Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorne who wrote (6395)	6/15/1999 11:18:00 AM
From: Ahda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81972

Lorne I think it is important there is balance you can't have balance unless you have to sides to weight with. It stops extremes.

To: lorne who wrote (6395)	6/15/1999 9:17:00 PM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81972

lorne, this is a reply to your post of 9am today, its now 8pm and I have read all remaining posts on this thread. I think we all might agree that when one wishes to learn about a topic, that sources must exist that gives a viewpoint. We expect to find more than one source, and hopefully more than one viewpoint if the topic touches on an area that does not have strick laws that must be obeyed, for example a text on highschool math algebra so that we can manage spending money at a store to buy stuff verses an economic text on how a group of people goes from a barter system to paper money so that one may exchange one's own work with another when neither wants the others product produced. For this example of creating paper money, lets use SI threads to represent text books. And as you posted to questions about your original post you agree that, for example paper money via a gold standard, should have three threads, one in support, one saying its incorrect, and a third like this thread where supporters of the other two can debate their position with ones taking the other side. There will be those that only listen and not engage in the flow of posts, to either pick up more information to fine tune their position, or those needing more information before a decision on which side to accept as correct. Personal attacks between two threaders may not "kill" a thread as I posted, but they can, and have on occasion, seriously disrupted a thread causing some that read only to not read, and others that post to stop or limit their posts. To me Ron is very close to doing this, but then I remind myself that before Ron starting to bite back each bite given to him, that this thread took on a mild and not too interesting or depth of thoughts character, to me. Maybe at this time when the economic landscape could experience some cracks or earth type quakes or storms based on ones belief in GATA to predict as such, that soon hard facts from new and changing events will deliver to this thread stuff to analyse so that past comments can be given some kind of litmus test. To me Ron is here because he believes in his understanding and as first to do is give himself an opportunity to express it for self realization. To me Ron is not here to destroy or try to prevent those that like a gold standard from hurting himself, he is just exercising his opinion. Not to say he does not want to help us misguided folks, but his reason here is to follow thru on what he believes to be true, same as the rest of us. To put forth a belief with the understanding that this will be best for all to live under. In my opinion, to my understanding, Ron does not understand that he is in error, and to explain this I say that Ron has examined the past history of facts as he has stated, and has arrived at a wrong conclusion because he made a mistake in the step that one takes prior to the collection of data needed to make a conclusion or understanding of the topic. philosophy - what is information (for example: using logic to decide) psychology - after the above, how does one use this information Ron's logic can be described as coming from a smart person, but its flawed. Ron is much more dangerous than a bad person wanting to destroy and hurt others, as Ron believes he is correct and good will happen only under his views being inacted as rules or the law of the land. In the struggle between good and bad it is possible that the bad may gain control and keep it "forever", but if so the quality of life will deteriorate until those in control will have layed waste to civilization and resulting in a land of no law and order but only a rule of force, whoever has the biggest gun or strongest muscle or best at con'ing others to do their bidding. This is why Hutch stays mostly technical in his posts, as he believes what he says is correct, but he knows deep down that if all he understands as being the way things are done, then the human race is done for. So Hutch will post that which "gets the job done" for survival of himself and close ones, but he knows that others with a better grasp of what he knows would destroy him as the strong destroys the weak when force is used over thinking. Maby Bill Murphy could post this on the Cafe under anonymous guest speaker who says that unless the gold standard side wins that darkness will replace that which the people of the world will live under, darkness felt as a threat that bad has won over good. Just in time for the millennium 2000 to arrive, gold standard or not, which will it be, light or darkness to arrive. Doug