-->The Evil Genius of John Maynard Keynes

The Daily Reckoning

Paris, France

Tuesday, August 24, 2004

---------------------

*** Stocks to"melt up," says Forbes columnist...

*** Vacations...sunsets...and the vacant $500-a-night
views...

*** The airline industry...Wall Street...Flimflam...and
more!

---------------------

"I don't see what the problem is," said Forbes columnist
Ken Fisher over dinner last night."This economy is great.
I don't see any problems. Stocks are cheap - at least
compared to junk bond yields.

"Look, at the beginning of the year, everybody was singing
the blues about the twin deficits...because the dollar was
going to collapse, interest rates were going to rise and
the stock market was going to melt down. And guess what
happened? Nothing. We're still waiting. None of those bad
things happened.

"And yet, everybody's still so negative. I think what we're
going to see is a big surprise later this year...a melt-up
in the stock market, when people get tired of worrying and
start thinking about making money again."

Could prices"melt-up"?

Of course they could. But when we look around us, what we
see are many more reasons why stocks are likely to get
cheaper, rather than more expensive. Stocks hit a major
high four years ago. They don't usually go for another
major high - without hitting a major low first. The whole
cycle takes about 30-40 years, peak to peak. We have a long
way to go down before another major bull market begins.
Buying stocks before the next low is achieved is very risky
business; you'll be fighting nature all the way.

There is also the interest rate cycle, the rising oil
price, the unresolved trade deficit, consumer debt,
mortgage debt problems, the decline of the dollar,
declining consumer incomes and a shortage of jobs. Any one
of these alone could lead to an economic slump or falling
stock prices. Together, they could conspire to create an
extreme financial collapse. Not a melt-up but a meltdown...

Nothing much has happened so far this year. The Dow seems
frozen in one spot, at about 10,000. Gold is stuck at $400.
Each time we think one of them might be thawing out or
breaking away, a cold blast comes down...and the move comes
to a chilly halt.

Sooner or later, something's bound to melt. By our
guess...more likely down than up.

More news from Eric Fry...

---------------------

Eric Fry, reporting from the Pacific Coast...

- Work is the new vacation...R&R is démodé. According to
the glossiest of America's glossy travel magazines, working
vacations are all the rage. Trout fishing is out; counting
butterfly larvae in the Amazon is in.

- For just a few thousand dollars, the vacationing"Type A"
can enjoy a week in Tanzania monitoring mating cheetahs.
Alternatively, for a modest fee, hardworking Americans can
take a break from their labors by working for someone else.
Pitched as an opportunity to check out a"dream job," they
could spend three or four days learning to make cheese or
learning to run a bed-and-breakfast or learning to tend
bar.

- Your New York editor cannot relate...when it comes to
vacationing, he is a traditionalist. Vacations are for rest
and relaxation. He tries to do nothing at all...and usually
succeeds. Occasionally, he yields to the restlessness of
his co-vacationers and does a little something...like
driving to a different beach for the day.

- Over the last few days, your New York editor has visited
various Hawaiian and Californian beaches...and he has not
missed a single sunset. Few natural wonders can compare
with a sunset in the Pacific. And yet during one
particularly spectacular sunset, your editor turned toward
the five-star hotel behind him and noticed that every
single one of the hotel's balconies was empty. In other
words, the hotel guests were either taking in the sunset in
some other location or were holed up in their rooms
watching The Apprentice. In other words, almost every one
of the hotel's $500-a-night guests had elected to do
something other than watch the sunset from their $500-a-
night hotel room.

- Who would spend thousands of dollars to fly to Hawaii and
stay in an ocean-view room at a five-star hotel merely to
miss the sunset? Almost everyone with the money to do so,
it seems. Have Americans forgotten how to relax?

-"The indigenous Hawaiians never invented a wheel or
anything else of value," grumbled a fellow tourist to your
New York editor last night.

-"Why would they?" came the reply.

-"Well, don't you think they should have invented
something of value?"

-"Why would they?" came the reply again."And you're
wrong, by the way."

-"Huh?"

