After the New Economy

Sorry it's late i didn't have computer access last night, my Gram is a little behind the times. And if it makes a difference, I as a college student got up at 7:00am to write this, since we are two hours behind you :) phew!

This article was fairly hard for me to read. Therefore I am gonna focus on the part that interested me the most, but also confused the heck of out me! On page 10 Doug Henwood displays what to me, appears to be the mad scientist views of Gilder. Gilder was expressing his frustrations about who actually is at the root of the "microcosm" stating it wasn't the work of ivy league men with tons of money and women they married straight off the show "Desperate Housewives."
Gilder begins a list of all the common people of the world, in which he lost me half way at the "Adam's apple bobbing". I had to read over this passage again because I wasn't sure what his true meaning of this passage was. Was he telling us the root of technology doesn't come from people like Bill Gates? Is it supposed to come from everyday Joe's? I could understand the making process could yes, be hands-on labor, however now days, everything is done by machines. Although I'm pretty sure it was another one like Bill Gates inventing the machines.
In the beginning I also got confused as to what exactly Henwood was trying to prove. He insults Gilder's first list saying he left out the cruel treatment of women making these parts of computers and other technologies, and then re-iterates that we shouldn't forget Gilder's amazing list making skills. Henwood then displays another list of Gilder's he wrote in reference to how a "capitalist society is always saved by the last among it's citizens perpetually becoming first." (Pg. 11) This part reminded me of our theme throughout our first year NCC showing us a group could only be as good as it's weakest member.
Was Henwood trying to prove Gilder wrong by saying that Bill Gates is a great asset to our society, but if the weakest ones in the society can't use a computer, we don't prosper as a group? Or was he simply mocking Gilder all together, completely off track from his other ideas, of the stock market and his research of how many times the word "New Economy" was used in articles between 1980 and 2003. Further down page 11 he insults Gilder's home life saying his style is deeply "austere" (severe in appearance or manner; uncompromising) and that his couch was so shabby that good will wouldn't take it as a donation.
He then goes on to talk of Gilder's views on masculinity, femininity, racism and the wealth of workers. (Page 12/13) For this, I wish I were in class to discuss. Is Henwood just throwing out more examples to prove Gilder's instability in the social world or was there a point to these readings in terms of where he started with the new economy? He tried to tie this back into economics by focusing on the "Stats he [Gilder] must have gotten from The Bell Curve." Gilder goes on to state that black women earn 106 percent of wages of white women. Again is he mocking Gilder or using his work as an easy means of dispute?