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: Don Lloyd who wrote (80705)	1/12/2002 4:31:13 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 116756

So if we all have infinite food and water, then food and water are so much frippery. Of course no one would have infinite diamonds so then diamonds will never be frippery. It is still supply and demand. There is lots of air, water and food. If you think about it much of man's energy is spent on making sure that he has enough of these. So if we factor in cities, moving about, wars, and other costs of social organization, we have spent lots on that cup of water. In California, in the goldfields, water was a luxury to wash gravel to leave behind the gleaming metal. So water was sold to miners in units of a miner's inch. This was the water that would flow in a ditch if the weir of a certain width ata a certain head was lowered one inch. Each miner's inch was sold for its unit price per month. We pay lots for necessities but it is not always dollars and cents over the counter. We locate, dig wells, put in fancy equipment and defend our land all for the necessities of sustenance and security. We put a price on it all. But once got on a social basis we cannot then sell one unit more of it because man has sufficient by his 'law of action'. Each marginal unit more, demands less price --- necessities are consumed up to the necessary amount and hoarded in a different way than luxuries as they do not always store well. Diamonds are hoarded and stored, and coveted as they are things of long lasting value. You might hoard store and covet access to water, as in good land, but not so much the water itself. Unless you are an evil cattle baron and that pesky John Wayne shows up with his farmin' folk. Subjective value makes sense. I don't think though, that evaluations can be base on irrationality or whim. Ultimately the record of purchases of the individual makes the scale of his valuations. For instance Doug AK spends 1500 dollars a month on seedless watermelon. In his value system, a rotten watermelon is a religious artifact, so travelling watermelon salesmen seek him out, and his backyard is full of used, surplus and depleted watermelon. This does not argue though, that the sanity of the value system does much to validate the theory. EC<:-}

To: Don Lloyd who wrote (80705)	1/13/2002 11:19:16 AM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 116756

To each according to their need, to each according to their ability to stab people in the back and sleep at night. To each according to their ability to make up seemingly non hypocritical evaluations for their bad behaviour. To each according to their tendency to be fooled into accepting societies homilies of docility that are designed to give a bad conscience to otherwise oppressed children. Economics is often used as a rationalization for endlessly expanding government, avaricious banks, and crooked unregulated markets. It should be apparent that if the amount of money banks were allowed to loan out were fixed for safey's sake, and foreign loans without internationally collectible collateral were disallowed, then much of the tinkering with interest rates would be unecessary. It is plain that banks are charging for people loaning money to them. The government must step in. The banks must be made to pay positive interest, and do away with these charges. Why interfere with free market in banking? Because it is not free in the first place. It is totally monopolistically setup. It is entirely old boy crooked and government run. So lets stop the charade that a crook should be given bullets to rob the blind for freedom's sake. ALL bank charges should be rolled back. An account with 1000 dollars in it on Jan 1 with NO transactions will be at 920 dollars by the next Jan 1st, savings or chequing. The banks have been handed a license to not pay interest for their money, but to charge interest for lending that same money 20 times over. For this reason, the 8 largest profit earning companies in Canadian history, at one billion dollars after tax profit for the past 7 years continuous-- have been the (CDN) banks. This profitability came into being when they could break their unions and get rid of tellers and accountants by introducing the automatic teller and more computerization, and they could then justify charges for "services" that had always been non charged. Contrary to what they would have you believe, insurance and stock brokering have not made them that much money. 80 percent of their accounts, of which they had millions (CDN banks are all national) became money makers through charges. Charges seemed small, but at low interest rates, the interest came to less than the average amount of charged! 100 dollars a year of charges does not sound like much but on an account with 1000 dollars in it on average, the interest is only 30 dollars per year. Then they introduced credit checks to open accounts. Imagine this. You approach your neighbour -- he says to you: "I would like to borrow ten thousand dollars! HoW can I be assured that you are a good risk?" "Just a minute", you say, "I am lending you money -- You ask me for my credit rating? What about yours?!" This kind of heinous activity must be stopped. It is either that or "anyone" should be allowed to open a bank and loan money. Of course anyone can loan money, but if they meet regulations they should be allowed to with some monitoring create loan credit. This competition would stop the CDN bank monopoly from gouging their customers. EC<:-}