On Oct 2, 10:33*pm, Nickname unavailable wrote:
On Oct 2, 11:54*pm, RHF wrote:

*i realize that this is most probably a waste of time. your type, are
almost un-educational. as mussolini stated, fascism should be renamed
corporatism.

http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/chpt1.htm

What Fascism Is & Isn't

No other word causes so much misunderstanding, confusion, and heated
debate in politics than fascism. The term has been applied to many
individuals such as McCarthy, Hoover, and others. It is frequently
used to describe government policies and government themselves, often
incorrectly. What then is fascism exactly? Webster's Dictionary
defines it as: "A government system marked by a centralized
dictatorship, stringent socioeconomic controls and belligerent
nationalism." But the author takes exception with that definition. At
best, the definition is vague and abstract. Nor does the definition
seem capable of taking into all forms of fascism.
There is a resurgent, widespread attempt by the far right to label
fascism as a form of socialism. Fredrick von Hayek was the first to
attempt labeling the Nazis as socialists in his book The Road to
Serfdom published in 1944.70 The hard right quickly adopted it, as it
allowed the hard right to escape the charges that they had much in
common with the Nazis.2 Such endeavors are not only silly, but
dishonest as well and represent an attempt by the far right to
distance themselves for their earlier support of Hitler.
Hayek's book is based on two erroneous assumptions from the very
beginning. He first assumes that fascism and communism are one and the
same, as they are both totalitarian systems. This makes about as much
sense as calling a maple tree a pine tree because both are trees. His
second erroneous assumption lays in his belief that only socialism or
liberalism leads to totalitarian systems. In fact, all political
systems can lead to totalitarian systems and all political systems are
inherently unstable, as is any system created by man.
From there, Hayek takes severe liberties with history. For instance,
he goes on to claim that by deliberate policy the United States by
allowed the growth of cartels and syndicates after 1878.71 Indeed this
date and time period is significant, but not for a move towards
socialism or liberalism. Rather, it's the opposite a move towards
fascism and corporate rule. Even a reader with a rudimentary knowledge
of American history would recognize this time frame as the beginning
of the robber baron era and laissez faire economics, precisely the
type of economic policy Hayek holds in utmost esteem.
*Hayek offers little proof to support his conclusions; in fact the
book is devoid of any proof or even examples to support his findings.
The book degenerates into an argument based upon unsubstantiated
assertion. He argues against the nation state and proposes a
supernational authority or world federation made up of the financial
elite. In essence, Hayek proposes a world made up of sovereign
corporations accountable to no one. Not only did Hayek take severe
liberties with American history, he ignored the very nature of fascism
in Germany and Italy.
In various speeches made shortly after the March on Rome, Mussolini
stated, "We must take from state authority those functions for which
it is incompetent and which it performs badly... I believe the state
should renounce its economic functions, especially those carried out
through monopolies, because the state is incompetent in such
matters... We must put an end to state railways, state postal service
and state insurance." The state returned large monopolies to the
private sector after returning them to profitability such as the
Consortium of Match Manufactures, privatized the insurance system in
1923, the telephone system in 1925, and many of the public works.
In Germany the Nazis announced they would end nationalization of
private industries when they seized power. In 1932, Hitler returned
control of the Gelsenkirhen company to private hands and in 1936
returned the stock of "United Steel" to private hands. Throughout
1933-1936, the Nazi returned to private hands the control of several
banks: Dresdner, Danat, Commerz and Privatbank, the Deutsche Bank, and
several others. In 1936, the steamship company Deutcher Schiff and
Maschinenbau was returned to the private sector. In 1934, Dr. Schacht,
the Nazi Minister of Economy, gave instructions to hasten the
privatization of municipal enterprises. These enterprises were
especially coveted by the rich industrialists, as they had been
prosperous even during the depression.
Both in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, the tax system was changed to
one favoring business and the wealthy. The Nazis allowed industries to
deduct from their taxable income all sums used to purchase new
equipment. Rich families employing a maid were allowed to count the
maid as a dependent child and reap the tax benefit. In Italy, the
Minister of Finance stated: "We have broken with the practice of
persecuting capital."73
*Such programs, catering to big business and the rich elite, are more
akin to the policies of the Reagan Administration than it is to any
liberal administration including FDR's. Likewise, it was the rich
industrialists that were behind the fascist movement in the United
States during the 1930s. Thus it is no surprise that the right wing
attempts to try and label fascism as socialism in trying to distance
themselves from their previous support of fascism.
Perhaps the only redeeming feature in Hayek's book is his
acknowledgement of environmental problems.72 Indeed this is
significant, considering the book was first published in the 1940s,
long before the birth of the environmental movement. Hayek readily
acknowledges the problem of industrial pollution and the harmful
effects of deforestation, yet he stops short of any meaningful
solution. Instead of offering a viable solution Hayek condemns
government regulation and would allow market forces to provide the
solution. However, it was these same market forces that produced the
problem. We have plenty of proof of such a fool hearty approach both
here and globally. As late as the 1970s rivers caught fire in the
United States, cities were smog stricken and harmful pollutants were
damaging the environment world wide. Today we face the problems of
global warming and ozone depletion, and the problem of environmental
estrogens, which has the potential of being even more threatening than
both global warming and ozone depletion.
But perhaps the most damning of all evidence that Hayek was dead wrong
comes from the implementation of an economic system based on his
beliefs. Hayek later taught at the University of Chicago, the same
university that trained the "Boys from Chicago" who were the economic
brains behind the fascist regime of Pinochet in Chile. There is no
question in the matter that under Pinochet, Chile was indeed fascist.
More alarming, Hayek is an idol to several top-level officials in the
George W. Bush administration. They are dangerous close to imposing a
fascist style economy on the United States.
In order to dispel the myth of the Nazis being socialists we need to
first define socialism. Socialism is rigidly defined as an economic
system in which the workers own the means of production and
distribution of goods. A more relaxed definition would be simply that
the workers maintain political control over the production and
distribution of goods. Even using the more relaxed definition of
socialism, the Nazis can not be labeled as socialists as there simply
was no worker control over the production or distribution of goods in
Nazi Germany. In fact, the Nazis outlawed legitimate labor unions. In
place of the original unions, the Nazis implemented quasi-like unions
that were controlled by the industrialists. In a déjà vu manner, the
Republican Party has recently tried to enact a similar measure,
conferring legal status on worker groups controlled by corporations.
Some writers and historians have argued that you cannot have fascism
without corporatism, as the corporate power structure has much in
common with fascism. During the period preceding the outbreak of WWII
it was common to refer to fascism as corporatism in polite English
society.
More recently others have tried to define fascism as the "Third Way",
in the sense that it borrowed ideas from both capitalism and
socialism. The basic philosophy behind the "Third Way" incorrectly
labels any regulations or government controls over businesses as
socialism; essentially it's just a restatement of syndicalism. Such
nonsense should be rejected whole heartily. It again represents an
attempt to distance the right from their support of Hitler in the
1930s and ignores that the basis of the German economy under Hitler
was a capitalist system where the means of production remained in
private hands. Further, following the logic of the "Third Way," one
would have to label all capitalistic systems as "Third Way," for
throughout history there has never been a pure capitalistic system. A
pure capitalist economy is so inherently and fatally flawed that it's
never even been tried. But that is to be expected for any system that
awards the winner with all the eggs. Nor has there been a pure
socialistic system. Human greed simply prevents it.
The dangers of such nonsense can be illustrated with the following
quote taken from a Baptists fundamentalist's web page in their
labeling of the Japanese economy as fascist: However, Fascism is an
economic term, denoting the type of economy where the Means of
Production [factories, companies] and the ownership of raw materials
[mines, oil wells] remains in the hands of private individuals, but
where the government intervenes to determine how many competitors will
be allowed to produce the same thing, how much is produced, and what
prices may be charged.1
Here it can be seen that the term fascism has been clearly misapplied.
This description could past for the economic ...

