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: THE ANT who wrote (109467)	1/4/2015 1:45:20 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217868

The global economy was just as difficult to understand when people used gold and silver coins as money. It just seemed simpler because people could ignore most of economics and instead focus on the simple barter of services and goods for metal goods for other goods and services. It seems simple enough. But those in a position to do so, either metal smiths or kings, very quickly got into the business of storing metal gold and silver and lending it out at interest. People in the economy were no longer limited to buying things with the barter of gold, silver or other goods and services, but could also buy things with letters of credit and gold or silver receipts. The total amount of profitable new investments were no longer limited to the supply of gold and silver. You now had a complex economy which was very difficult to understand, while the simpletons continued to focus on the simpleness of bartering. The economy of complex economies could leapfrog past the grinding poverty of gold and silver barter economies, but only if the prince or metal smiths in the complex economy were careful to lend or invest in productive schemes which would create additional goods and services. Prosperous economies have been this complex since before the days of the Romans. Backward barter economies remained simple and poor whether they used gold and silver as money, salt or sheepskins. It has always been up to each individual how much of economics they choose to understand. Understanding little has always been easier, but far less profitable.

To: THE ANT who wrote (109467)	1/4/2015 3:06:10 PM
From: THE ANT	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217868

I am not anti war in general. I just think the US government is too stupid to figure out who the enemy is and too stupid to know how to win. We know they are too stupid to run the economy well. When Greenspan was at his peak of prestige I was saying he would someday be one of the most hated men in America. I generally heard the remark "so you think you are smarter than Greenspan?" with a short laugh following it. When GW Bush announced he was removing the top 5 layers of governance under Sadam I said "We are screwed, has no one in the military read up on Alexander the Greats history" When Obama was about to bomb Bashar al-Assad in Syria shortly before ISIS showed its cards and my liberal anti war friends shouted "hurrah for a just war for a change, as Obama would never fight a unjust one!" I realized they were not just stupid but cold blooded killers under the right leaders I can certainly be wrong but do my best to have the knowledge base to have an opinion on anything. It is amazing how amongst my MD colleagues many don't even have the knowledge much less the frontal lobe to use it. If that is true in medicine what about government?