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: energyplay who wrote (52296)	7/11/2009 8:59:48 PM
From: RJA_	Respond to of 217860

Re this: >>No governments want to give up the power to tax surreptitiously and stimulate the economy by debasing the currency. >>Therefore IMHO it is unlikely a true fiscal gold standard will re appear unless: >>1. Governments have no other choice -or- >>2. Some gold rich country makes it so (Russia or China). >>2 would be difficult because immediately on beginning a gold standard, the value of that currency would rise, and make exports from that country too expensive. >>Therefore, we are back to #1. >>Gold backing could perhaps occur, however, a direct exchange gold standard is more problematical. >>That is my current thinking. I am open to being convinced otherwise. I would modify it to add -- that a resource based exporting country, that did not have a manufacturing base to protect could go to a gold standard and require payment for its resource in its own gold backed currency. Russia could do that in cooperation with OPEC. The scam of paper dollars (or paper anything) could then be eliminated, game, set, match. China could not do it without totally dominating manufacturing such that the resultant increase in the price of its currency would not effect its manufacturing dominance. I don't think they are there yet. Besides, doing it would eventually make them un competitive.

To: energyplay who wrote (52296)	7/12/2009 7:28:07 PM
From: TobagoJack	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217860

<<(Snarky comment about the US Government and crooks goes here)>> ... difficult to take up on your most kind invitation, but the instances are too numerous and characters are way plentiful that one is at loss to know where to start, so best to take a rain check :0) i will instead go in another direction ... watching bbc and just noted afghanistan fighters have been killed in ... somalia, and an off the cuff remark by me, that i also note the obama administration continue to provide safe harbour to uigher terrorists even as it has kept just about as silent as church mouse on the clash of civilization in new horizons (xinjiang autonomous region) while its lapdog turkey complains and complains about uighers being given more previledges (can have more than one child, carry sword and knives in public, no capital punishment for any infraction less than murder, etc, and education opportunities) than han chinese in china but is silent on palestinians given less rights than jews in the promised land. the inconsistencies and omissions and convoluted arguments on bbc are too numerous to pick off point by point, and so i will not tune to cnn, as it would be an absolute waste of time as opposed to utter waste of effort. by connecting the dots between foreigners fighting in somalia, no headscarf in france, whatever is and is not happening in iraq and afghanistan, usa weapons through russia, and now, stirrings in xinjiang, i am guessing that clash of coivilizations heating up