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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (37269)	7/17/1999 2:48:00 PM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

< The primary weapon in this war is cheap gold loans to short sellers....> What is illegal about these loans? Again, Gold is a Currency. I can borrow Yen (if I so desire) at an even cheaper interest rate than Gold! The only reason people are borrowing Gold to begin with is that they can get a 2% interest rate instead of, say 7% from a bank. If gold rises more than 5%, then this differential makes gold less favorable to borrow than ordinary money. So, what's the beef against the gold loans? It is completely legal and represents one of its many transactions as Currency. This gold carry trade is not destined or rigged to always work out for the benefit of shortsellers. This gold carry trade can blow up right in the shortseller's face and he or she can lose a fortune. There are other market forces and economic factors which are making this trade successful. To blame the Gold Carry Trade for the low POG is not only to completely misunderstand the great inner nature of Gold as CURRENCY, but it gives a false impression that the Gold market is rigged when it is NOT! Given this view of Gold as being completely manipulated on behalf of short sellers, why should an uncommitted investor bother to take a long position in a Gold Mining Company? No doubt, the Shortsellers sure love GATA.

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (37269)	7/18/1999 7:54:00 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116764

<<As regards Yardeni, there is little doubt that Y2K, the decline in the price of computing power, and the explosive growth of the internet are indeed deflationary. >> For just a moment, perhaps we should look at this from another perspective. If the Federal Reserve is correct and our society has greatly gained productivity from these massive infusions of technology to reduce manpower required many repetitive and communication tasks when(if?) that technology Y2k fails would it not require more not less man- hours to accomplish the same level of output? If we are to believe the current employment numbers would this sudden increase in manhours required to accomplish the tasks and replace the broken technology not drive massive inflation(without the full benefit imported replacement parts as Y2k failures are expected to be far greater in other countries)?