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: KyrosL who wrote (66381)	9/23/2010 8:26:50 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217661

kyrosl, let us start with the fundamentals of that which underpins the plot (1) question: what has gold done in usd pricing action over the past 10 years? 1999 Dec 31st USD 288/oz 2000 Dec 29th USD 274/oz -6% 2001 Dec 31st USD 279/oz +3% 2002 Dec 31st USD 348/oz +25% 2003 Dec 31st USD 416/oz +20% 2004 Dec 31st USD 438/oz +5% 2005 Dec 30th USD 519/oz +18% 2006 Dec 29th USD 638/oz +24% 2007 Dec 31st USD 833/oz +31% 2008 Dec 31st USD 889/oz +7% 2009 Dec 31st USD 1,095 +23% 2010 Aug 27th USD 1,290 +18% (2) question: starting in 1999, joemiddleclass who put 100% of his nav in gold would have done what relative to bobmiddleclass who had done whatever else? (3) why? as in why is gold going up in price, even as it failed to keep its value relative to other minerals and elements? (4) what changed? and what is the natural trend per logic, education, learning, and suspicion? (5) at point of destination, what could happen to joemiddleclass? what must happen to bobmiddleclass? (6) how china does at the end of this tale is irrelevant to joe and bob. (7) usa going back to 1970s life style, at twilight of babyboomers years on this planet? really? that simple? what do you think the increasing numbers of bobexmiddleclass would be voting for via universal suffrage when suffering? hint, they would be voting to get you. (8) the brightest would do well in many places, but as a society devolves, the brightest opt out, and many usa are moving to freedom hk, because they are bright. (9) the net investor class immigrant to hk over the past 12 months number some 12,000. 9,000 are from mainland china as a matter of course given cultural affinity, and geographic proximity, but 3,000 are from far away places, a surprise that should not be. 70% of the group happily buy a usd 700k or more apt. hk is discussing raising the bar to usd usd 1.25mm as worth of freedom rises in line with dawning of tyranny everywhere else. (10) do not be misled by china trade dependence spin. china trades mostly with itself, and as a consequence, is the largest trading partner of many, but that does not at all mean china is dependent on any one partner, especially any partner that china is better off without, as one deadbeat wannabie that cheats via uneven playing field by machinating a fraud and has the audacity of turning around and accuse the money redeemer of currency manipulation you do see the comedy in the truth, do you not? (11) reflect on above item (1), see the truth of item (2), consider item (3), and figure a way to save yourself. it is easy. (12) trying to win a debate that i am not engaging in is senseless. just save yourself.

To: KyrosL who wrote (66381)	9/23/2010 8:33:16 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217661

I will disagree strongly with that. Almost every non-military and non-aircraft production system and logistics chain in the US involves large parts of East Asia - (in historical order of when they became part of US logistics) Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Phillipines, Malaysia, China, and now VietNam. Europe is pretty similar. Russia still has a degree of isolation on some products, but they don't produce much that is competitive. This means a North Korea attack on South Korea would shut down at least a third of the electronics production in China (actually more like >80%) about a third the auto production in Japan and China, and have nasty effects on a dozen other industries in China, like ship building and construction. After trade stops, the US lifestyle might recover to mid 1950s after a few years. Besides, I would miss eating bananas...

To: KyrosL who wrote (66381)	9/24/2010 3:36:47 PM
From: Hawkmoon	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217661

A reset due to all out trade war soon will affect the USA relatively little. I would tend to agree.. Those industries who were looking for the cheap manufacturing in China and other overseas locations would RUSH to return their manufacturing capacity to American shores. No good having factories with cheap labor if they can't ship their product. Hawk

To: KyrosL who wrote (66381)	9/25/2010 2:58:21 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217661

1) out trade war will affect the USA relatively little. ANSWER: it does, for to pay for its imports, any country has to export. And it was this failure to export that caused the deficit. 2) The USA is a continent with virtually everything it needs right here, ANSWER: US imports 50% of its oil 3)with plenty of resources per capita, with still the best higher education in the world, still attracting many of the best and the brightest from around the world. ANSWER: US education costs too much. US students owe $850 billion. That is more than the whole credit card debit. Soon American system will suffer as a result of the lack of funds 3) Most of USA imports are because of choice and want, not necessity. ANSWER: to pay for its imports -like the 50% of its oil- US must export 4)If trade stopped completely tomorrow, they USA simply goes back to a 1970s lifestyle. ANSWER: the 1970 world does not ressemble at all today's world. Then it was Cold War years and there was no competition from emerging markets 5) The USA middle class will probably be better off than it is today in such a situation. ANSWER: that goes against David Ricardo. Not his law of diminishing marginal returns but "The idea is this: a country that trades for products it can get at lower cost from another country is better off than if it had made the products at home. The big losers will be multinational company executives and WS financiers. ANSWER: that conflicts with 5), since middle class depends on multinational and WS financiers