartMart
Research Reports
SmartMoney Solutions
Financial Publications
Wealth Mastery System
Wine & Spirits
Golf Vacation Packages
Golf Equipment






SmartMoney Select | SmartMoney University | SmartMoney Magazine: Current Issue | SmartMart
SmartMoney.com ? 2002 SmartMoney. SmartMoney is a joint publishing venture of Dow Jones & Company, Inc. and Hearst Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. By accessing and using this page, you agree to our terms and conditions and our privacy statement. All quotes delayed by 20 minutes. Delayed quotes provided by S&P Comstock. Historical prices and fundamental data provided by Media General Financial Services. Mutual fund data provided by Morningstar. Mutual Fund NAVs are as of previous day's close. Earnings estimates provided by Zacks Investment Research. Insider trading data provided by Thomson Financial. Upgrades and downgrades provided by Briefing.com.


Could this be Act One, Scene One of The Great Devaluation? Stay tuned, folks.

Jenny Genser writes... Which leads me to the 911 Attacks. After a catalyst, life can return to "normal" but Things Are Different. That is the case now. Brian Rush has pointed out that the furor over Enron is much more substantive -- how to we protect people's retirement savings rather than who got money from Enron. Life continues on, but I think we will realize around in 2004 that it ain't 1999 any more.

Nice post. I have been dissapointed that no "Regeneracy" has been happening to speak of. The concept of a "let's hope it goes away" pause before the crisis proper seems right. Also, the turning boundaries are likely seen much more clearly with distance and 20 20 hindsight. They might all properly remain a bit soft and fuzzy.

On 2002-02-15 06:58, Bob Butler 54 wrote:

Nice post. I have been dissapointed that no "Regeneracy" has been happening to speak of. The concept of a "let's hope it goes away" pause before the crisis proper seems right. Also, the turning boundaries are likely seen much more clearly with distance and 20 20 hindsight. They might all properly remain a bit soft and fuzzy.

Yes, the turning boundaries will be be much more clear in hindsight. However, we should not expect the regenracy any time soon. Not until 2004 or 2005.

This intriguing theory of Jenny's about the period of time between Trigger and Moment... I really like it! Thinking about it caused me to do something really odd (for me) and I wrote a poem, which I will now share (and blame it on Susan and JayN's influence :wink. Just tried to capture the feeling:

Days so slowly tiptoe near
Anticipation Soup du Jour
Wait for signs of change or still
With elbows on the windowsill

Fate is silent in the lead
Yet prays for nothing, still in need
Connect the dots, but lines go dead
When rhymes as reason fill the head

No words make plain what feelings be
Our actions hear what eyes can't see
'Tis us we wait for to obey
As days so quickly pass away


Please be kind. I'm new at this.

On 2002-02-15 11:56, Barbara wrote:

Please be kind. I'm new at this.

You'd never know it! That's very good.

On 2002-02-12 10:55, Chris Loyd '82 wrote:
Grey is low-value Black, Jessie.

OK then, I guess I would agree with him. But agree with MSM or not, I'd certainly take his essay seriously! Geez!

Does anyone else other than MSM here see anarchists as "sanctimonious fools divorced from the real world", as he says the majority are, or not take them seriously, as he says the majority don't? I just don't believe that that many people could be that completely rude and dense-headed so as to go beyond simply viewing anarchists as an enemy political philosophy, and take them as a complete joke!

Oh, and, one more thing. I'm a boy. :smile:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jesse Manoogian on 2002-02-15 13:04 ]</font>

Here's a question. Do you think that the type of scandal that people focus on varies by turn? It seemed as if during the seventies, after several decades when people trusted the Government (1930s through most of the 1960s) people became disillusioned and journalists really focused on Government scandals -- welfare queens, Watergate, and the like. And now, after several decades where the private sector rode high, people are getting disillusioned so the press is focusing on corporate scandals.