quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Why not dump physical computer for a paper computer?

You both are being dicks.

1) You buy and pay for stuff with paper everyday. Why not just send all that paper to me? I'll get rid of it for you. I use a physical computer because it works. I use paper money too because it works. In fact, legally so.

2) You are ignoring the difference between a note and any other kind of paper.

3) You are pretending there's no difference between something used for money and the resources they can represent.

4) Why don't you take silver to the store for groceries? Because they'd rather have cash--what we use for money. I suppose there's no point in telling you yet again that you both completely misunderstand what money is and does, as you just keep dancing around about how the Fed creates money, something we all know, hell, even high schools teach this now. You just don't want to grasp the idea because, like your other pet rants, you're still getting over leaving the gold standard, and the reason it bothers you so much is that you can't see how money--gold, silver, paper, shells, salt, or coffee beans, works, mainly because you don't want to, preferring to lament the gold standard.

5) In answer to the question "What does this have to do with the stock market"--Nothing. I told you both that pages ago. Then, when you didn't like the data, you switched from insisted it was relevant to proclaiming it irrelevant.

6) You were both touting silver and gold as solid investments. They are not, as history shows.

7) That silver and gold spiked on foreign markets when Nixon abandoned the gold standard is not only not surprising, but in fact predictable. The dollar bounced around for a while before it found a market position reflecting its value, and naturally people turned to silver and gold while that was happening--not as long term investments, but as temporary havens. When the dollar settled, people dumped silver and gold, bringing prices back down.

8) If Nixon hadn't stopped the gold standard, arbitragers (would had already twice brought the Bank of England to its knees, and were making runs at the dollar) would have done the same thing here, exploiting the difference between the dollar's true value as reflected by it's economy and it's artificial value pegged to gold. We'd have been forced to devalue the currency, and as many times as arbitragers repeated the exercise. Instead, we went to a managed float, just as most countries do now.

9) Gold and silver backed currency is NOT more stable--rather, this backing is an official and arbitrary stability, the illusion of stability. It doesn't make the economy suddenly stable--ask Chinese peasants. It doesn't make the gold and silver suddenly stable either. What it DOES is arbitrarily fix costs. How's that for socialist government control?

10) Now, if I remember correctly, this thread is about the stock market, not your pet monetary ramblings, positions we all know inside and out anyway, as you stick them into thread after thread after thread after thread after goddamn motherfucking thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I don't see it like that. Every once in a while- I hear from someone on CM- asking me for info.

Precious metals are the opportunity of a lifetime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
The dental filling I got the other day is not made out of paper. Is is made of silver.

People lose money in commodities markets, too--silver went from $50 an ounce in 1980 to $17.36 today.

And I'll bet you paid for that filling with--paper.

People who invest sanely in the stock market don't experience the same fate as the gamblers.

[image]http://www.greatdreams.com/grace/images/figure335.gif[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It gets worse. That $50 adjusted for inflation is $128.50 (and much, much higher if you use Real's 30%+) -- you'd have lost 85% of your investment. Oh, the pile would still be shiny, but it's valuation and purchasing power would be a fraction of what you had put into it.

And why? Yes, the silver market has its manipulators, in the form this time of an attempt to corner the market. As for fat fingers, commodities are also traded via electronic means, and exactly the same thing could happen.

Gold tells a similar story. Whether nominally or adjusted for inflation, that 1980 investment would have lost a bundle. Security in hard metals is a myth--commodity trading can be volatile. In both cases, silver and gold, you STILL wouldn't be anywhere near recapturing your losses thirty years later.

[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Historical_price_of_gold.png[/image]

And yes, both silver and gold have industrial uses, but holding it produces nothing--unlike stocks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Why not dump physical computer for a paper computer?

You both are being dicks.

1) You buy and pay for stuff with paper everyday. Why not just send all that paper to me? I'll get rid of it for you. I use a physical computer because it works. I use paper money too because it works. In fact, legally so.

2) You are ignoring the difference between a note and any other kind of paper.

3) You are pretending there's no difference between something used for money and the resources they can represent.

4) Why don't you take silver to the store for groceries? Because they'd rather have cash--what we use for money. I suppose there's no point in telling you yet again that you both completely misunderstand what money is and does, as you just keep dancing around about how the Fed creates money, something we all know, hell, even high schools teach this now. You just don't want to grasp the idea because, like your other pet rants, you're still getting over leaving the gold standard, and the reason it bothers you so much is that you can't see how money--gold, silver, paper, shells, salt, or coffee beans, works, mainly because you don't want to, preferring to lament the gold standard.

5) In answer to the question "What does this have to do with the stock market"--Nothing. I told you both that pages ago. Then, when you didn't like the data, you switched from insisted it was relevant to proclaiming it irrelevant.

6) You were both touting silver and gold as solid investments. They are not, as history shows.