-"Didn't Hawaiians invent the surfboard? The Greeks and
Romans lived next to water for thousands of years and never
invented a surfboard."

-"Are you serious?"

-"Yes," your editor replied."And let's not forget that
Hawaiians also invented the mai tai. Maybe you should
reconsider your definition of 'advanced culture.'"

- Hawaiians did not invent the sunset, of course. But the
skies over the Hawaiian islands host some of the most
beautiful sunsets in the world. Meanwhile, 6,000 miles from
Maui, investors watched the Dow sink slowly below the
horizon yesterday.

- The blue chip index drifted 37 points lower to 10,073.
The Nasdaq Composite Index was virtually unchanged at
1,838. The price of crude oil also fell, as the benchmark
October contract dipped 67 cents, to $46.05. That's more
than $3 below the record-high price of $49.40 a barrel
reached last Friday.

- Hope, more than substance, seemed to push the price of
crude oil lower. Investors hope that there will be some
sort of resolution to the standoff in Najaf between
militiamen loyal to rebel Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and
U.S. armed forces. Investors also hope that the Russian
government will cease and desist from threatening to push
Yukos into bankruptcy. But as yet, neither hope boasts much
in the way of substance.

- The resurgent gold price took a breather yesterday,
pressured by strength in the dollar, after climbing nearly
$9 over the prior two sessions. The precious metal slipped
$2.40, to $411.

- Once again, the financial markets are becoming as
fascinating as they are treacherous. Once again, investors
must ask themselves,"Which market is 'right?'" The gold
market (seconded by the oil market)? Or the stock market?
Is the gold market correctly anticipating a climate of
rising geopolitical tensions and price pressures? Or is the
stock market correctly anticipating a MOSTLY favorable
climate for the U.S. economy?

- We don't know the answer, but our temerity leads us to
favor gold's clairvoyance...and besides, we like the way
gold glistens...kind of like a Maui sunset.

---------------------

Bill Bonner, back in Paris...

"The airline industry as a whole has lost money, ever since
it began," said British analyst Tim Price."It has been a
net destroyer of capital."

Airplanes are one of the most successful new technologies
of all time. Invented only a century ago, now the skies are
full of them. Yet had you bought the shares of all airlines
as they came to market, you would have actually lost money
over the entire period.

Employees made money. Passengers enjoyed the convenience of
air travel. Airplane manufacturers and suppliers made
money. A lot of money changed hands. But the capitalists
who financed the airline industry made nothing.

Go figure.

On the other hand, we wonder if investors - overall - ever
make any money...and whether Wall Street, itself, is not a
net destroyer of capital.

"I saw one study," Tim continued,"that showed that during
the last bull market of the '80s and '90s stocks rose at an
annual rate of 17%...but investors really only made an
average of about 5%. And this was during the greatest bull
market of all time. Think what actually happened during
bear markets."

How could it be, dear reader?

We have a hypothesis. Wall Street, we believe, is a giant
flimflam outfit. The"flim" is investors' natural
inclinations to do the wrong thing at the wrong time for
the wrong reasons. A stock goes up - investors buy it. They
are throwing bad money after good - indirectly
overcapitalizing a good business, inviting its managers to
waste money on projects that are much less likely to pay
off than those that got them going. Eventually, the shares
go down and investors lose money.

The"flam" is the cost of doing business on Wall Street.
Brokers, analysts, lawyers, shills, market makers, coffee
makers, rainmakers, bookmakers - nothing comes cheap. The
flam is the friction in the machine, which Warren Buffett
estimates as high as 30% of all capital invested.

***"Paris insulted. Paris bruised. Paris martyred. But
Paris liberated. By herself. Liberated by her own
people..."

Charles de Gaulle stood at the Arc de Triomphe and
exaggerated. Sixty years ago today, Paris was liberated
from the Germans. A French captain, accompanied by Spanish
troops, drove up to the town hall and took charge. The day
before, the German commander, von Choltitz, had been given
a direct order by Hitler himself: Reduce Paris to ruins.
But the Allies were only a few days away...the Germans were
going to lose the war...and von Choltitz was no fool.
Earlier, Paris Mayor Pierre Taittinger, had paid him a
visit and spelled it out for him: One way or another,
history would remember the German - either as the man who
destroyed Paris or the man who saved it.

