Guy Berger

Yeah, I felt a little guilty putting "Road Warrior" up there -- but man, that was one hell of a chase scene. Perhaps I will check out Apocalypto. My brother's philosophy on Gibson is to pirate his movies and share them widely in order to take away his revenue. To add -- my comment about subtitles was tongue-in-cheek -- feel free to add non-Anglo action movies, eg Crouching Tiger. The most recent Batman was excellent, as was the first one with Jack Nicholson and Michael Keaton. Guy

Alright -- nothing artsy-fartsy, no characters that look like they came out of a Sprockets skit, and subtitles only when the bad guys are talking. Some favorites: Raiders of the Lost Ark The Last Crusade Die Hard (first one) The Road Warrior Terminator 2 the most recent Bond movie The French Connection I'm sure there are a ton that I am not thinking of.

It is a bitch to keep up. I get most of my reading done on a stationary bike. It seems like once I get caught up the Technology Quarterly or one of the other interesting special sections comes around and I fall behind again. I almost always turn to Business first and go on thru the Obit, then to the front on thru International. Not that anyone asked... I am the same -- stationary bike (reading it on the treadmill is a bitch, but doable). And yes, the Tech Quarterly is a killer as far as keeping up with the issues. Guy

Don't foreigners own the Federal Reserve banks? That bothers me a lot more than their owning Citibank. Foreigners owning Federal Reserve banks? Where did you get that idea? Here is how ownership of the Fed works: Since there are some depository institutions in the US that are operated by foreign banks, and since many foreigners own stock in "domestic" banks, it is inevitable that in some sense foreigners own part of the Fed districts banks. Guy

The way I see it -- good for us, bad for their countries. TD -- apologies on the outdated nature of the articles -- a lot of the time I am catching up on back issues. Guy

Assuming you are talking about fiscal policy -- that's a question that should probably be left for the politics forum.

If the business cycle is an inevitable part of most economies, it isn't inevitable, yes? Softening the sharper edges of a recession is a worthwhile endeavour; however it's one which usually turns out to make things worse in some unforseen way. That's because everyone's problem is some other bugger's opportunity. MG Hence Milton Friedman's recommendation to replace the Fed with a DeskJet that prints out money at a constant rate. I agree that the Fed should avoid trying to fine-tune the economy -- but also think that when the economy is slipping toward recession there is scope for well-executed monetary policy (and well-executed fiscal policy, if such a beast is possible) to mitigate the pain. Guy

I have read this paper -- the parallels are very alarming.

What is this? The world needs to know! Seconded! I haven't heard Gary Peacock recently, so I can't say if he was lobotomized or not. Reports are he sounded great with Bley not too long ago (a pesky pianist whom Jarrett claims never to have heard). When did Jarrett claim never to have heard Bley? In the Carr biography he is quoted as saying that he listened a lot to Bley in the early or mid 60s. Guy

I couldn't disagree more . The Fed is taking their customary hair-of-the-dog approach : an economy drunk on cheap money needs...........more cheap money ! The Fed's move was acknowledgment , if any was needed , that the U.S. economy and the consumption which drives it , are now structurally dependent on unbounded credit expansion and concomitantly rising asset values. In such a debt-saturated society inflation is tacitly welcomed while deflation is openly fought . Given that the business cycle is a function of an unchanging human nature , attempts to abolish it are misguided , and what's more , are downright dangerous . Forest rangers know that if occasional small fires are always extinguished , the risk of a forest-destroying conflagration grow enormously . Likewise , small tremors relieve some of the pressures that cause devastating earthquakes . The economy is like this too . The Fed is in effect trading the current economic pain of the few for the future economic pain of the many . That the Wall Street tail now wags the economic dog is reason aplenty for gloom . I disagree. Recessions are usually miserable -- particularly ones that last a long time -- and usually don't cause pain for "the few". Just because the business cycle is an inevitable part of most economies doesn't mean that governments and central banks shouldn't attempt to soften its sharper edges. That said, I agree that the Fed's apparent response to a prospective sharp fall in the stock market sets a bad precedent and one that will cause them pain in the future. Guy

I don't think the date on the second recording is right, judging by the personnel. Guy

My attitude is -- if people want indie bookstores or record shops, they should feel free to support them by paying a higher price at those places. I don't see why those same people insist on passing laws that force OTHERS to subsidize their aesthetic preferences over shopping venues. In these discussions of small vs big retailers, it doesn't seem like policymakers consider what consumers actually want. One final comment -- let's take it as a given that the French government wants to keep independent retailers. This policy is still a suboptimal means for achieving that end. Guy

I deleted the political stuff from this article, but there's plenty of humorous stuff left.

I was listening to Stanley Turrentine's The Spoiler, which features an absolutely smokin' tune titled "La Fiesta" by a composer named Armando Boza. Anybody have any information on him? Did he compose anything else, and was it recorded? Guy

Have you seen the most recent one? It was great! (And I would agree about its recent predecessors.) Guy

Nonsense. A person does not have to spend 52 hours a year (or more) for each stock owned to "beat the market," that's just silly. Cramer is an ass, but at least now what he's preaching makes more sense, especially compared to his previous churn churn churn ways. I agree that people experienced in following the market don't need to spend an hour per week per stock to beat the market. However, someone inexperienced could easily spend more time and still underperform the market. I maintain that it is relatively simple to identify an undervalued security*. It is far more difficult to predict exactly when it will stop being undervalued, and that is the skill that really leads one to making money. *It is at least as easy to identify an overvalued security, but generally more expensive and time consuming to profit in that situation. I'm curious -- since you guys (if I understand you correctly) believe that there is a way to routinely generate returns beyond those of a simple market index without a greater degree of risk as a freelance investor while doing less than 52 hrs of research per year, have you succeed in doing so? (I don't intend this to sound confrontational, but I am curious.) Guy

Happy birthday, Nate! Guy