Hello CB,
<<As politicians go, I still prefer Bush et al to Gore et al. Wouldn't mind having better choices.>>
... Yes on both, no arguments.
<<But as for gold as money, that's not going to happen, unless the US is reduced to grubbing in the rubble>>
... no arguments here either.
<<In which case, gold won't do you any good because, unless you are very well armed, someone is going to hit you over the head and take it away from you>>
... yeup, between hiding the goodies and hiring a private army so as to accumulate more gold, something can be worked out to the benefit of a few :0)
<<We saw a mini-version of your predicted TEOTWAWKI in the New Orleans Superdome after Katrina ...>>
... no question, having moolah of any sort in the superdome was a bad bad idea.
<<The nice thing about paper is that it's inherently worthless -- just acts as a place marker>>
... it is what I am told by my intuition, and so no arguments here.
<<Attacking human beings is inherently risky, so it's typically a desperation move>>
... that is precisely the concern.
Very civilized exchange.
All that we have agreed on is precisely why we must spend while we can, at least a little, without digging into the seed storage, and buy some gold, to guard against the central bankers, and that would be all central bankers.
Gold saved enough families during many recent crisis to matter, and I vividly remember the Koreans selling their gold to the officialdom to save the country from debt implosion, while the Thais were disgorging gold to save their businesses from credit crunch. Then there were the Argentines, ATM-blocked, whereas a gold coin or two would come in quite handy, all things equal.
Let us simply conclude that during a financial reset, it is better to have gold than not, dangerous or not.
Chugs, J |
