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 (86559)	1/28/2012 5:03:13 PM
From: RJA_	Respond to of 219794

In the referenced post there is an error, the paragraph should have read as follows: >>The Chinese in Nov took 105 tons as imports. Annualized that is 1260 tons, but they also mine 300 tons annually (included in that world production), which they keep. So the anual take up of China is 1560 tons or almost 2/3 of world production.

To: RJA_ who wrote (86559)	1/28/2012 7:05:56 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219794

Now over $400 per ounce to dig it up? I admit I haven't checked lately how much it costs to dig new gold. Whatever it is, as you say the amount doesn't go up and down quickly, but the longer it stays up, the more people will bring on stream more of the stuff. The current Irrational Exuberance is based on the idea that the USA if not the world is going back onto the gold standard. I am betting a lot against that idea. I have my bets on what will replace the US$ and others. No, I am not advising people to buy QCOM at $60 a share. I'm not doing so myself, so I don't see why other people should do. Mqurice

To: RJA_ who wrote (86559)	1/28/2012 9:35:08 PM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Respond to of 219794

That part of the process should not be underestimated. There is nothing wrong with being a chimp, or tribal firelight dancer, if that's the preferred lifestyle. I admit to such proclivity myself - though with a few modern accoutrements: < And besides, dancing by firelight is fun... <g!> > The Amish very deliberately select a bygone era lifestyle. When explorers set out on adventure over the millennia, not all agreed that it was a good idea. Most people preferred the known way of life and stayed back in tribal HQ. Adventure is not for the faint-hearted. 99% of new experiments fail because the unknown unknowns are always lurking in the murk. But it just takes 1 to establish a beach head and the rest can follow or breed from that one successful transplantation to the future. Companies nearly all last one life time, because they are nearly always formed by one challenging male set out on life's adventure and he pours his heart and life into success. When he dies or passes it on, the next generation might even expand on it. By the third generation it's always a mature business carrying on largely by momentum and economies of scale. As you say, almost none become going concerns for over 100 years and into the 200 year realm because the impetus has been lost and the creator long forgotten. Apple was very much a Steve Jobs creation. Of course in cahoots with like-minded others. But such impetus cannot be sustained for many decades. Qualcomm was very much a Dr Irwin Jacobs creation [of course with like-minded others]. To get the next punctuated equilibrium leap to the next big thing is very difficult and unusual. Microsoft could have, but didn't invent search. Google could have, but didn't invent Facebook. Yes, gold goes on with a basic retained value because people like jewelry and money. Gold is a form of money. Not many gold bugs in 1980 would have believed that gold would be $280 in Y2K. They all knew fiat money was being diluted and destroyed. But they were wrong. Mqurice