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: Zardoz who wrote (50230)	3/9/2000 8:45:00 PM
From: d:oug	Respond to of 116752

Hutch, you continuously do not get it. Eventhought your explaination is the same one used for over a thousand years, it has been showned to be invalid. So why is it still received as correct ? Simply because most all of those who do study history do not understand it, as this leads to that saying "Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past will duplicate those mistakes." So Hutch, when you say it is futile to fight against certain elements of society, that one will not win no matter the effort, that one is better off accepting that evil has a permanent and forever strong hold to determine certain outcomes, that everyone should accept this and move with the flow to position themselves so that their lost will be lessen thru an acceptance and ok'ness as normal certain evil existence we all know of but do not understand how to erase using good. ok Hutch, you have the right of your thoughts here, no problem, but if I am correct and you are not, then there will be a day that will judge the actions of people as legit or criminal or naive. An extreme example to highlight this is the acceptance that wars and poverty and starvation and extreme sickness from diseases for masses of people like those in the very poor nations with only the top .001% of the governemnt and connected folks living the high life while the masses live in misery, yes people can say that this is the way it has been, is being, and will forever be, because that the way it is, and I will accept rather than question and understand the why behind history lessens after the facts of the history lessons concludes the highschool class. ok Hutch, sure I may be wrong in my interpertation of life as I know it, and your view thru you understanding, and then translated into your actions to interact with it for your well being and all attached to what you hold as value, so that the best as possible is obtained, yes I may be wrong and you right. Just my differing of opinion to your view of gold not including the timeless battle between good and evil, with gold as a means by each side to be used to combat the other. You say gold cannot become a success because only paper money has the ability to be created and moved and changed to suit the needs and wishes of those who decide for us. doug

To: Zardoz who wrote (50230)	3/9/2000 9:35:00 PM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116752

<<This high growth is ultimately bad for GOLD. >> You might just be wrong, IF(& I'll grant this is a mighty big "if") there is simply a great enough demand to outstrip supply. It should be remembered, women in the developed world often increase jewelry purchases toward & through the end of an economic cycle, while people in the third world want gold & a currency other than their own - when the economy allows. Perhaps we would be well informed to also consider the understood worth of gold in much of petroleum producing world. At times custom & religion may dictate the relative worth of a commodity more than man's laws or markets.

To: Zardoz who wrote (50230)	3/9/2000 10:05:00 PM
From: Archie Meeties	Respond to of 116752

Hutch, I have not read a more succinct explanation of the differences between the new and old economies. But although they appear dichotomous, they can not be unrelated for any length of time. The robustness of the old economy provided both the capital and the demand to energize the new economy. As you noted, this was possible as long as demand outpaced margins. If the old economy stumbles (PG), and demand withers, expectations of future revenue will be revised downward. Such a shift should occur in individual companies first, but at some point, such a shift will dominate market mentality, and initiate a fundamental shift in investment strategy. It is no mystery that the weakness of the DOW has caused investors to rotate from the old economy into the new, but what what is unrecognized is their interdependence.

To: Zardoz who wrote (50230)	3/10/2000 4:05:00 AM
From: PaulM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116752

Hello Hutch. We disagree. 1. The Nasdaq is mostly massively captilized junk (i.e., businesses with zero barriers to competition, no profits, no credible business model etc.) That about sums up all but a handful NAS companies, which people seem to think we can build an economy around. 2. The reason the NASDAQ companies have "grown" is that they have the luxury of selling stock, rather than goods and services, to the public. What's more while the NASDAQ grew 80% last year, the US economy grew by only 5%. So what the NASDAQ is showing me is an excess of liquidity coupled with moral hazard induced capital flows into the riskiest assets with the highest potential return (no matter how unlikely that return). 3. The Central banks (Greenspan etc.) buy bonds, with money that is created by the Central banks. It's called an "Open Market Operation," or "Coupon Pass" or "Repurchase Agreement" (in that case, a loan). They add reserves to the banking system and maintain bank loan rates at the fed target rate. 4. I am not a techician. The point of the charts was that, contrary to what AG has been saying, inflation is not at all hard find. I think he no longer has the luxury of noticing inflation because an overly agressive tightening might prick the bubble. Not that I'm complaining. The current environment is easy to peg. 5. Gold will have its day. I don't know when. To know that I'd have to know how much CB gold is on loan, who the CB's are that lent and bunch of other facts I don't know about this murky market. Paul

To: Zardoz who wrote (50230)	3/11/2000 12:54:00 AM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116752

<We are clearly in a bull market.> You can't be serious. You call 40 to 50 red hot stocks a bull market while investors and traders have ignored most of the rest. This is not the first time in history that such a phenomenon has occurred, but this is what a traditional bear market looks like. Most stocks get pummeled while a handful of stars shine, often while hardly anyone talks about what the internal market has been doing. That is typical: Just talk about the winners and how everything is beautiful while in point of fact the vast majority of stocks have been in a Bear Market for the last 23 months. We are in a Bear Market here in the States. The typical Bear market runs 6-18 months; this one is almost 23 months old for the internal market condition, such as the Advance/Decline Line reflects. This is incredible in that the NDX is at new highs while the DJIA is bordering on a post-meltdown crash. Even in 1929 breadth was better at the top. These Rate increases by Sheriff Greenspan are keeping the Dollar Strong and Killing the XAU. High Oil and a Weak Dollar can create Stagflation, the best friend of Gold. Oil is still high. Traditionally, the Fed Chairman will refrain from raising rates leading up to the Presidential Election. If the Dollar begins to weaken over the summer( or late spring) when Greenspan stops tightening and Oil does not moderate, watch out: Gold will rally very strongly. PS Another 700-1000 point decline on the Dow and Greenspan will stop tightening. What he really wants is for the NDX to correct.