Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 13:43
trotsky (Egoli@Bushonian Potemkin villages tour) ID#248269:
Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved
first of all, this is normal and to be expected. to have the emperor seemingly have help magically appear in his wake for the benefit of the TV cameras is 100% compatible with the m.o. of modern day politicians. one shouldn't necessarily single out Shrubbery for that, because the handlers of a different president would have organized a similar circus.
i can confirm that European coverage of the disaster was extremely critical of the official response...a tone of stunned disbelief permeated it, and apparently for good reason.
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 13:22
trotsky (Yorkie, Mooney, etc...) ID#248269:
Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved
first of all, determining whether gold's purchasing power in general has held up well by picking out a few specific items ( without even documenting how those items have changed in fiat money price over the time frame observed to boot ) isn't a good way of proving the case that's been made. admittedly it's not easy, and i don't know what methodology was used in the purchasing power chart that was posted at resourceinvestor some time ago ( the one that shows gold's purchasing power has actually increased by about 80% since 1780 ) . instead of wasting time arguing, i'm going to find out and report back on the topic.
however, this here:
"In the 1880's gold was widely used as a store of value. Indeed it was used in coinage. Now-a-days bank accounts are more generally used ( except for a rather strange minority group of people .. grin ) . In other words, it is used relatively less and it's value may reflect that."
is simply wrong. just because bad money has driven out good money in daily use, doesn't mean that the good money has lost its moneyness. it has merely been withdrawn from circulation - if the state forces a fiat currency on everyone, you'd be a fool to pay for anything in gold. the proof is in the pudding - if the market didn't think gold was more than just an industrial material used in the creation of ornaments, it wouldn't trade where it trades. as everybody knows, the indestructible stock of gold already in existence dwarfs the annual industrial use of gold by a factor of almost 50. no pure industrial commodity has a comparable inventories-to-flows ratio. that doesn't leave too many options when one tries to explain how it comes that it trades at $440 for a measly ounce. seems simple enough to me.
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 12:42
trotsky (doran) ID#248269:
Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved
"The drivers are asking others to sign a petition calling for government intervention in the rising cost of fuel."
this neatly encapsulates what's wrong with the world...everybody's crying for government intervention. of course the government just loves to hear it - justification for its existence reaffirmed. hand us the barf bag.
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 12:35
trotsky (James@broken windows) ID#248269:
Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved
in fact, it is to be expected that the gubmint's economic statistics will record an increase in economic activity on account of reconstruction. but that only proves beyong a shadow of doubt that those statistcs aren't worth sh*t, to put it bluntly.
it is a case of the seen versus the unseen - the resources that have to be diverted into rebuilding can now not be used anymore for other things. if the government concludes that this is a net gain somehow, then all we learn is that its statistics tell us nothing whatsoever about wealth gained or lost. they're worse than useless, they're misleading. real resources remain scarce, no matter how much funny 'money' the Fed futilely prints when disaster strikes, or how diligently the state's statistics minions mangle the resulting activity.
|
