To: LLCF who wrote (27630 ) 1/22/2003 2:51:12 AM From: Maurice Winn Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559 <If my analysis is in the right ballpark and Greenspan from now on uses the gold price to guide his monetary policy, no further significant increase in the price of gold should be expected. If demand for the U.S. dollar continues to drop, the Fed will issue treasury bonds, and if it rises, it would buy them or other government bonds. Once the U.S. dollar becomes "as good as gold," even if informally, and with the present fiscal stimulus, capital will flow to the U.S., the euro will weaken, and so will the Canadian dollar. Reuven Brenner, a professor at McGill University's Faculty of Management, is the author of Force of Finance. He is a member of the Financial Post's Board of Economists > Well, he got most of his first rantings wrong, but seems to have rescued the situation by coming up with the correct conclusion. Uncle Al KBE will be happy with the right conclusion, even if Reuven can't read [he obviously misunderstood Uncle Al's previous commentaries over the decades]. I haven't yet read Green$pan's comments directly, but the conclusion was written in the tea leaves over the past year as gold has soared and the dollar has dropped and people wonder if it's time to head for the hills away from the US$. Be warned, Uncle Al is saying. Bet against him and the USA and you will feel like Al Qaeda, the Taliban and Osama, with Predators, AC130s and USS Enterprise on your tail. Meanwhile, being unwilling to bet against the US$ with other currencies, gold is now at $360 and has almost recovered back to the QUALCOMM gold standard = 10 x QCOM. In case anyone misunderstands, Green$pan was not saying bet on gold instead of the US$. He was saying that the US$ is as good as gold, thanks to the political management of an unlimited printing press which was allowed to get over-heated earlier in the days of the US$ floating free. Mqurice PS: Contrary to Reuven's comments, Green$pan did NOT say that the gold standard had kept prices stable for 100 years. On the contrary, he said that there was plenty of volatility, but overall and in the long run, prices didn't move much in 100 years. Which is quite another matter when markets are whipsawing around which happened all through the 19th century.