Capt. Dronne, Gen. de Gaulle, Gen. Le Clerc, Col. Rol-
Tanguy, Gen. Eisenhower - a lot of men could claim to have
liberated Paris. Ernest Hemingway claimed he had liberated
the bar at the Ritz.

But von Choltitz was the real hero of Paris' liberation. A
career soldier, he knew he had to obey his commander in
chief. But he had a talent as rare in a military man as
good manners in a teenager: He was able to see his
duty...and have the good sense not to do it.

---------------------

The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: The mainstream use the term
stagflation so loosely, it's becoming a buzzword. But few
people actually know what it means or what causes it.
Here's the answer...

THE EVIL GENIUS OF JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES
by Sean Corrigan

Seventy years or so ago, Keynes saw that if Muhammad would
not go to the mountain for a lower paycheck, the mountain
must come to Muhammad.

What Keynes realized was that if modern institutional
arrangements and political short-termism were going to
prevent wages from falling far enough in the bust in terms
of the dollars and cents people were paid in (if wages were
"sticky downwards" as economists have it) - unlike the
price of beach hats during a rainy summer, which, as far as
politicians are concerned, can fall all they like - he
could achieve the same result by making the dollars and
cents themselves worth less!

Monetary inflation can price people back into work so long
as they are under the illusion that they are not suffering
a real cut in their wages, concluded Keynes...and the
message spread.

Sooner, rather than later, of course, that illusion was
dispelled. Soon, the workers and their representatives, not
to mention the pensioners and welfare recipients, began to
watch the published price indexes very closely and at the
first hint of an uptick, they would all demand to be
compensated for the loss to their purchasing power that
that increase comprised.

Indeed, before very long, they were making the process
pretty much automatic, by building indexation clauses into
working agreements and state benefit payments.

So as more and more money was pumped into the world economy
in the 1960s - led by a U.S. trying then, as now, to have
both guns and butter - and as this inflation pushed prices
up ever more rapidly, workers became ever quicker to adapt
to the change, making any lessening of their real cost to
employers ever more transient and unreliable.

Inflation, then, was not reducing unemployment in anything
like the manner the Keynesians had predicted, and this was
solely because the plumbers had outsmarted the professors
and the sausage makers had gotten a jump on the central
bankers.

In due course, this helped hasten the monetary breakdown of
the early '70s. Nixon put America into another partial
default (FDR having been the first to do so) by closing the
gold window. The breakdown of the Bretton Woods system,
which Keynes himself had helped to construct before his
death, soon followed.

Then, as the dollar - for so long propped up only by the
purchases made, largely unwillingly, by all the other
central banks - plummeted, and war broke out in the Middle
East, the oil producers decided they would not sell their
resources artificially cheaply for depreciated paper, an
aversion naturally heightened by the fact that some of
these same resources were being used to fuel their enemies'
assault tanks and jet fighters.

Here another blunder was made by unthinking mainstream
economists, under pressure from their political masters.

Instead of accepting that oil was henceforth going to cost
more dollars than it had before, and instead of reigning
back on the creation of money, so that the inflation that
brought this about might be slowed, energy costs were
baldly dropped from the calculations. About this time, the
concept of something called"core" consumer prices - a
measure excluding first energy, but later also food prices
- became the vogue.

Now, if you had spent $10 on gas and $5 on groceries
yesterday, by rights, when gas went up to $12 overnight -
and assuming you would rather be without your shallots than
without your Chevy - you should have had only $3 left with
which to buy food today - and the price of food should have
fallen to reflect this new economic reality.

No extra money (no inflation) and no overall rise in price,
only a relative change in these prices would have ensued.

But no! Most central banks, anxious not to see money
diverted from domestic producers to the account of the
foreign oil magnates, simply had another $2 printed up so
that you now had $17 to spend in place of your original
$15, so $12 for oil and $5 for food could be simultaneously
accommodated, at least in accounting terms.

