To: Square_Dealings who wrote (73898 ) 7/24/2001 9:17:09 PM From: IngotWeTrust Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116753 Michael, your derision is not becoming: Bob is doing several things in his posts: one is he's posting the increases in production which perma-goldbulls are not likely to "voluntarily post." Secondly, he's posting cost reductions achieved by the increase in production spread over more ounces. Thirdly, he's being a gentleman and not sticking his tongue out and saying "I told you so."... Bob is fostering discussion by posting facts...good facts, "not so hot facts" facts from reliable sources, observations from his vantage point of an incredible database at goldsheetlinks.com and the time he takes--WITHOUT PAY-- to update as fast as he can type every QUARTER. The point is this: The increase in gold production is cumulative and "all the cows have not come home NOR reported their individual increases as of this date" and two...what a fabulous refresher lesson in ECON 101: The lower the price, the more is produced and sold in order to meet payroll, earnings, debt payments, etc. Price always rations supply, and the good news is this: LOW PRICES INCREASE SUPPLY, so there MUST be increased demand in all those statistics on gold production somewhere. Most on this thread have held dearly to the notion that "high prices will ration gold supply and help clear out the hedge books... WOOPS, there goes another dearly held GATA myth/tenet crashing to the tundra. You would have thought perma goldbulls have not so easily forgotten what wheat and corn and soybean and coffee and orange juice and rapesead and cotton, etc etc etc, have ALWAYS known: that low prices mean fence-row to fence-row miner "gold" plantings, errroops, I mean harvest.<grin> Ahhhhhhh, how soon we forget our Economics classes... gold_tutor