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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: yard_man who wrote (75686)	3/5/2001 2:56:34 PM
From: Mark Adams	Respond to of 436258

I understand the reasoning, though I disagree. I will post later on it ... Disagreement is good. I see another perspective as a result of trying to clarify the position. This is the same thing oyu posted before and again -- you have no sense of measure to apply -- Even if gold could be mined at twice the current rate -- it would comprise very little of the overall economic activity. Until it does become significant the point is moot. Well, your right about this. I don't have the faintest idea how much capital is spent to develop and produce gold today. I remember a great post about how much economic activity is directed towards the pursuit of physical intimacy, and I'm sure this would swamp mining investment. <g> I do expect that $1000/oz for gold would triple or more the amount of investment into development and production, and suspect that even a billion dollars of shifted investment could be better applied improving our US energy transmission efficiency.