read more »

On Oct 2, 11:54*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 10/2/2010 9:17 PM, RHF wrote:

...
yes there are times when gold has little or no value
-wrt- the necessities of day to day survival ~ RHF
* .
* .

Whenever gold has no value, only food, shelter, water, clothes, etc.
will continue to have value. *But as soon as their is a desire for
money, gold is king.


cash is king today. its in shortage. people want it. if gold was so
desirable, all extra stocks would be exhausted by now.

*Not only that, but you can bury gold for an
eternity and dig it back up and spend it. *Paper money will deteriorate
rather quickly ... again, gold is king.



how many people are willing to bury their gold for decades cash is
king in a deflating economy.


But, I suspect you waste your time ... this idiot only argues for the
sake of "being right" ... it has no bearing on if what he says is even
close to correct, or not.



that still does not refute what i have been saying. gold is
deflationary in nature, gold has never stopped a currency from being
debased, gold has never stopped inflation, gold and silver have caused
inflation, gold can make a recession, into a depression. cash is in
shortage right now, cash is king, the owners of gold, will gladly sell
you their gold, for your worthless little pieces of green paper, in a
deflating economy, you might be forced into selling your over priced
assets(gold), at a reduced price to raise scarce cash to pay your
bills. refute them.

Regards,
JS

On Oct 2, 10:33*pm, Nickname unavailable wrote:
- i realize that this is most probably a waste of time.
- your type, are almost un-educational.
- as mussolini stated, fascism should be renamed
- corporatism.


