Profit and loss

[Coffey, Mitchell R]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jane [mailto:lycidas2 at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 3:42 PM
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Subject: Re: Profit and loss
[snip]

> Just to get rid of one of the BS platitudes of these folks,
> just ask yourself, what does it really mean that the
> activity on the foreign exchange and currency and index and
> commodities, and all manner of derivatives has sky rocketed?

It means that investment capital is being is more available, 
and moving with greater efficiency, over a wider range of 
international markets.

> Could it be a very, very, good thing? 
[snip]

Yep, since it means more capital is likely to be available to
take advantage of investment opportunities in those 3rd World
countries we wish to prosper.

> Why not? 
[snip]

1. Well, it can make individual countries less the masters of
their own fate.  

2. It can tend to concentrate econonic, political and cultural 
power into the hands of international corporations and 
organizations - nameless, all - that are outside the control of
democratic structures, and... and... well, you know. 

3. It's possible in certain circumstances that the stuff we're
talking about could facilitate a net outflow of capital from some
of the 3rd World countries we wish to prosper; that is, those
that are really bad investment targets. 

4. The effects of economic growth, economic, political and cultural, 
are not all and always what econ majors make them up to be.

5. Foreign investment means foreign influence of assorted kinds.  
This can be bad.  (On the other hand, J.M. Keynes once pointed 
out that "If a bank loans me 1000 pounds and I can't pay it back, 
I'm in trouble; if a bank loans me 1,000,000,000 pounds and I can't
pay it back, the bank's in trouble."  This phenomenon can give
debtor nations a strange sort of counter-influence.)

> Jane, thinking of investing the Fresh Air money in EU FLN
> Mortgage IOs.

I wish.

Mitchell Coffey, Recovering Economist