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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter snowdon who wrote (23978)	11/13/2003 5:35:44 PM
From: Louis V. Lambrecht	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Enjoyed the reading, particularly what he didn't said. He stays on generalities, apparently in order to not frighten people. IMHO, monetary situation is worse (in my layman's view, not the one of the monetarists). To be very short, IMO, 1971 was the end of Bretton-Woods and the end of any relation of the Dollar to gold. Which has failed (as the Pound reserve currency failed at the end of bi-metalism) in 1996 (failure of he Rubin-Vlinton strong Dollar policy). Since then, we already are in the credit system. Joseph Stiglitz had an interview on CNN some years ago, apparently too old to be kept in archive. He proposed, in short, that the lending capacity (of a state, company, individual) would be based on the capacity to service the debt, forget the principal. In the end, this would result in a "controlled" inflation (aka exponential money sypply, ideally a straight line on a semi-log chart). We are in such a situation, IMHO, with the major currencies in a competitive devaluation. How to protect oneselves? Warburton lists doesn't satisfy me either. And the list can be simplified. Fresh water is one finite source life depends upon, as a corollary waste treatment will produce fresh water (plus hydrogen and many other resources). Then, things. Things, as antiques, are a protection, not a conservation. Things trend to lose value in time, face value is higher, but not higher than inflation. This is the case of antique furniture. Rare collectibles will increase in value, but are most illiquid. If you can't sell, what is the use putting a theretical value on things. Resources (of course with no speculative premium on them). Two cases: this is a primary resource. In case of scarcity any government would confiscate those resources. (I once thought of buying land with water reservoir below, but this can be conficated as fast as signing a new law). IMO, this goes for arable land too. Hence, only way would be to buy shares of companies mightier than countries. Drawback, as a small holder, you will be shaven as often as can be. Leaves non-primary resources which are needed up to a certain point, but would be less likely to be confiscated. Name me one, I would buy immediately.<ng> Given that the value of those non-primary reources should rise more than the money supply (as you have to service the debt in a constant inflation, you will nedd more revenues in order to be able to service more debt as you keep running in front of inflation). Theories, theories,... <ng>