X-Message-Number: 12694 From: "John de Rivaz" <> Subject: Could technology growth continue at the same or higher rates without involving the stock market Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 10:34:56 -0000 Cryonet readers who have not put my name in their kill files will know that I think that investing in technology is right for cryonics purposes because without the technology growth there will be no revivals, hence disappointed investors will never know their investments have failed. However there is a relevant question that needs to be asked, and this is: Could technology growth continue at the same or higher rates without involving the stock market? Two possible scenarios suggest it may, but it doesn't at the moment seem that likely. 1. That the method proposed by Paul Wakfer and Saul Kent of funding research by gifts becomes the norm. Zyvex, the nano company, seeks donations rather than investments from small investors. (It does seek investments from major investors. http://www.zyvex.com/CorpInfo/Investing.htm for a detailed look at their proposals) Gates, Groves and people like that certainly have enough money to give it away to people willing to research subjects that interest them. The recipients of such gifts will not seek to raise money on the stock markets, and will themselves grow rich if the fruits of their labour are successful. If they get as rich as Gates and co, (and many certainly will) then the process could repeat. The stock market will then be denuded of future Intels and Microsofts, or at least they will enter the market when mature. The huge gains people made riding on the coat-tails of Gates and co from the early days via the public stock markets will no longer be available. 2. The stock market is humanity's best "computer" to distribute funds for any form of entrepreneur, whether research based company or just a new way of doing business. The running costs are the nett profits made by the investing public as a whole. Artificial intelligence or simply just bigger digital computers could one day compete with it to distribute funds more efficiently. If that happens, their owners, not the general investing public, will get paid for the job. I hope I am wrong, but the stock markets may not be with us for ever, even in Tech heaven! Comments invited. -- Sincerely, John de Rivaz my homepage links to Longevity Report, Fractal Report, my singles club for people in Cornwall, music, Inventors' report, an autobio and various other projects: http://geocities.yahoo.com/longevityrpt Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12694