What they failed to notice, of course, was that this did
not give full voice to the more urgent requirement for gas,
nor did it truly reflect individuals' lesser relative
demand for green beans and that by"monetizing" the oil
price rise, they were only making matters worse!

They also struggled to see that the sheiks still got more
of the pie, both in monetary and in real terms, despite
their efforts to confound this shift in free market
valuations.

Remember, too, that while all this was going on, organized
labor and the political parties that represented it were
perhaps at the zenith of their powers, and so as prices
rose, wages and benefits rose just as fast, if not actually
faster.

This meant that, rather than becoming cheaper, workers
were, in many cases, getting pricier, and goods, as we saw,
that are more pricey do not tend to sell as readily as
those that are not. Unemployment, therefore, rose.

Whereupon there was another reason to inflate again, for
once the market adjusts to a given volume of money and a
given matrix of prices, to prevent another relapse, the
artificial stimulus must be reapplied, and in increasing
dosage to boot.

This process - in another failure of economic vocabulary -
became known as"cost-push" inflation, or as the"wage-
price spiral." That way, the real culprits - the men whose
hands were covered in printer's ink - could conveniently
lay the blame for the woes of the world onto militant union
leaders at home or onto sinister Arab princes abroad.

At the same time,"fiscal drag" - by which we mean the
process wherein tax thresholds and depreciation allowances
are not adjusted fully in line with rising prices - was
bleeding businesses of internal funds, limiting their
ability indirectly to employ others higher up the cone of
production, by placing orders for capital equipment and
plant via continued investment.

Moreover, with foreign exchange rates going wild, with
interest rates more volatile than for many a long year and
with commodity prices soaring alongside labor costs, few
businessmen were able to make any meaningful plans for the
future.

Indeed, the whole question of what constituted a profit
became vexed when historic costs of inventory or equipment
recorded on the books bore little relation to prices being
charged on current markets.

Further, with all this"core" consumer price nonsense and
amidst all these ex-food and ex-energy shenanigans, all
manner of relative prices were being distorted, too, as our
green beans and gas example illustrates. It cannot be over-
emphasized that relative prices are the kinds that provide
the most important market information of all to any
entrepreneur.

This is because, in many ways, the entrepreneur is
effectively someone who takes a recipe out to a shop, buys
the ingredients listed there, and then bakes a cake to be
sold later in his or her market stall. If he can't
accurately price the flour and the sugar, the fruit and the
butter, and measure the total against his estimate of what
someone is likely to pay for the finished pastry, how can
he expect to make a profit by his efforts?

So in addition to being unable to afford the higher wages
arrived at under threat of strikes, or through subjection
to government"arbitration" and the forced complicity with
national pay deals, on top of having capital consumed by
the interaction of flawed accounting systems and rapacious
government revenue departments, company executives and
business owners alike found themselves increasingly
uncertain as to what it actually was they should be doing
if they were to make a profit; even one, at root, that they
couldn't properly quantify if and when they were to make
it.

Naturally, then - either voluntarily or by force of
circumstances - they did less of everything. Production was
cut back. Joblessness rose, and stock prices plunged -
though sometimes the extent of their fall was disguised by
the coincident steep fall in the value of people's money.

For a while, as all this went on, the politicians and the
central banks fell back on their two most readily utilized
means of Depression-busting - a resort to the command
economy means of maximum prices, mandatory wage caps and of
restrictions on the mobility of capital and, of course, to
more inflation to combat the spreading stagnation of output
and work.

Ultimately, however, this was recognized as being
inherently self-defeating and, clad in the political
camouflage of an adherence to the"new" doctrines of
monetarism, the Anglo-Saxon central bankers - a distinction
we draw because their more conservative continental
counterparts had, as ever, been a deal less susceptible to
such follies - began to do what was long overdue: They cut
back sharply on the pace of credit creation and let the
inevitable bust work itself out at last. For such a belated
recognition of economic reality was Paul Volcker
apotheosized and allowed to ascend the monetary Mount
Olympus from whence he appears occasionally to berate the
poor mortals who succeeded him!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, was what stagflation was
all about - and a fairly horrid experience it was, too.