- = NnUa = - "your {my} type" & "un-educational"
You Have Entered the "Arguing with Idiots" Zone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arguing_with_Idiots
There is a sign post up ahead . . .
-and-it-reads- "You Are An Idiot !"
-for- Arguing with someone that you reasonably
believe to be a Total and Complete I D I O T [.]

On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 08:03:10 -0700 (PDT), "Chas. Chan"
wrote:

Fascism is a form of government which centers all power [House, Senate
and Judiciary] in a single party [Liberal Fascist Democrats] headed by
an absolute dictater

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

On Oct 3, 9:15*am, John Smith wrote:
On 10/2/2010 10:28 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...
* it sure is. the owners of gold will gladly sell you their gold for
little green pieces of paper. now who is the fool

That is probably how children see things, I will give you that.


are you saying that children can identify a scam quicker than a adult
can

*But no,
the owners of gold, which want to buy something, will trade you a
portion of their gold for dollars so they can go get a home, a car, a
yacht, an island, an airplane, etc.



BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! gold is
not money. you figured it out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now what
happens when money is in short supply? why, the owners of assets sell
said assets, to raise scarce cash to pay bills. and they snicker at
those who over pay for a asset in deflationary times. like gold bugs,
who are being goosed into over paying for a commodity used in
electronics and jewelery.


The gold mines will gladly sell you gold, it is their business.


then little green pieces of paper, mean more to them than gold

*Gold,
for the most part, stays in places such as fort knox (yeah, I know, it
is empty, or else someone elses gold is stored there) or the large
holdings in china, middle east, etc. in large storage areas. *Just like
people with money, people with gold have to trade part of their wealth
for things they purchase. *People also go broke on large gambles, and
supplies of gold come onto the market.


you are making my arguments, thank you so very much.


Gold is a way to secure and hold wealth in a stable form, where years,
decades, centuries, etc. it can be liquidated and spent and used.



that is not true. it can hold wealth sometimes, sometimes it leads to
massive wealth loss. and it pays no income or dividends, its a very
poor way to hold wealth. anyone who bought gold in the early 80's can
testify to that.

this article says it all, you still have not beaten a checking
account.

gold is a lousy investment, cash is scare in a deflating economy, cash
is king:since 1980:Gold Can’t Beat Checking Accounts 30 Years After
Peak, average U.S. checking account rose at least 92 percent. On an
inflation-adjusted basis, gold investors are still 79 percent away
from getting their money back



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...xBrQ9JTg&pos=3


Gold Can’t Beat Checking Accounts 30 Years After Peak (Update1)