7) That silver and gold spiked on foreign markets when Nixon abandoned the gold standard is not only not surprising, but in fact predictable. The dollar bounced around for a while before it found a market position reflecting its value, and naturally people turned to silver and gold while that was happening--not as long term investments, but as temporary havens. When the dollar settled, people dumped silver and gold, bringing prices back down.

8) If Nixon hadn't stopped the gold standard, arbitragers (would had already twice brought the Bank of England to its knees, and were making runs at the dollar) would have done the same thing here, exploiting the difference between the dollar's true value as reflected by it's economy and it's artificial value pegged to gold. We'd have been forced to devalue the currency, and as many times as arbitragers repeated the exercise. Instead, we went to a managed float, just as most countries do now.

9) Gold and silver backed currency is NOT more stable--rather, this backing is an official and arbitrary stability, the illusion of stability. It doesn't make the economy suddenly stable--ask Chinese peasants. It doesn't make the gold and silver suddenly stable either. What it DOES is arbitrarily fix costs. How's that for socialist government control?

10) Now, if I remember correctly, this thread is about the stock market, not your pet monetary ramblings, positions we all know inside and out anyway, as you stick them into thread after thread after thread after thread after goddamn motherfucking thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I don't see it like that. Every once in a while- I hear from someone on CM- asking me for info.

Precious metals are the opportunity of a lifetime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
The dental filling I got the other day is not made out of paper. Is is made of silver.

People lose money in commodities markets, too--silver went from $50 an ounce in 1980 to $17.36 today.

And I'll bet you paid for that filling with--paper.

People who invest sanely in the stock market don't experience the same fate as the gamblers.

[image]http://www.greatdreams.com/grace/images/figure335.gif[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It gets worse. That $50 adjusted for inflation is $128.50 (and much, much higher if you use Real's 30%+) -- you'd have lost 85% of your investment. Oh, the pile would still be shiny, but it's valuation and purchasing power would be a fraction of what you had put into it.

And why? Yes, the silver market has its manipulators, in the form this time of an attempt to corner the market. As for fat fingers, commodities are also traded via electronic means, and exactly the same thing could happen.

Gold tells a similar story. Whether nominally or adjusted for inflation, that 1980 investment would have lost a bundle. Security in hard metals is a myth--commodity trading can be volatile. In both cases, silver and gold, you STILL wouldn't be anywhere near recapturing your losses thirty years later.

[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Historical_price_of_gold.png[/image]

And yes, both silver and gold have industrial uses, but holding it produces nothing--unlike stocks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Why not dump physical computer for a paper computer?

You both are being dicks.

1) You buy and pay for stuff with paper everyday. Why not just send all that paper to me? I'll get rid of it for you. I use a physical computer because it works. I use paper money too because it works. In fact, legally so.

2) You are ignoring the difference between a note and any other kind of paper.

3) You are pretending there's no difference between something used for money and the resources they can represent.

4) Why don't you take silver to the store for groceries? Because they'd rather have cash--what we use for money. I suppose there's no point in telling you yet again that you both completely misunderstand what money is and does, as you just keep dancing around about how the Fed creates money, something we all know, hell, even high schools teach this now. You just don't want to grasp the idea because, like your other pet rants, you're still getting over leaving the gold standard, and the reason it bothers you so much is that you can't see how money--gold, silver, paper, shells, salt, or coffee beans, works, mainly because you don't want to, preferring to lament the gold standard.

5) In answer to the question "What does this have to do with the stock market"--Nothing. I told you both that pages ago. Then, when you didn't like the data, you switched from insisted it was relevant to proclaiming it irrelevant.

6) You were both touting silver and gold as solid investments. They are not, as history shows.

7) That silver and gold spiked on foreign markets when Nixon abandoned the gold standard is not only not surprising, but in fact predictable. The dollar bounced around for a while before it found a market position reflecting its value, and naturally people turned to silver and gold while that was happening--not as long term investments, but as temporary havens. When the dollar settled, people dumped silver and gold, bringing prices back down.

8) If Nixon hadn't stopped the gold standard, arbitragers (would had already twice brought the Bank of England to its knees, and were making runs at the dollar) would have done the same thing here, exploiting the difference between the dollar's true value as reflected by it's economy and it's artificial value pegged to gold. We'd have been forced to devalue the currency, and as many times as arbitragers repeated the exercise. Instead, we went to a managed float, just as most countries do now.

9) Gold and silver backed currency is NOT more stable--rather, this backing is an official and arbitrary stability, the illusion of stability. It doesn't make the economy suddenly stable--ask Chinese peasants. It doesn't make the gold and silver suddenly stable either. What it DOES is arbitrarily fix costs. How's that for socialist government control?

10) Now, if I remember correctly, this thread is about the stock market, not your pet monetary ramblings, positions we all know inside and out anyway, as you stick them into thread after thread after thread after thread after goddamn motherfucking thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I don't see it like that. Every once in a while- I hear from someone on CM- asking me for info.

