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 : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: orkrious who wrote (68644)	8/23/2006 10:36:33 AM
From: bart13	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110194

The latter sounds just like Bernanke. Yes, and the facts as well as saner economists like Friedman and many Austrians support it. Anyone who thinks we can solve the mess created by too much money with more money needs to rethink their position. At the risk of being misunderstood, the whole system is based on more money. If the system went negative on overall money supply creation for any significant length of time a depression and massive social unrest is guaranteed. I submit that the biggest issue, but in no way all of them, is the size of the oscillations... followed closely by a high rate of money creation. The '50s in the US was one of the "best" economic periods in the last century, and was also the period with the smallest oscillations. Feedback loops suck.

To: orkrious who wrote (68644)	8/23/2006 11:32:55 AM
From: ild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Hambone@commodities and recession -- trotsky, 11:17:06 08/23/06 Wed you said: "For decades the US produced and sold to its own population. We had economic prosperity while the rest of the world may or may not have. So, what's to prevent China (and the rest of the far east) from experiencing the same thing? And if that's the case, demand (and thus prices - and thus inflation) for base commodities wouldn't react to a US recession." i think that's a very dangerous assumption. don't forget, prices are made at the margin. generally, in commodity markets only a SLIGHT shift in the supply/demand curves is often enough to have a very large effect on prices. besides, with the US consumer the world's 'buyer of last resort' i don't think the ROW can just shrug off a consumer-led US recession. regarding gold and recession, i agree with your assessment. gold is a commodity too, but primarily it is money. its supply / demand characteristics are totally different from ALL other commodities. jewellery demand does not drive the gold price. monetary/investment demand does, and gold is one of the few asset classes to perform well in recessions (specifically, its REAL price tends to improve noticeable in bust conditions and liquidity crises). @recession indicator -- trotsky, 11:09:47 08/23/06 Wed got this from Russell: "whenever the rate of sales by new-car dealer has dropped 2 percent or more on a year-over-year basis, we have been on the edge or actually in a recession. The record is shown below -- Sept. 1970, index was down 2.9%, recession began 9 months earlier. Apr. 1974, index was down 3.2%, recession began 5 months earlier Nov. 1979, index was down 2.6%, recession started 2 months later. Feb. 1991, index was down 2.6%, recession started 7 months earlier. May, 2001, index was down 2.6%, recession started 2 months earlier. June, 2006, index was down 2.4%, recession ??? Note -- many times a recession is already underway, but it is not recognized at the time." @bursting housing bubble -- trotsky, 10:44:02 08/23/06 Wed "Sales of previously owned homes plunged in July to the lowest level in 2 1/2 years and the inventory of unsold homes climbed to a new record high, fresh signs that the housing market has lost steam." 'lost steam' is the WS euphemism for 'soft crash landing underway'.