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: goldworldnet who wrote (73457)	7/14/2001 7:54:28 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116816

<<money could become ONLY a stream of electrons in a hundred years. Some people might not like this.>> Not really sure it wouldn't be better than a stream of credit. At least then the rules would be controlled by something that resembles the laws of nature & or physics and the stream would be bent & accelerated/ decelerated by technical types rather than bankers. Forget that tripe, I well remember, in absolute terror, inventories taken by engineers, maybe monetary rule by accountants would be best.

To: goldworldnet who wrote (73457)	7/14/2001 9:47:15 PM
From: marek_wojna	Respond to of 116816

<<What concerns me is that money could become ONLY a stream of electrons in a hundred years.> Josh, For me no matter, we already halfway there. Economists like in the past and present will make bad predictions about humans greed and need. Bad cycles will repeat again, search for best protection box of electrons will never die.

To: goldworldnet who wrote (73457)	7/15/2001 1:28:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116816

What concerns me is that money could become ONLY a stream of electrons in a hundred years Given that there is only maybe $500 Billion in hard US currency floating around the world, compared to our $10 Trillion econonomy, it would seem that 95% of our currency ALREADY CONSISTS OF ELECTRONS and electronic records in our bank accounts. When this changes and the financial system falls apart, THEN there will be an argument for gold.... ....and for barter items like bullets, food, fuel, and clothing. Hawk

To: goldworldnet who wrote (73457)	7/15/2001 2:00:06 AM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116816

Unfortunately this item needs a "Chatter's" to help wayward posters. Sorry Richard [of Mazz], but the folly presented by posters not taking the time and care to be specific with their thoughts has presented not only a false impression of electron streams, but has created a dummy view of an issue thats will lead readers of them there posts to get the impression that streams of electrons have an inherent attribute "coded" into them to trash the money supply. Not so, just as guns don't kill people, people do, these minding their own business streams of electrons do not care if they light a lightbulb, snuff out the life of a dead man walking, or create a situation where a flip-flop, as in binary, situation can be detected. Again ron-ron has "mooned" himself displaying his $h!t4brains, but that is a non-event here, and as ron-ron says "gold is not money", i can say that a "stream of electrons" also is not money in the same exact sense that ink patterns of numbers on us bills are not money but represent as Ayn Rand has written, a promise of value that can be exchanged for them ink+paper or streams of electrons. This "promise", or bottom line or at the end of the day or whatever time you choose to transfer it to another for their goods and services has to have a Rarebird type existance attached to it that it is a value in truth and not a false existance. It has to be able to stand by itself, alone without any support and have worth, just as a Rarebird has worth in that he can supply or educate or create "as" a value (standalone.) Physical gold can do it because of it rarity and finite supply. A person like Rarebird can do it, be a pointer to something that is recognized as having "itself" worth based on what it can create, goods and services needed and wanted. [Note: these just written words are mumbo jumbo and most likely are not worth understanding the thoughts of mine since it is very difficult to put into words what many past persons have spent a lifetime using a zillion words to explain.] All i am trying to say, if the ink + paper or characters and symbols on a computer screen or print out say that it represents money, then only when it points to a real value that depends not on another value to transfer it's value back like a daisy chain, then only then is it real money. example - gold standard guns do not kill people a.k.a. the gun itself "decided" to kill a person guns have no existance as life cannot think and decide they are created out of steel and lead and gun powder each component non living non thinking how these components are combined requires man at that point man determins how the gun will be used same with paper or any other form of "bookkeeping" to serve as money man determines the how it is done man as governments decide how money is implemented correct or not good or bad and then the usage is regulated just like a gun enforce laws already on the books not to, then any other route has as goal a total ban then only allowed will be police, military, government agents and not allowed and armed will be criminals and non criminal folks with a desire for self protection. Those e gold money places seem to have a one to one in that your money is the value of the physical gold that you deposited or purchased directly into your account. Your stream of electrons display your status and account for any withdrawals or deposites. money is a promise this promise is an agreement between people once you can not know the other person's truthfullness then you are a fool to not know why the promise points to "... money could become ONLY a stream of electrons in a hundred years. Some people might not like this." Thats like someone saying long ago when only gold coins and silver coins and tobacco leafs and a farmers promise of his next harvest[hedged for speculation ok] the following. "... money could become ONLY a piece of paper with ink in a hundred years. Some people might not like this." its the promise, what it points to, either nothing but a politican's elect-me speech, or physical gold ok, Now we is all ready for Chatters to really explain this or Stone of Gray's ak