"rst0wxyz" <rst0wxyz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:45e31951-ce82-4425-9d44-0f6fab12c6b1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
May 20, 7:33 am, "Ed" <fri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Jim Walsh" <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > China has been a recognizable civilization for about 5,000 years. For
> > much
> > of
> > that time it was equal to or advanced relative to the other
> > civilizations
> > on
> > the Earth. In that context, the 4 or 500 years since 1500 are only 10%
> > of
> > the
> > story.
>
> The most im****tant 10%. Now is always more im****tant than then even if
> things that happened then affect the now.
> Whether or not they were equal to or more advanced than others 500 or
> 1,000
> or more years ago they were still not very well off. I'm guessing that
> you're posting from one of the two cultural groups these messages have
> been
> going out to. Here, at mimf, the past is of little or no im****tance.
Of course, the past is im****tant. The past tells us where we have
been, how we progress to today's society. We spend a lot of money to
learn the past. The museums spent a lot of money to dig and learn
more of the past. Our universities have huge history departments with
big staffs. We spent a lot of time learning of the past.
------------------------
As an investor, it's not im****tant to me. I agree, I think way too much
money is wasted on the past.
Someone was ignorant enough to include misc.invest.mutual-funds in their
choice of newsgroups. I have no interest in what some Chinese farmer was
doing 700 years ago. Yawn.
|
