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: Zeev Hed who wrote (70697)	5/30/2001 2:05:48 AM
From: Gord Bolton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116753

Some days these arguments remind me of the hunter and the squirrel. The hunter approaches a tree from the south and spots a squirrel on the south side of the tree. The squirrel also spots the hunter and as the hunter approaches the squirrel moves to the north side of the tree. The hunter moves to the west side of the tree and the squirrel moves to the east and so on until the hunter is back on the south and the squirrel back on the north side of the tree. Now most would immediately agree that the hunter has certainly gone around the tree but many will disagree on whether the hunter has gone around the squirrel. It all depends on what you mean by going around. A gold standard would imply that a unit of paper currency would be fixed to a certain amount of gold. That does not mean that a country could only print currency in direct correspondance to the amount of gold that it held in the central bank unless of course the country had absolutely nothing else of any value. Real estate, resources, labour and technology would still be valuable and creditworthy. The holder of the note, however, would be assured that it could on any day be redeemed for a specific amount of gold. I do not follow the arguement that this would limit the development of economic prospects, resources, or the expansion of an economy would be limited by the exact amount of physical gold in the central bank or in existence for that matter. The development of a new oil field, technology or a bumper crop would add more value to the economy even if it did not add more gold. The resulting prosperity would not be limited because their was no increase in the amount of gold. A gold standard can be used without worshipping gold or creating everincreasing piles of it in a vault. It is simply a discipline imposed by the population on the printers of currency. This is in no way a novel or unique concept. It is really no different from objecting to the neighbour who simply creates currency with his photocopier while I and presumably you have to work for it or trade something of value for it.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (70697)	5/30/2001 9:49:01 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116753

< DAK, I thought that "or doom the world to sub par economic growth," is equivalent to: "current economic thought is the opposite, that tying to gold would be too restrictive monetarily.", why would you term it "the opposite"? > I didn't... that was refering to your previous assertion that it [tying to gold] would cause inflation. DAK

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (70697)	5/30/2001 10:07:43 AM
From: Ahda	Respond to of 116753

Zeev you speak in terms of restrictive yet one should think in terms of moderation. Here where i live one would have to have blinders on to not see inflation and not question the long range impact of it. At this particular time we due to currency are able to invest elsewhere which we should do but the problem is the return on the investment. Due to currency difference the profit line can change from a plus to a minus. Eventually i feel many companies will spin off their divisions elsewhere to be profitable. Presently we rely on sales in the USA and savings due to the partial production of the product parts else where. It is only recently that China is attempting to modify her system reduce restriction invite investment and use what we have proven works. I don't feel restrictive is the proper word as you invest your time into what you feel is lucrative for you. This is restricting yourself making a decision on a constant base of is it worth it or not. The difference here in our Nation is it is almost impossible with non restrictive money base combined with a high debt philosophy to control inflation. We have had many periods of excess demand that have ended in contraction that created a balance. Now we are trying to avoid contraction in doing so we might end up with inflation that is totally out of our control.