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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tradermike_1999 who wrote (16016)	3/2/2002 9:16:55 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Gee Mike, only US$20,000 debt per person? That's not much in an economy with GDP per capita of $40,000 or something like it. Servicing that debt is less than US$2000 per year. <...Because Congress is notoriously in favor of deficit spending; we are currently expanding the national debt at $250 billion a year and we have nearly a $6 trillion debt...> I think they should increase the rate of debt expansion. Mq

To: tradermike_1999 who wrote (16016)	3/2/2002 9:24:09 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 74559

<...Do we ever concern ourselves about the people who have had two-thirds of their income removed because they happened to be savers and living off interest, we gouge them with inflation, the loss of purchasing power, as well as taxing that, and yet a lot of people in this country have suffered from that particularly system? > Uncle Al is quite rightly persuading these suckers to not hold too many $. He is pushing them to buy real assets of either a consumer or investment nature. Too many people are trying to own US$. So, lower the rewards for holding them by cutting interest rates and diluting their holdings! Mq

To: tradermike_1999 who wrote (16016)	3/2/2002 9:33:26 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 74559

A warning from Uncle Al to invest in the Q currency, not the $. <...dealing with essentially a fiat currency, what it is that we are doing is that the currency is granted value by fiat of the sovereign, as it is said in the textbooks. The issue there is that, in years past, there's been considerable evidence that fiat currencies have been mismanaged in general and that inflation has been too often the result. What I was mentioning in the speech that you were referring to is the fact that there is some evidence that we're learning that lesson, learning how to manage a fiat currency. I've always had some considerable skepticism about whether that in the long run can succeed, but I must say to you, the evidence of recent decades is that it has been succeeding. Whether that continues is a forecast which I can't really project on.... > That means that a risk premium should attach to fiat currencies, NOT to shares. The productive enterprise of people and the value of real assets doesn't evaporate suddenly, unlike Argentinian-style fiat currencies when things go wrong. The US$ is a well-managed enormous fiat currency. Mq [Yes, some of that is repetition from times gone by - but the criticisms of Uncle Al are replays from long ago too].

To: tradermike_1999 who wrote (16016)	3/2/2002 10:50:25 PM
From: AC Flyer	Respond to of 74559

tmike, the indiscriminate Greenspan-bashing is getting a little old. >>I maintain that the jury is still out on whether fiat money will work on the long term.<<.....Ron Paul Well, Ron can maintain that all he wants, but what's his time frame? 50 years, 100 years, 200 years? To paraphrase Keynes, "in the long term, we're all dead." The last 50 years of fiat money look pretty damn good to me. >>...we might have to go back to seashells and oxen as our medium of exchange. And then you reassured everybody that the open discount window would have an adequate supply of oxen.<< Ron Paul quoting Alan Greenspan. Good for Greenie!