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 : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (10813)	4/18/2002 9:36:04 AM
From: BSGrinder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36161

At the end of that article, it said: "The world's biggest central banks, led by the US and Germany, sit on about 32 000 tons of gold in officially declared reserves. - Reuters" I think that it is curious that we cannot get a straight answer from central bankers about how much of those "officially declared" reserves are sold, loaned, or promised in some fashion. On that topic, I just found this interesting testimony at the GATA web site: Bill: The speech I attended was in Grand Rapids, Mich., on April 15, Tax Day." It is traditional for the Economics Club of Grand Rapids to bring a speaker appropriate for this event. This year it was Secretary O'Neill. Seven hundred people were in attendance. The local and national media were there, as well as C-SPAN. The other reason O'Neill was there is that he is good friends with a local influential political supporter who was having a birthday party. Vice President Dick Cheney also attended that event. The reason for the speech was to make a case for simplifying the tax code and impress on everyone what a waste of resources our current tax system is. As a certified public accountant, I couldn't agree with him more. For the most part O'Neill's, speech was refreshing, though it is doubtful that any real tax solutions will be implemented. After the speech there is always time made available for questions. I was first to raise my hand, and I was acknowledged. I inquired as to what U.S. policy is as to our gold reserves and whether would he comment on whether we were engaged in lending our gold or using it for other financial means. The moderator was quite taken aback by the question, as it did not fit the theme. Secretary O'Neill took his time and remarked that the United States had gone off the gold standard in 1971. He went on to emphasize that our real reserves or currency strength are based on our intellectual capabilities. He never did address the question any further. There was more talk about our economy, etc. I do not believe the government has any intention to answer questions like mine. The response was to ignore or marginalize the questioner. This is the same way the shorts were treated in the Enron fiasco. It was clear that O'Neill did not appreciate the question. You could tell by the way he looked at me. It was also clear that the audience had no idea of the relevance of the question. Everyone was more comfortable moving on to something more familiar. O'Neill's speech received wide coverage in the media, but nothing was mentioned about my question. I am not surprised by that. I do not know when C-SPAN will be airing the speech. Upon reflection, it is sad how irrelevant gold and other tangible assets are viewed in today's economy. Apparently the current view is that intangible "assets" constitute the real value. I find this especially interesting in light of Enron and all the other accounting scandals. High-level policy makers like intangible assets, be they intellectual capabilities or financial instruments, because they can control them -- at least for a while. Do I think gold is being used in a variety of financial arrangements by our government? Yes -- I could see it in the glare of O'Neill's eyes. It's too bad, because in a lot of other respects I admire him and the job he is trying to do. If he and all the capable business people in the room don't even register this as a relevant issue, we have a long way to go. -- Bob Schellenberg Grand Rapids, Mich.