To: Merritt who wrote (68475 ) 10/1/1999 10:15:00 AM From: Henry Volquardsen Respond to of 132070
But in the 70's, gold's intrinsic value probably wasn't any greater at $800oz than it was at $150oz. What had changed was people's perception. agreed people's perception changed but they overreacted, which is fairly common. The intrinsic value of gold was probably down around 300-400 which is where it settled after the free market had several years to correct itself. The run up to $800 was an overreaction in much the same way as water travels much further after a dam breaks than it would have if the water had been flowing freely. After the flood you find what the natural level should be.The average J6P has probably never heard of Forex, and could probably care less about the natural corrections that occur in a free floating currency market - except for how he's affected by that "correction." When he sees the buying power of his paycheck dwindle, he knows something's wrong - and the built-in reaction is to get tangible assets, gold being the usual asset of choice. Free floating currencies have more impacts than on individual's actions. It is more important the impact it has on government action. I wouldn't disagree that people would have concerns about their paychecks if purchasing power were being eroded. But where are people getting this perception? There is no great inflation underway, the fear in much of the world is deflation. There is more concern about keeping paychecks. We are a long way from people having a perception that they have to put some money into gold.I've been wondering about this recent announcement by the EEC's CBers. Wondering if they were trying to strengthen people's perception about the strength of the euro, and to what purpose. It was probably done to strenghten the IMF, but... One of the really wicked pleasures I have in life is watching the Europeans tie themselves into knots try to figure out a currency policy that will let them have their cake and eat it. On a pure economic basis they want a weak Euro. Economic growth for the Euro core has been sluggish and they all suffer from very high unemployment. They need a weak currency to encourage exports to the US and give them a competitive advantage in other markets. The other side of the picture is emotion and ego. The French in particular have had their guts eaten out by the US success and would love a strong currency as a symbol of success over the 'Anglo-Saxon' model. They are fun to watch. In the end they need a stable to weak Euro. I believe the recent announcement was to prop up the IMF and emerging market gold producers.Last year I wrote a note to MB about how if I were a fundamentalist moslem who wished to strike a blow at "The Great Satan," I'd demand that my oil royalties be paid in a currency other than dollars. Variations of this have been around for decades. I remember back in the 70s about how the Saudis were going to demand a basket of other currecies. There have been other versions as well. My response? Let them, be my guest. They can't get out. If they started selling dollars they would destroy a significant portion of their own wealth before they sold a fraction. And more importantly where are they going to go to invest their wealth? Bankrupt Japanese and French banks? No currency offers the investment opportunities, liquidity, diversity or minimal restrictions that the US does. And more importantly which fundamentalist moslems are going to strike this blow against the US? Iran, Iraq or Libya? They don't hold much of their assets in dollars now. Saudi or the other Gulf States? Well who is going to send help the next time Saddam gets frisky? Very low propability scenario. Good Hollywood script but little else. They need us as much as we need them.<g>