Hello Hawk, you are wrong now, about nearly everything, as you were wrong before, about everything else Message 25160203 . That was the summary.
We will revisit above post in another 7 years, perhaps by then you will appreciate the beauty of truth from amongst the facts.
<<Your response in section "A" seems a bit cryptic and non-specific, so it's hard for me to directly respond>>
… I was not at all cryptic. The pie is shrinking, as in getting smaller, and the ones losing the most will be the ones with the most to lose – it is a simple mathematical concept.
<<But with regard to section "B", there's no doubt that China has been working desperately hard to upgrade the livelihood of their peasant class. And up to know, they were making great progress in financing it strictly via mercantilist policies. They're export driven economy, driven by deliberate strategies aimed at maintain a low exchange rate between their non-convertable currency and those of their customers (primarily the US) has funded most of their efforts>>
… that paragraph was so much rubbish from the beginning to its nonsensical end. You must have really worked at it.
It is interesting you on the one hand mention china's peasants desperately struggle for a livelihood, and on the other talk, elsewhere, about how china's exchange rate should be higher ... like, perhaps Zimbabwe's exchange rate should also be higher?
What is the correct exchange rate in any case? Do you know? I surely do not, cannot, but will mention that the exchange rate between RMB:USD could be 8.3 in a short while, and perhaps overshoot to 9, because the rate is the rate, there is no right rate.
It is interesting that you actually and wrongly believe China's economy is export driven. Precious. 1.3 billion people driven by export ... you can believe just about anything, can you not?
Did the US customers fund China’s effort? Willingly or by force? Do folks in America not need socks and bras? Or did Chinese fund the USA to make possible a boom life style? Do you know?
<<… they're getting ready for the inevitable protectionist policies of the incoming US administration and a decrease in their markets in America>>
Yes, I suppose Americans will need less socks and bras, and may eventually have to go without shoes altogether.
The incoming administration can do a lot of things, inevitable protectionist policies will not work as intended, because debtors cannot and must not try to call the tunes. Trade is one of the few monetary engines that can still work, now that Fannie and Freddie are history.
You still do not get it, do you? That you are done for, and in a process of inevitable and unstoppable collapse sequence, powered forward just and only by exponentially rising debt, and not much else. From when we first started posting each other November 22nd, 2000, when the S&P500 was at 1,347 and gold at 267/oz, we should have progressed in our understanding that I was right for all the right reasons, and you were wrong because you were wrong.
We are now at 919 for S&P500 and 737 for gold. Mathematically, S&P 500 collapsed 32% nominally, and 75% against gold. If a 75% loss is not regarded by you as collapse, do not fuss, another 50% should be on tap for this current iteration, in nominal terms, and additional 50% by gold benchmark, at the very least.
So, to recap, just as I thought, correctly, that the end of year 2000 was a decent time to get gold within grabbing distance.
I think now is as good as any time to get still more gold, as its value invariably increase against all else as dire times become more desperate, like during the days in the lead up to what eventually became known as the Peace of Carthage.
Reasons? Simple, that the wastrel nation in command of the global reserve currency is living beyond its means fighting meaningless wars and cannot discern truth from facts.
<<Also, there are already instances where Chinese managers are just burning their financial books and walking away from their companies and leaving their workers in the lurch with no payroll>>
... I call that free market justice, one side loses hard assets in the form of machinery, building, and whatever else, and the other side loses jobs. What do you call it? Communism?
What do you prefer the resolution to be? That the boss should apply to the Chinese Parliament, apply for political largess, seek dispensation, get bailed out, at the cost of the broader society? Like GM, AIG, Fannie, Freddie, and the other wastrel treasures of NYSE? You are a communist, and you do not even know it.
<<They just went through the highlight of their history, the olympics and within 5 months the dreams are being shattered. There will be a lot of questions being asked by the people as to where everything has gone wrong>>
… you are of course joking. The dream shattered?! The dream just got upped by 5x in tempo, as that is what will be spent on rural development as compared to the cities over the past quarter century. You are aware of the benefit of long term planning, no?
<<Well, for those holding the assets, or unable to produce and sell goods at the cost of manufacture, it doesn't make much difference. Consumers will not spend on anything but essentials until they are sure that what they buy won't depreciate. And that's the same for gold TJ. If you're facing a "cash crunch", you start selling any luxury items you have at hand. And gold is a luxury until inflationary pressures dictate that it's essential to preserving a storehouse of value>>
… You, Hawk, are misunderstanding gold. Gold had always been and will forever be liberated by the strong, cash high, debt free, from the weak, debt-ly sinned, and cash poor. This time is no different. Once so transferred, then come the good part … as in once the inflation trades have fully and overly discounted ‘deflation’ as spun by central bankers, politicians, financiers, and the media, then comes visible signs of … oops, mygolly … inflation.
<<Recall that the price of gold only recently soared as commodities soared. It was a play against the USD as oil prices soared (despite the fact that US demand for oil has leveled off over the past 3 years)>>
Given that I benefited from gold and commodities rise, and did not get substantively hurt by commodity deflation, perhaps I am better qualified to discern the golden truth from amongst the commodity facts, and if you stipulate so, then I comment, “you are wrong”, and leave it at that for the moment.
<<… see when it's the right time, if at all, to buy gold. Inflation indexed bonds might prove to be more of an indication>>
… you are kidding me, of course.
Cheers, TJ |
