From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Broward Horne)
Subject:      Re: Effects of the U.S. National Debt
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 15:39:01 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA01000; Fri, 2 Oct 92 14:59:57 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA10053; Fri, 2 Oct 92 14:57:03 -0700
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 2481; Fri, 02 Oct 92 15:55:53 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 1595; Fri, 02 Oct 92 15:55:52 MST
X-To: misc.invest.usenet

From: fischer@li.serum.kodak.com (Chris Fischer (x39613))
Subject: Re: Effects of the U.S. Debt
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:49:10 GMT

>Consider this.  If Gates sells 1/10 of his holdings this year, 1/10
>next year, if might not plummet in value.  Supply and Demand.

        I'd like to see this one. :)  Boom!  When Gates sells...

>Of course, some of us were smart enough not to buy real-estate.

            Chum.

            Think for second.  It is irrelevant whether YOU
      aren't stupid.  Believe it or not, other people's actions
      affect you.  Just as yours affect them.  Huge monolithic entities,
      squelcing competition, driving up the cost of resources, affect YOU.

>But it is not a piece of paper.  It is ownership in a company.  The
>company has assets.  The minimal value of your "pieces of paper"
>That is wealth.

         Paper.  Less filling.
         "Wealth. Tastes great"
         Paper. Less filling.
         "Wealth. Tastes great"


>.Now, Hornet's Nest Inc., those shares are truly paper.  There
>.are no assets.

         Sure there is.  Me.  Just like Gates.

>I'm not saying your a "COMMIE BASTARD."  More like somebody who
>feels that we need more state intervention to "redistribute wealth"
>and have an industrial policy to run our economy, and a real estate
>policy to hold up the value of real estate.

         Who said anything about state intervention?  You chose to
    knee jerk that one.  What I said was, " The economy won't get
    better until resources are redistributed ".

         This is totally independent of the IMPLEMENTOR. Personally,
    I figure society as a whole will do it.  One way.  Or another.

         Yeah, sure, it would be cool if we could all run around,
    plundering everything, then move our capital elsewhere, shrug
    and say  " well, too bad, you were stupid ".  Unfortunately,
    everybody is stupid at least once.  And the poor become a drag
    on the economy.  It's bad business.

         Hmmm.  I have to admit, it was great fun telling the
   defenders of California Real Estate:

         " Well, too bad. You were stupid. I went to Idaho "  :)

>>     a)  5 % of the population own everything, and is called capitalism
>>     and
>>     b)  5 % of the population own everything, and is called communism?
>
>One difference is that in a), I can be Bill Gates, minor league software
>company owner, and become Bill Gates multi-billionaire.

       No, you can't.  Bill Gates already has that niche locked up.
    And he WILL kick your ass, if you mess with him. :)  Look at DR Dos.

       And in the Soviet Union, you could become a party member.
       No difference.

       Investment - A redistribution of resouces.  I like it. :)