Chirac Ready To Turn His Anger On Blair If France Votes Non

The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 5-28-2005 | Toby Helm

[Vicomte13]

Madame, I would describe myself as a Catholic.

My wife enjoys the "de" that she gained by marrying me, and might describe me as of a noble family

My friends would describe me as an eccentric.

Most others would describe me as an ass.

[investigateworld]

Your earlier comment about 'discovery' leads me to believe your an attorney?

[flaglady47]

"My wife enjoys the "de" that she gained by marrying me, and might describe me as of a noble family
My friends would describe me as an eccentric.
Most others would describe me as an ass."

Thank you for replying, Monsieur d'Ass. But I prefer to think of you as an eccentric, which I think probably fits. I like eccentrics.

[flaglady47]

P.S., I have torn feelings about the French, as I am partially one (Landry, but I doubt very much if there was a "de" in it). However, when visiting Notre Dame, on the right side of the square in front of the cathedral, there was a St. Landry's residence, so I may not be of "de" descendancy, but might be saintly. That would be a nice tradeoff. I have found your comments on this thread most interesting. Merci buttercups.

[Vicomte13]

Well, the good news is that you could be descended of a French saint. Indeed, perhaps your great great grandfather was a priest, your great great grandmother was a nun, and your saintly ancestor was born in a convent!
(A thought inspired by a road excavation in the Midi a few years ago. On the one side of the road, an ancient monastery. On the other, a convent. And the secret hidden since the middle ages discovered by the road construction workers? Why, the secret tunnel linking the two, of course!)

Also, please remember that if you were to ascend 32 generations of 30 years each, this would take you back to approximately 1066, when England was conquered.

You would have 2 to the 32nd power ancestors, which is to say 4,294,967,296 ancestors, half male and half female, living at that time. Of course, there were only about 750 million people in the world then. Which means that you are almost certainly related by blood to every person in Northwestern Europe without needing to remount all the way back to the tale of Noe and the Deluge.

Therefore, greetings, cousin.

Merci buttercups?

Je vous en prie, madam-weasel.

[flaglady47]

Bon Soir, Monsieur. I retire due to extreme fatigue. Till the next time. A River.

[investigateworld]

Your thoughts on the elction M.Vicomte? It was great hearing a rare insight into the thinking there.

[investigateworld]

Your thoughts on the elction M.Vicomte? It was great hearing a rare insight into the thinking there.

[Vicomte13]

I have not seen any projections from today, but I remain strongly convinced that the Non camp will prevail.

[rlmorel]

Yeah, so they subsidize Airbus to make it competitive. Ain't gonna work in the long run...

[investigateworld]

Your insights as to Sunday's election would be most welcome!

[crasher]

His new book is pretty optimistic about stocks. He argues that individual stock performance has little/nothing to do with the industry the stock is in. Basically his book argues arguing against the "growth stock" idea. He also says basically what you do about India and China and our retirement problem calling it the "global solution." He claims to be an optimist but he is incredibly pessimistic about America's future economic performance relative to world, and that to me is not optimism.

I also don't know if it is true. Don't know enought about what causes differences in economic growth in the first place, how easily wealth is transfered from wealthy countries to poorer ones (since Birth of Plenty it has very rarely occured outside of west), and to what extent poorer countries would adopt those policies that generate wealth creation. I guess we'll know soon though. What China has done since 1978 is historic but still not enough I would think to disprove those who say they are not destined to be become wealthy country or those who say developing countries face great difficulties in making transition to developed status. I don't know.

[crasher]

Question on this: why is it that people won't simply keep working longer and that in turn doesn't solve a lot of the problem. I say this partly because of possible policy changes in future, but also because of changes that will occur having nothing to do with policy. The nature of work has changed is changing, lifespan is changing, people are more vigorous for longer, and in general it is hard to conceive of economics adding up (for retirees or society) with an average retirement age of 62. I don't know what people currently estimate for future years, but I would set projection for average retirement age far higher than 62 for future.

I think policy should get rid of any biases that currently exist in favor of earlier retirement.

[Torie]

Folks will have to work longer. The pity is that a majority of folks don't really like their jobs. At least I think that is the case.

[Torie]

Ah yes the value premium free lunch. I think it is really true. Some say it is due to embedded risk of collapse in a severe economic downtown. I think that is nonsense. There simply is no empirical basis for that.

[Torie]

In this day and age, a civil and ordered and reasonably honest society causes economic growth.

[crasher]

Would you say China fits definition of a civil and ordered and reasonably honest society? What is weird, is on a per capita basis, there really hasn't been much covergence between WW 2 and now. Not as much as you would expect given what Siegel predicts for future.

[crasher]

Siegel says equity premium is historically 3 percent. What say you about what reason for equity premium is or what we would expect it to be in future?

[crasher]

btw - am reading this right now. article by Irving Kristol. Very good I think. I simply cannot give the supply siders too much gratitude. The Homestead movement of our time.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-1632106,00.html

[Torie]

The expected equity premia, equals the real economic growth rate minus maybe .5%, plus dividend return minus the the excess of the risk free T bill rate over inflation. These days one might want to use short term TIPS real rate (about .8%) instead of the excess of T bill rate over inflation. I don't know what that number comes out to, but it is lower than 3% pre tax. It might be around 2.5%. During the bubble, it was negative.