Guest Posted March 24, 2003 Report Share Posted March 24, 2003 > Macroeconomics is definately a philosophy ('a pouring from the empty into the void') that is beyond most of our feeble 'sanukers' brains. Not really, but it does take some effort. Very few of us could possibly ever be a Mozart, but most of us can probably learn how to play a simple tune on the piano if we put our minds to it. The point is that you can't just sit there and bang stuff out; you need to spend a little time understanding the thing, you know? > No wonder Anderson could make Enron look like a great company. That was microeconomics, not macro. > Now to the important questions......will the price of barfines and ST/LT rise or fall > relative to the GDP or whatever benchmark you fellas choose You can expect the sex-scene to get more expensive as the economy grows and women have broader opportunities. Personally, I think that?s a good thing. Many may disagree, but wanting a country to remain poor in order get cheap sex is pretty morbid, IMHO. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 24, 2003 Report Share Posted March 24, 2003 Hi KS - Been a long time, sorry about that The current format is excellent - much better than the first one off delphi (honestly, it's the format that kept me away) thanks for moving this thread, I could never find it - had to go through gummigut's profile! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 24, 2003 Report Share Posted March 24, 2003 > Ask the Bank of England and all of the AESEAN members what can happen when the trading community loses faith in your currency. Sure, but both crises were the end result of a series of fundamental economic issues (e.g. the EMU, rising current account deficits, fixed FX regimes) that "theoretical" economists had pointed out long before the bubbles burst. Soros led the charge agains the B of E, I'd hardly call him an "average guy with an average view of the world"; Krugman pointed out the problems in ASEAN in 1992 while he was an economics professor at MIT, not exactly a "bachelors degree at an average university" When markets make emotional moves (e.g. Black monday 1987; 9/11 drop 2001), they tend to revert pretty quickly; large shifts based on underlying fundamentals are much harder to claw back. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted March 24, 2003 Report Share Posted March 24, 2003 Hi, Glad to see you back again, and yes the current format is much better than the previous one. And we are always trying to improve it Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJsushi Posted March 24, 2003 Report Share Posted March 24, 2003 Says scuba22: > Ask the Bank of England and all of the AESEAN members what can happen when the trading community loses faith in your currency. Sure, but both crises were the end result of a series of fundamental economic issues (e.g. the EMU, rising current account deficits, fixed FX regimes) that "theoretical" economists had pointed out long before the bubbles burst. Soros led the charge agains the B of E, I'd hardly call him an "average guy with an average view of the world"; Krugman pointed out the problems in ASEAN in 1992 while he was an economics professor at MIT, not exactly a "bachelors degree at an average university" When markets make emotional moves (e.g. Black monday 1987; 9/11 drop 2001), they tend to revert pretty quickly; large shifts based on underlying fundamentals are much harder to claw back. Cheers, Exactly. Fundamentals are great and all but the market may not neccessarily take them into account. The guys moving the capital around ultimately pull the trigger. The internet bubble of the 90's proved that. Everyone with a modicum of common sense knew that the growth was unsustainable based on purely basic fundamental economic principles. Unfortunately, it took the market a few years to believe it and lose faith in the economic miracle of internet based businesses. 3 prominent hedge funds shut down during that time because the "market" didn't get it or didn't care about the fundamentals. The 3 funds were Quantum(Soros) Tiger(Julian) and LongTerm(Merriwether-their story was more complex). Now granted each of the prominent funds had other problems with performance, assets, trading strategies etc, but they all named irrational markets as a culprit for their downfall. Concerning the AESEAN crisis. The assault on the Asian currencies came at the defining moment when the market realized that the Thai government couldn't afford to support the currency to the dollar peg. All confidence was lost capital moved fast and the punishment was brutal. Don't forget the "mavens" such as Soros(I think Stanley was leading the charge at the time because Georgie was focused on his humanitarian thing) were getting their asses handed to them shorting the currency prior to the float and many smaller funds had to abandon the trade with losses because the rest of the market still had confidence in the governments ability to support the peg. George didn't have enough firepower to take it down by himself. My point is that regardless of what the underlying economics are the market is always right even when it is obviously wrong. Goldman Sachs can give two craps about what their economists say when it is opposite of the profits their traders capture in the market. Profit makes you right as far as the Capital markets are concerned. Only in hindsight are people judged to have been right or wrong. BTW- I think most Wall St guys are average guys. IMO very few are brilliant and I am not talking brilliant with the ability to crunch numbers or regurgitate what they learned in B-school. I mean brilliant when it comes to thinking, having thoughts beyond the norm, the ability to synthesize information with amazing clarity and apply it to a given situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickfarang Posted April 3, 2003 Report Share Posted April 3, 2003 Its happened! 52.94/96 as of April 3. Time to make that international wire transfer? RickF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted April 3, 2003 Report Share Posted April 3, 2003 I think this was a mistake by the Post. Overjoyed when I first saw it (wow- my $$ just increase 25%!!!), I checked 2 other sites- bith say 1 USD = ~42.93 THB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickfarang Posted April 3, 2003 Report Share Posted April 3, 2003 I don't understand it myself. The BKK Post shows 52.94 today, but you're right - the other sites are showing 43.x at the moment. Is it that the other sites are slow in updating, or is it a problem with the data on the Post's page? I am sorry for my part in raising any false hopes. Rick F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted April 4, 2003 Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 It became normal at one point last night, but, right now, it's pegged at 52.94. I wish they had an online exchange service! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 4, 2003 Report Share Posted April 4, 2003 what are you talking about? check that: http://www.bot.or.th/bothomepage/databank/FinMarkets/ExchangeRate/exchange_e.asp that says: Foreign Exchange Rates as of April 4, 2003 Average Interbank Exchange Rate = 43.112 Baht/US Dollar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.