Following on "061. There really is a mystery" Ed Weick writes:

<<<<

Keith, I don't doubt that both Iraq civic and Iraq aggressive are driving some, perhaps much, of the anemic growth that the US economy is experiencing. However, when it comes to consumers, I don't think they are looking for the next delightful gadget as much as simply hanging on to the money they have, if they have any. They're scared. They may already be laid off or facing the prospect of layoff. As well, since 9/11, compounded by Iraq and the Bush administration's feeding of the prospect of further

terror, a huge curtain of uncertainty has descended on American society. And one might add that with the enormous corporate scandals, America is no longer bright, shining and holy. What's there to believe in? Don't spend your money. Keep it, you may need it.

>>>>

As I'm replying to this, there's a radio programme on talking about the avalanche of complaints that's still pouring down onto the Financial Services Authority (the principal financial regulator in England). Millions of people in this country have lost anything between 25% of their pensions (if they're lucky) and 100% because of the irresponsible share-churning by almost all our household-name insurance companies and pensions funds.

So yes, I agree with Ed completely. There's been a breakdown in consumer confidence in America and other advanced countries which is going to take a long time to heal. But I just want to nitpick the term 'delightful gadget' because what I'm suggesting is not the just a refusal to buy gadgets but, probably, the sheer lack of status goods that would have the same sort of stimulative effect that cars and TV had in the last half-century. After all, even in a recession, many gadgets are produced -- and bought. For example during the Great Depression there was prolific production of consumer goods -- mainly light electrical goods for the house (radios, toasters, fridges, etc). (The game of Monopoly was also invented then. Although it wiled away the hours of many unemployed people and their families, and its profit margin made a personal fortune for its inventor, the game itself hardly brought about the real-life parallels of the houses and hotels that were moved around so readily on the board!) None of these gadgets had the "oomph" which stimulated demand sufficiently to get the economic machine going again.