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 (57243)	8/13/2000 6:37:20 AM
From: d:oug	Respond to of 116915

double good news - my reply to Ron Reece + Hutch in 1 very short post Introduction (Its longer than my actual reply to their posts.) No, i am not sick or pressed for time, its just that they have both supplied in a single sentence those very key thoughts that hold a position deep down at the lowest foundations of how they each view most other matters that pertain to the gold market, money and economic structures and control of such. Not so much a revelation here, there was nothing new disclosed nor any re-wording, but just an identification of a point that one can now get a better handle on most all other views they hold. [End of Intro.] [Start of the Ron and Hutch posts] To: ikegodsey From: Ron Reece Sunday, August 13, 2000 [question to Ron] ...how is gold made artificially scarce Ron? [answer from Ron] ... gold supply is held in the vaults of Central Banks and not available in the physical market... Regards Ron To: Ron Reece From: Hutch Sunday, August 13, 2000 ... a fiscally sound country doesn't need gold to back its currency. Hutch [End of the Ron and Hutch posts] [Finally, my very short reply] (1) Ron Reece does not view gold as a Store of Value, but as a poor investment to hold it as physical. An article at the Le Metropole Cafe very correctly in my opinion identified in detail how history has always viewed holding physical gold as a correct way to guarantee one will not be at the mercy of corrupt or misguided government leaders that can destroy the value of the paper funny money one holds. Once I thought Ron was a double agent working for GATA and his objective was to stir up folks and get them mad when gold was bashed and belittled. I was wrong. Sad. (2) Whereas Ron is a weak cold cup a coffee, Hutch is a steaming hot strong Espresso and one needs to acknowledge respect, as I now do by saying that Hutch's statement of "... a fiscally sound country doesn't need gold to back its currency." I totally agree with, but at present the commentaries at the Le Metropole Cafe of many highly regarded authors tells of a situation in the world's economies that all is not well to the point of being very sick. Yet as we all know the message from the mainstream medias like CNBC is that all is between good and great, and will stay that way. Doug

To: Zardoz who wrote (57243)	8/13/2000 8:10:40 AM
From: re3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116915

Hutch/Ron : you talk about a fiscally sound country. i find that very puzzling. i don't know if there are any. and even if you can name one or a hundred that meet YOUR criteria of being fiscally sound, i have a two word reply to that : Things change Any country you name can subsequently deficit spend themselves into trouble. I know it was last century but didn't Mexico have a currency crisis a few years ago. Perhaps their currency should have been gold backed. Then you simply can't spend what you don't got.

To: Zardoz who wrote (57243)	8/13/2000 9:19:18 AM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116915

<<In fact a fiscally sound country doesn't need gold to back its currency.>> But should it be playing the short side?

To: Zardoz who wrote (57243)	8/13/2000 9:32:13 AM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116915

Nobody says that gold backs currencies any more. Any more than marks, pounds, dollars, yen 'back' a particular currency. Except that gold is a bigger component in nearly all cases. This straw man is trotted out time and time again by the anti- gold camp - but it doesn't fly.

To: Zardoz who wrote (57243)	8/13/2000 12:24:51 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116915

In fact a fiscally sound country doesn't need gold to back its currency. And to go a bit farther, the manner in which gold is currently being handled reminds me of many of these internet stocks that went IPO last year. They'd have 100-200 million shares outstanding but when they would only sell 10% of that amount to the public (UPS is a good example of this too). So by keeping supply deliberating scarce, and fluctuation in demand has distorted impacts on the overall price, both upward and downward. In effect, what that does is give the majority stake holders an inflated price at which to distribute their holding back into the markets. That's called distribution in my play book. Pump it up, prop it up, and dump it to those who don't know any better. Regards, Ron