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: RJA_ who wrote (22915)	9/22/2007 3:57:19 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 220525

RJA, I'm not happy about the US$ being mushed and economic disruption either. Price stability isn't one of the things the US$ managers have to achieve, it's really the only thing. It's the actual definition of money. But they can't stop bubbles in particular things. For example, look at gold and oil zoom as houses plunge. The underlying problem is that the owners and controllers of state-run fiat currencies are different people from those who hold the currency at any particular time. There is therefore a divergence of interests. The controllers can dilute the holders by simply pixelating and printing as many more as they like and giving it to themselves or supporters [such as voters]. That is a money tree. If they don't get too greedy, people will treat it just like any other tax = part of the price of living in that community and doing business there. Which isn't to say they like it or will put up with it any more than they have to. If the controllers get too greedy, as controllers invariably seem to do, there is a revolution and people abandon the money and the controllers [if not actually killing them in the process]. Mq is working on the Qi to replace those bung currencies. So far, so good. I am positioning various pieces. I visite Aztec HQ in Grafton in Auckland when gold was $323 an ounce, but decided against it and stayed in the realm of phragmented photon cyberspace and it's as well I did because while gold has doubled, QCOM has paid dividends and gone from $12 to $40 a share [split adjusted]. AND my products have done a LOT of good, while gold would have just sat there incurring storage and insurance charges. And I would have to pay high transaction costs [about 10%] on gold. I suppose I could open an account at some lower cost financial institution to trade paper gold, but owning a piece of paper through some dodgy company in Hong Kong purporting to represent a piece of gold stored somewhere or other, allegedly, wayyyyyy out of my control, seems as risky as owing corporate paper like QCOM which actually directly produces things people want to buy. When the gold fever is over, again, as it always passes, gold will revert to its traditional ornamental Aztec aspect of baubles for bare-bummed heathens keen on human sacrifice. "This time it's different". No it's not. Gold has a cost of production and a bank-rate profit on that cost of production is what it's worth. Beware charlatans leading you down the garden path. Gold was money, but that has passed into history, along with horse shoes. There is not enough gold for 6 billion people to use it as money and any country foolish enough to use gold as their money will find themselves economically backward. Several small countries could use gold as their money and even a few large ones, but the economic entropy would punish them. If the US$ really goes a gutser, gold should make it to $2000 an ounce, temporarily. By then, financial carnage should be clearing, I'll own a bunch of houses in Hawaii, California and New Hampshire/Maine. People won't be out of "their" houses because they can rent them for $10 a week if they maintain them well. Mqurice