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: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55991)	7/10/2000 9:45:53 AM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116814

Washington Agreement (con't). In the past there were years in which the CBs were net buyers of gold. The Washington Agreement ensures that for the next 5 years the 15 banks will be net sellers - so in effect, deficits have been institutionalised. That is why the Agreement is negative for gold. I don't buy the argument that the market likes certainty - now we have certainty without hope.

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55991)	7/10/2000 8:37:24 PM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116814

hb, Is Jim Grant a forest type and this thread the trees type, or is it the other way? Add all those saying of "...can not see..." to the 2 combinations of the above where this thread and Grant alternate places, and you might even add the other possibilities possible, but then you need a 3 dimensional TruTh Table to obtain results like (a) both this thread and Grant at the same time are both forest, and (b) at same time both are not forest while at same time both not trees. Now as Ron would reply with another of his non reply posts, the most accurate reply would be "Why the heck do you post gibberish?". As in "for sure" thats what it is when posted on a forum like this, where elsewhere it might be for study or for obtaining a direction towards places one wants to leave, or avoid. The last sentence from the Jim Grant url stuff might be a better method than the forest and trees. "As on a bridge, so in the markets." The trees and forest are like those technical tools used lots on the Dutch thread, like elliot waves and other witchcraft like stuff, but Rarebird knows that each in itself has links, both forward and into the past, with black holes and worm holes, so that each by itself is just a piece of a space and time zigsaw puzzel of constanting adjusting it's picture. Jim Grant - on gold and money: ...money becomes a confidence trick ...flipside of...lack of interest...is unquestioning faith ...birth of Britney Spears [ who is this? doug ] ...A perceived sure thing is always potentially explosive. ...gold bear market...crystallisation of complacency toward money. ...gold price is...reciprocal of confidence in money, which governments print, and confidence in credit, which is the promise to pay money. ...Unqualified belief is unwarranted, however, and is likely to prove unprofitable. ...What is the Fed's mission? The better question is: what is not the Fed's mission? democratic process." ...We cannot know and neither can the well-meaning but fallible public servants - until it is too late. ...So, there is no certainty, neither about money nor about credit. ...If the stock market is the economy, and the economy is the stock market, then the US dollar exchange rate is a kind of derivative of the stock market. ...The structure of speculative forces calls to mind the new Millennium Bridge over the Thames in the centre of London, which was closed three days after it opened because of an unexpected wobble. When the bridge started to sway, pedestrians fell into step with the swing, as one report put it, "exacerbating the lateral movement". As on a bridge, so in the markets. James Grant is the editor of Grant's Interest Rate Observer.