Max Sawicky wrote, >Without getting immersed >up in the Flow of Funds stuff, the inescapable >fact is that, as Doug says, NIPA savings trends >do not support the BBB(Baby Boom Bulge) theory. Whenever I hear tell of an "inescapable fact", I suspect a retreat from reasoned argument into dogma. On my side of the debate, there are no such inescapable facts. I can't "prove" my hypothesis, which is really more of a question than an answer. But I'm goaded on by the impression that my tentative formulation makes Max and Doug uncomfortable enough to invoke "definitive" dismissals and "inescapable facts". Is the Pope infallible? Does a bear shit on the Street? >Financial bubbles have an autonomous character, >relative to individual and corporate decisions >on the amount of income and receipts, respectively, >not to spend. That's an intriguing tease, Max. My last message argued that the metaphor of the bubble is inapplicable precisely because of its autonomy from subjective time preference for money and risk aversion. Regards, Tom Walker ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ #408 1035 Pacific St. Vancouver, B.C. V6E 4G7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 669-3286 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
