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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (3447)	1/16/2006 5:57:47 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217885

TJ, gold as money is money, as it has been for 000s of years. Gold as ornaments is not money, but can be converted to money. Nickel as bolts is not money either, but can be converted to coins, which are money. I don't know where you got the idea that I think gold can't be a form of money. Gold is more accurately a commodity, but as with other commodities, gold is also a store of value and means of exchange. People can own oil contracts and that's a store of value and they can trade those on-line and that's a means of exchange. Many things are becoming money these days. Of course more money = more freedom as one can buy more goods and services which are required for one to do things. But one could own a pile of gold and be in prison, simultaneously, and one could not be said to be free. Uncle Al KBE hasn't exhibited any senility that I've noticed, though at his age I'm sure that his acuity is reduced from his 40s and 50s. His article on gold from long ago was fair comment. That doesn't mean he shouldn't keep a fiat currency on the straight and narrow. As has been obvious now for decades, the gold standard wasn't necessary for an effective state currency to exist, which is not to say things won't change, as I am planning to make them change and do away with fiat state currencies. <You think Britain sold Hong Kong out, cowardly shrinking away from its responsibilities?> When a lease is up, it's game over. It's not a shirking of responsibility to leave the tenanted property. It's a responsibility to up stakes and leave. It is not cowardly to recognize an agreement. Though, because the agreement was signed with parties which ceased to exist long long ago, it would make sense to abrogate the agreement and leave it to the Hong Kong people to unilaterally decide their political direction. It's absurd to transfer debts as though politicians can incur debts for future generations. Saddam incurred debts for Iraq but they were really his debts as he decided on expenditure, such as more palaces. Those debts can't now be forced onto his internal enemies, or their grandchildren. Those people would quite sensibly tell the creditors to take a hike. Same for Hong Kong. They owe Beijing's current bosses nothing as those bosses did nothing to have a right to boss Hong Kong around other than shoot a lot of people. Which has been the olde style way of attaining power, though not reasonable agreement. <you are so far down under that you have no comprehension of what freedom is any more.> You have your ideas about me and this and that, and if those ideas make you happy, that's a good thing [unless you enjoy sadism and theft]. I'm glad to contribute to your happiness. <there is also the minor detail that by treaty, Brunei owes the Ming Court a whole lot of moolah > As I explained, it's absurd to think such debts can be inherited. Such silly debts should be repudiated. Lenders should not make such foolish loans. Mqurice

To: TobagoJack who wrote (3447)	1/16/2006 9:10:37 PM
From: Crabbe	Respond to of 217885

God what freedoms you practice in HK We even allowed in the Korean trouble-making WTO protesters, and permitted them to swim in the polluted harbour to their hearts content, bopping up and down like so many odd looking buoys as we dug into our lunch and dinner in the comforts of home, watching them on the television. You in the great land of freedom "allowed" them to swim. (btw the word is bobbing not bopping, bopping is a 1950's dance that did not particularly go up and down, alternatively it is to strike or hit.) The freedom to pollute other peoples water. Remember your freedom ends where my nose begins. r