To: yard_man who wrote (63426 ) 1/11/2003 1:11:12 AM From: skinowski Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 209892 Gold, gold, gold… Richard Russell is passionate about advising his subs to own it. 321gold.com I sense some sort of an error there… He considers gold to be “true money”, and therefore thinks that under conditions of deflation it will go up in price. However, the rise in the price of gold implies a decline in the value of the dollar – in other words, inflation. In our society prices are measured in $$, and not in gold. Another person who made the same claim was James Dale Davidson (one of the co-authors of "The Great Reckoning” and “The Sovereign Individual”, both interesting books). To me this is far from clear: The situation when the dollar collapses and, simultaneously, the gold goes up IMO presupposes some sort of a major collapse of the socio-financial system, which is very unlikely. Besides, in such a case one wouldn’t be able to collect anything for their paper assets anyway – even if they happen to be gold mining shares. If one expects a situation when the dollar collapses while gold goes up (and begins to function as "real" money), than the logical thing is to own the physical metal. Another criticism of this article relates to the recently ‘famous’ increase in the short positions by the commercials. In the case of gold, commercials are producers. They have nothing else to do with the stuff other than to sell it. They have to be - by and large - SHORT gold, as they sell it forward, locking in the increasing prices. For all I know, the increase in their short commitment may be in reality reflecting increasing production, and may in fact guarantee an eventual serious decline in price. Ski.