To: Zardoz who wrote (86301 ) 6/3/2002 11:59:23 AM From: E. Charters Respond to of 116762 Being negative is twice as wrong as being positive. Nobody has the right to be wrong. You cannot say wrong is right. Let's face it, you are being stubborn, you don't like gold, and you are wrong. There is nothing wrong with argument. However, argument must give reason. As smart as Keynes was, he did not give reason when he said gold was a barbarous relic. He just took that opinion. So what if gold is old? So is the earth. He did not explain why paper money and government inflation indexes are better, or how we were to avoid inflation. (Not that he really plumped for printing money, but he did not say HOW controls were absolute. Only that governments should only spend on infrastructure programs in times of economic necessity, not all the time. Did he advocate that an institution like the Fed tune interest rates to control the economy? - I am not sure.) In fact, neither does a gold standard really avoid inflation, if paper money exists. And it always will it appears. No genius has solved the inflationary component of interest. All gold proponents are saying is that there is no use in cartel control of an economy, either in cartel control of sugar price, or cartel control of gold in order to pump up money, or cartel (Fed) control of interest rates. Economies will fluctuate as they will with our control or without. You can't trust governments or people, but you can trust free markets and gold. For 200 years, from 1660 to 1860, the American economy did not have a Fed, or income taxes, or significant inflation. They had prosperity, relatively free markets and a balanced budget. You bring on the Fed, and you get the people eating grass in the richest nation in the world. 1930's. And then you bring in income taxes, and federally orchestrated inflation, and you get the greatest percentage of people living in relative poverty of any nation right here in the USA. 30%. You don't have 30% poverty in Germany or Switzerland. What is the reason? Money control, the labour market and income taxes. Income taxes, Federally allocated money, and big labour have driven the cost of living out of reach of many. Every thing sold in the USA and Canada has the cost of multiple layers of taxation factored into it and the high cost of unionized labour as well. Without income tax, shelf prices would drop by 30% and consumption would increase and more people would be employable. Instead of one person working for the government and not producing while making 50K a year, there would be two people working for industry making 25K a year and living well on that wage. How does this all relate? Well every one that has the opinion that governments can be trusted to print paper, and that gold should not be free to barter or trade without government interference, I find also has an attitude of liberal deficit spending, and total government control of the economy and business. This is what leads to all the economic trouble. I realize governments have to regulate, but their damnable interference in every last detail of business has led to a bankrupt country. The US cannot afford to pay its bills because of high taxes. As well, and as a consequence, it produces obsolete polluting energy wasting junk in transportation equipment and energy plants. Waste, pollution and high costs go hand in hand. US workers are less productive, higher cost, and energy inefficient. US products are a waste of money. High cost to buy and to own. The reason is directly related to the high cost of government. EC<:-}