Regards,

Sean Corrigan
for The Daily Reckoning

-->Früher oder später muss etwas passieren!

von unserem Korrespondenten Bill Bonner

"Ich sehe nicht, was das Problem ist", sagte Ken Fisher, Kolumnist
beim Forbes-Magazin, vorgestern beim gemeinsamen Abendessen mit mir.
"Dieser Wirtschaft geht es großartig. Ich sehe keine Probleme. Die
Aktien sind günstig - oder zumindest sind sie das im Vergleich zu den
Renditen, die man mit Risiko-Anleihen erzielen kann."

"Sehen Sie mal, zu Jahresbeginn sang jeder den Blues der
Zwillingsdefizite... weil der Dollar auf dem Weg zum Kollaps war, die
Zinsen stiegen, und der Aktienmarkt dabei war, weg zu schmelzen. Und
raten Sie mal, was passierte? Nichts. Wir warten immer noch. Keine
dieser schlimmen Sachen passierte."

"Und dennoch ist jeder immer noch so negativ. Ich denke, dass wir
später im Jahr noch eine große Überraschung sehen werden... eine
Jahresendrallye! Und zwar dann, wenn die Leute es satt haben, sich
Sorgen zu machen, und damit beginnen, wieder übers Geld verdienen
nachzudenken."

Könnte es zu einer Jahresendrallye kommen?

Wenn ich mich umsehe, dann sehe ich mehr Gründe für fallende als für
steigende Aktienkurse. Die Aktienkurse haben vor vier Jahren ein
größeres Topp erreicht. Normalerweise erreichen sie dann nicht ein
neues größeres Topp - ohne vorher ein neues Tief erreicht zu haben.
Diese Zyklen dauern etwa 30-40 Jahre, von Topp zu Topp. Wir haben noch
einen langen Weg vor uns, bevor ein weiterer großer Bullenmarkt
beginnt. Wenn man Aktien kauft, bevor das Low erreicht ist, dann ist
das eine sehr riskante Sache; man stellt sich da gegen die Natur.

Es gibt auch noch den Zinszyklus, den steigenden Ã-lpreis, das
ungelöste Problem des amerikanischen Handelsbilanzdefizits, die
Schulden der Konsumenten, die Probleme mit den Hypotheken, den Mangel
an Arbeitsplätzen. Jeder dieser Punkte alleine könnte Grund genug für
eine Verlangsamung des Wirtschaftswachstums und für fallende
Aktienkurse sein. Alle zusammen könnten zu einem extremen finanziellen
Kollaps führen.

In diesem Jahr ist bis jetzt noch nicht viel passiert. Der Dow Jones
pendelt um die 10.000 Punkte, der Goldpreis um die 400 Dollar. Jedes
Mal, wenn ich gedacht habe, einer der beiden hätte sich von dieser
Marke weg bewegt... dann kommt ein kalter Wind, und die Preisbewegung
kommt zu einem Halt.

Früher oder später muss etwas passieren. Und die Aktienkurse werden
dann wahrscheinlich eher fallen als steigen... das ist meine
Einschätzung.

Mehr News von Eric Fry:

**********************************************************************

Mittwoch, 25. August 2004

Sonnenuntergänge in Hawaii

von unserem Korrespondenten Eric Fry, derzeit an der amerikanischen
Westküste

Wenn es um Urlaub geht, dann bin ich Traditionalist. Der Urlaub ist
für mich die Zeit für Erholung und Ausruhen. Ich versuche dann,
überhaupt nichts zu tun... und normalerweise habe ich damit Erfolg.
Gelegentlich tue ich dann doch etwas... wie zum Beispiel zu einem
anderen Strand zu fahren. Und gelegentlich schreibe ich sogar aus dem
Urlaub für den"Investor's Daily".

