On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 12:41:26 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
Without capital growth there isn't enough reason to assume risk, George. The
thought on this is that the system runs down like an unwound watch when the
only return on capital is dividends.
snip
------------------
Don't confuse capital growth with "growth," don't confuse raw
capital growth with inflation adjusted/tax effect growth, and
above all don't confuse an increase in "spondulicks" with an
increase in capital. {see my earlier post on this}

Even in a relatively static economy [from a population and
standard of living/conspicious consumption standpoint] there
should still be plenty of opportunity for profitable investment,
for example upgrading/replacement of existing plants/equipment,
production of consumables such as food and clothing, and
[legitimate] replacement products.

What would be missing is the "leverage" [steroids/meth] and
outsized returns, which never seems to "trickle down" to the
savers that provided the capital in the first place.

For the "investors" :-( that are looking for "action" there are
plenty of casinos, both in the US and abroad, that are more than
willing to accommodate them. This also has the benefit that "the
players" are further removed from the real economy, and less
likely to cause damage.