Precious metals are the opportunity of a lifetime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
The dental filling I got the other day is not made out of paper. Is is made of silver.

People lose money in commodities markets, too--silver went from $50 an ounce in 1980 to $17.36 today.

And I'll bet you paid for that filling with--paper.

People who invest sanely in the stock market don't experience the same fate as the gamblers.

[image]http://www.greatdreams.com/grace/images/figure335.gif[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It gets worse. That $50 adjusted for inflation is $128.50 (and much, much higher if you use Real's 30%+) -- you'd have lost 85% of your investment. Oh, the pile would still be shiny, but it's valuation and purchasing power would be a fraction of what you had put into it.

And why? Yes, the silver market has its manipulators, in the form this time of an attempt to corner the market. As for fat fingers, commodities are also traded via electronic means, and exactly the same thing could happen.

Gold tells a similar story. Whether nominally or adjusted for inflation, that 1980 investment would have lost a bundle. Security in hard metals is a myth--commodity trading can be volatile. In both cases, silver and gold, you STILL wouldn't be anywhere near recapturing your losses thirty years later.

[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Historical_price_of_gold.png[/image]

And yes, both silver and gold have industrial uses, but holding it produces nothing--unlike stocks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Gold was $35 an ounce the day I was born.

S0-  ponder that.   Is is $1220 now.  

quote:

failed currencies?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Gold was $35 an ounce the day I was born.

S0-  ponder that.   Is is $1220 now.  

In 1946, when Bretton Woods pegged the price at $35/ounce, the Dow was 191.46. Today it's 9,931.97.

Ponder that--an increase of 34.86 times the original investment for gold,
vs. an increase of 51.87 times for stocks--and that doesn't count all the dividends and stock splits along the way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

http://nowandfutures.com/inflation_long_term.html

Almost 90% of the Dow's gain since 1963 is inflation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

failed currencies?

That's why we avoid hyperinflation.

Not monetary systems.

This thread, however, is about the stock market.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

http://nowandfutures.com/inflation_long_term.html

Almost 90% of the Dow's gain since 1963 is inflation.

To which gold would also be subject.

"The price of gold had been fixed at $35 an ounce since the Roosevelt administration. But the growing U.S. balance-of-payments deficit meant that foreign governments were accumulating large amounts of dollars -- in aggregate volume far exceeding the U.S. government's stock of gold. These governments, or their central banks, could show up at any time at the "gold window" of the U.S. Treasury and insist on trading in their dollars for gold, which would precipitate a run. The issue was not theoretical. In the second week of August 1971, the British ambassador turned up at the Treasury Department to request that $3 billion be converted into gold. With inflation rising, the clamor to do something was mounting in both political circles and the press." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_nixongold.html

Artificial pegs are not reality--they are artificial. Reality continues on without them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

If no one in the world is willing to except dolla bills tomorrow as having value, (you know like china did), who has something to trade of value?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
"The price of gold had been fixed at $35 an ounce since the Roosevelt administration. But the growing U.S. balance-of-payments deficit meant that foreign governments were accumulating large amounts of dollars -- in aggregate volume far exceeding the U.S. government's stock of gold. These governments, or their central banks, could show up at any time at the "gold window" of the U.S. Treasury and insist on trading in their dollars for gold, which would precipitate a run. The issue was not theoretical. In the second week of August 1971, the British ambassador turned up at the Treasury Department to request that $3 billion be converted into gold. With inflation rising, the clamor to do something was mounting in both political circles and the press." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_nixongold.html

Artificial pegs are not reality--they are artificial. Reality continues on without them.

This thread is about the stock market. Start your own thread to debate monetary policy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

If no one in the world is willing to except dolla bills tomorrow as having value, (you know like china did), who has something to trade of value?

Yet they ARE willing--in fact, the dollar and interest on Treasury securities are both up.

And they will still tomorrow, because monetary systems are backed by a country's resources and production--ours is a fifth of the entire world's economy. Changing to gold doesn't help--it hurts by covering real value (which is what sunk Greece).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
"The price of gold had been fixed at $35 an ounce since the Roosevelt administration. But the growing U.S. balance-of-payments deficit meant that foreign governments were accumulating large amounts of dollars -- in aggregate volume far exceeding the U.S. government's stock of gold. These governments, or their central banks, could show up at any time at the "gold window" of the U.S. Treasury and insist on trading in their dollars for gold, which would precipitate a run. The issue was not theoretical. In the second week of August 1971, the British ambassador turned up at the Treasury Department to request that $3 billion be converted into gold. With inflation rising, the clamor to do something was mounting in both political circles and the press." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_nixongold.html

Artificial pegs are not reality--they are artificial. Reality continues on without them.

This thread is about the stock market. Start your own thread to debate monetary policy.

quote:

the value of the gold stays the same

quote:

Anyone with a brain in their ass knows