Gerade bin ich in Urlaub. In den letzten paar Tagen habe ich
zahlreiche Strände in Hawaii und Kalifornien besucht... und ich habe
keinen einzigen Sonnenuntergang verpasst. Wenige Naturereignisse
lassen sich mit einem Sonnenuntergang am Pazifik vergleichen. Während
eines besonders spektakulären Sonnenuntergangs am Strand drehte ich
mich um, zu dem 5-Sterne-Hotel hinter mir. Und da bemerkte ich, dass
jeder einzelne Balkon dieses Hotels leer war. Mit anderen Worten: Die
Hotelgäste genossen den Sonnenuntergang entweder von einem anderen Ort
aus, oder sie waren in ihren Zimmern und sahen sich schlechte Shows
wie"The Apprentice" an. Also fast jeder der Gäste dieses Hotels
(Zimmer kosten 500 Dollar pro Nacht) hatte sich dazu entschieden,
etwas anderes zu tun, als den Sonnenuntergang von seinem
500-Dollar-Zimmer aus anzusehen.

Wer würde schon Tausende Dollar für einen Flug nach Hawaii ausgeben
und dann in einem 5-Sterne-Hotel unterkommen, um dann einen
Sonnenuntergang zu vermeiden? Fast jeder, der das Geld dazu hat - so
sieht es aus. Haben die Amerikaner vergessen, wie man sich entspannt?

"Die eingeborene Bevölkerung von Hawaii hat niemals ein Rad oder sonst
irgendetwas Nützliches erfunden", grummelte ein Tourist zu mir,
gestern Abend.

"Warum sollten sie auch?" kam die Antwort.

"Nun, denken Sie nicht, dass die etwas Wertvolles hätten erfinden
sollen?"

"Warum sollten Sie?", kam die gleiche Antwort."Und übrigens haben Sie
Unrecht."

"Huh?"

"Haben die Hawaiianer nicht das Surfboard erfunden? Die Griechen und
Römer lebten Tausende Jahre direkt am Meer, und die haben niemals das
Surfboard erfunden."

"Meinen Sie das ernst?"

"Ja", antwortete ich."Und man sollte auch nicht vergessen, dass die
Hawaiianer das mai tai erfunden haben. Vielleicht sollten Sie Ihre
Definition von 'fortgeschrittener Kultur' überdenken!"

Die Hawaiianer haben natürlich nicht den Sonnenuntergang erfunden.
Aber der Himmel über den Inseln von Hawaii zeigt die schönsten
Sonnenuntergänge der Welt. 6.000 Meilen entfernt sinkt auch der Dow
Jones langsam am Horizont.

Und der Ã-lpreis ist auch ein bisschen zurückgekommen. Es war eher
Hoffnung als Substanz, die dazu geführt hat. Die Investoren hoffen,
dass es eine Art von Lösung gibt, für den Konflikt in Nadschaf. Die
Investoren hoffen auch, dass die russische Regierung mit dem Drohen,
Yukos in den Ruin zu treiben, aufhören wird. Aber bis jetzt ist der
Hoffnung noch keine Substanz gefolgt.

Wieder einmal müssen sich die Investoren fragen: Welcher Markt hat
recht? Der Goldmarkt oder der Aktienmarkt? Hat der Goldmarkt Recht,
der ein Klima zunehmender geopolitischer Spannungen reflektiert? Oder
hat der Aktienmarkt Recht, der ein GRÃ-SSTENTEILS positives Klima für
die US-Wirtschaft widerspiegelt?

Ich kenne die Antwort nicht, aber meine Kühnheit führt mich dazu, eher
den hellseherischen Fähigkeiten des Goldes zu vertrauen. Und nebenbei
gesagt mag ich die Art und Weise, wie das Gold glänzt... ähnlich wie
ein Sonnenuntergang auf Hawaii.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mittwoch, 25. August 2004

Netto-Kapitalvernichter

von unserem Korrespondenten Bill Bonner in Paris

"Die Flugindustrie insgesamt hat Geld verloren, seit ihrer Gründung",
so der britische Analyst Tim Price."Sie ist ein
Netto-Kapitalvernichter."

Flugzeuge gehören zu den erfolgreichsten neuen Technologien aller
Zeiten. Erst vor einem Jahrhundert erfunden, ist der Himmel nun voll
von ihnen. Aber wenn Sie Aktien von allen Fluggesellschaften gekauft
hätten, als diese an den Markt gekommen sind, dann hätten Sie
letztlich Geld verloren.

Die Angestellten haben Geld verdient. Die Passagiere haben den Luxus
von Flügen genossen. Die Flugzeughersteller und die Lieferanten haben
Geld verdient. Eine Menge Geld hat den Besitzer gewechselt. Aber die
Kapitalisten, die die Flugindustrie finanziert haben, haben nichts
verdient.

Andererseits frage ich mich, ob die Investoren - insgesamt - überhaupt
Geld verdienen... und ob nicht auch die Wall Street selbst ein
Netto-Kapitalvernichter ist.

"Ich habe eine Studie gesehen", so Tim Price weiter,"die gezeigt hat,
dass die Aktienkurse während des letzten Bullenmarktes der 1980er und
1990er um jährlich durchschnittlich 17 % gestiegen sind... aber der
durchschnittliche Investor hat dennoch nur etwa 5 % verdient. Und das
war der größte Bullenmarkt aller Zeiten. Stellen Sie sich vor, was bei
Bärenmärkten passiert."

Wie kann das sein, liebe(r) Leser(in)?

Ich habe eine Hypothese. Ich glaube, dass die Wall Street die
Investoren zu falschen Handlungen verleitet. Wenn eine Aktie im Kurs
steigt - dann kaufen die Investoren sie. Sie werfen gutem Geld
schlechtem Geld hinterher - was indirekt zur Ãœberkapitalisierung eines
guten Unternehmens führt, was deren Manager dazu einlädt, Geld mit
Projekten zu verschwenden, die wahrscheinlich weniger Rendite bringen
werden als die ursprünglichen. Schließlich fällt der Aktienkurs und
die Investoren verlieren Geld.

Und dann müssen ja auch noch die Kosten der Broker, Analysten,
Juristen, Market Maker, Kaffeehersteller, Buchhalter bezahlt werden -
nichts ist umsonst. Das sind die Friktionskosten, deren Höhe Warren
Buffett auf 30 % des gesamten investierten Kapitals schätzt.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mittwoch, 25. August 2004

60. Jahrestag der Befreiung von Paris

von unserem Korrespondenten Bill Bonner

"Paris wurde beleidigt. Paris wurde verletzt. Paris erlitt ein
Martyrium. Aber Paris wurde befreit. Von sich selbst. Befreit von den
eigenen Bewohnern..."

Charles de Gaulle stand am Arc de Triomphe, als er diese Worte sagte,
und er übertrieb. Gestern war der 60. Jahrestag der Befreiung von
Paris. Ein französischer Hauptmann fuhr zum Rathaus und übernahm das
Kommando. Am Tag vorher war dem deutschen Kommandanten von Paris, von
Choltitz, ein direkter Befehl Adolf Hitlers übermittelt worden: Paris
in Schutt und Asche zu legen.

Aber die Alliierten waren nur noch ein paar Tage von der Stadt
entfernt... die Deutschen waren dabei, den Krieg zu verlieren... und
von Choltitz war kein Dummkopf.

Kurz vorher hatte ihn der Pariser Oberbürgermeister Pierre Taittinger
besucht. Und er hatte ihm gesagt: Auf die eine oder andere Weise würde
die Geschichte an von Choltitz erinnern - entweder als den Mann, der
Paris zerstörte, oder als den Mann, der es rettete.

Captain Dronne, General de Gaulle, General Le Clerc, Colonel
Rol-Tanguy, General Eisenhower - eine Menge Männer könnten es für sich
in Anspruch nehmen, Paris befreit zu haben. Ernest Hemingway nahm für
sich in Ansprach, die Bar beim Ritz befreit zu haben.

Aber von Choltitz war der wirkliche Held der Befreiung von Paris. Er
war ein Berufsoffizier, der wusste, dass er den Befehlen seines
Oberbefehlshabers gehorchen musste. Aber er hatte ein Talent, das bei
Militärangehörigen genauso selten ist wie gute Manieren bei einem
Teenager: Er konnte seine Pflicht erkennen... und er hatte den
Verstand, diese Pflicht nicht zu tun.