By Nicholas Larkin and Millie Munshi

Dec. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Gold’s best year in three decades has yet to
match the returns of an interest-bearing checking account for anyone
who bought the most malleable of metals coveted for at least 5,000
years during the last peak in January, 1980.
Investors who paid $850 an ounce back then earned 44 percent as gold
reached a record $1,226.56 on Dec. 3 in London. The Standard & Poor’s
500 stock index produced a 22-fold return with dividends reinvested,
Treasuries rose 11-fold and cash in the average U.S. checking account
rose at least 92 percent. On an inflation-adjusted basis, gold
investors are still 79 percent away from getting their money back.
“You give up a lot of return for the privilege of sleeping well at
night,” said James Paulsen, who oversees about $375 billion as chief
investment strategist at Wells Capital Management in Minneapolis. “If
the world falls into an abyss, gold could be a store of value. There
is some merit in that, but you can end up holding too much gold
waiting for the world to end. From my experience, the world has not
ended yet.”
While gold’s nine-year bull market is attracting hedge-fund managers
John Paulson, Paul Tudor Jones and David Einhorn, strategists and fund
managers at Barclays Plc, HSBC Holdings Plc, SCM Advisors LLC and
Brinker Capital Inc. say buy-and-hold investors shouldn’t always own
bullion. The accumulation of gold is part of a record $60 billion
Barclays estimates will flow into commodities this year.
Hoarding Bullion
The SPDR Gold Trust, the biggest exchange-traded fund backed by
bullion, has amassed more metal than Switzerland’s central bank,
spurred by a plunging dollar and concern that the at least $12
trillion of government spending to lift economies out of the worst
global recession since World War II will spur inflation. The collapse
of U.S. real estate in 2007 froze credit markets and left the world’s
biggest financial companies with $1.72 trillion of losses and
writedowns, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
The U.S. Mint suspended production last month of some American Eagle
coins made from precious metals because of depleted inventories. The
U.K.’s Royal Mint more than quadrupled production of gold coins in the
third quarter. Harrods Ltd., the London department store, began
selling gold bars and coins for the first time in October.
Those sales contributed to a 30 percent rally in gold this year,
beating the 25 percent gain in the S&P 500, with dividends reinvested,
and a 2.4 percent drop in Treasuries. Investors bought gold as the
U.S. economy, the world’s biggest, shrank 3.8 percent in the 12 months
ended in June, the worst performance in seven decades. Gross domestic
product expanded at a 2.8 percent annual rate in the third quarter.
Longest Winning Streak
A weakening dollar also contributed to bullion’s longest winning
streak since at least 1948. The U.S. Dollar Index, a measure against
six counterparts, dropped in six of the last eight years, including a
6.6 percent decline in 2009, bolstering demand for a hedge. Gold fell
1.6 percent to $1,143 an ounce by 11:08 a.m. in London. Before today,
the metal had risen 32 percent this year, the most since 1979.
Buy-and-hold investors may not have done so well. One dollar put into
a U.S. checking account in 1983 would be worth at least $1.92 today,
based on annual average interest rates from Bankrate.com. The Federal
Reserve target rate from 1980 to 1982 was 8.5 percent to 20 percent.
Banks were paying 5 percent on the accounts in January 1981, according
to a report in the New York Times.
Dividends Reinvested
The S&P 500 returned 2,182 percent from the beginning of 1980 through
the end of the third quarter this year, according to data compiled by
Bloomberg. The calculation assumes dividends reinvested on a gross
basis. Treasuries returned 1,089 percent through the beginning of this
month, according to Merrill Lynch’s Treasury Master Index.
“Gold is a useless asset to hold long term,” said Charles Morris, who
manages more than $2 billion at HSBC Global Asset Management’s
Absolute Return fund in London. “I’m not a gold bug who believes that
you want to own this thing in your portfolio at all times. We should
own it when the going is good, and the going right now is great.”
Those who bought gold when it reached a two-decade low of $251.95 in
August 1999 have seen a 387 percent return, more than four times the
82 percent gain in Treasuries. An investment in the S&P 500 lost 0.4
percent through the end of last month. Interest on checking accounts
shrank to 0.14 percent this year from 0.89 percent in 1999.
Since the S&P 500 peaked in October 2007, investors in the index lost
25 percent, holders of Treasuries made 16 percent and gold buyers are
up 64 percent.
‘Very Conservative Investments’
“There are people that just stayed in very conservative investments in
cash and government bonds,” said Larry Hatheway, global head of asset
allocation at UBS AG in London, who recommends investors hold about 1
percent of their assets in bullion. “Surely they would have been a lot
better off being in gold.”
Buying bullion at $35 when U.S. President Richard Nixon abandoned the
gold standard in 1971 would have given a 35-fold return, about the
same performance as the S&P 500.
Gold will average $1,070 next year, according to the median in a
Bloomberg survey of 19 analysts. The metal may jump to $2,000 in the
next five years, said HSBC’s Morris. Ian Henderson, manager of $5
billion at JPMorgan Chase & Co., said he’s adding to his gold-related
holdings because of “the momentum behind it.” Jim Rogers, the investor
who predicted the start of the commodities rally in 1999, has said
bullion will surge to at least $2,000 over the next decade.
Touradji Capital
“Our sense is that this bubble is more at the beginning stages than on
the brink of collapse,” said Thomas Wilson, head of the institutional
and private client group at Brinker Capital in Berwyn, Pennsylvania,
which manages about $8.5 billion.
Touradji Capital Management LP, the New York hedge fund founded by
Paul Touradji, bought 2.23 million shares of Barrick Gold Corp., the
world’s biggest producer, during the third quarter, according to a
Nov. 13 filing with regulators. The stake, Touradji’s biggest equity
holding, is worth $95 million.
Paulson & Co., the hedge-fund firm run by billionaire Paulson, will
start a gold fund on Jan. 1 investing in mining companies and bullion-
related derivatives, according to a person familiar with the plan.
Einhorn, who runs New York-based Greenlight Capital Inc., told a
presentation in New York in October that he’s buying gold to bet
against the dollar.
Paul Tudor Jones, in an Oct. 15 letter to clients of his Tudor
Investment Corp., said gold is “just an asset that, like everything
else in life, has its time and place. And now is that time.”
Net Gold Buyers
Central banks will become net buyers of gold this year for the first
time since 1988, according to New York-based researcher CPM Group.
India, China, Russia, Sri Lanka and Mauritius have all added to their
reserves.
Gold should be held when governments cease to function and currencies
are worthless, or when inflation is surging, said Brian Nick, a New
York-based investment strategist at Barclays Wealth, which manages
$221 billion. He doesn’t recommend increasing gold holdings, which are
a “very small” part of commodity allocations.
Inflation has yet to accelerate. U.S. consumer prices will rise 2
percent next year, the smallest expansion since 2002, according to the
median estimate of 63 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Prices will
shrink 0.4 percent this year.
‘Knee-Jerk Reaction’
“People have this knee-jerk reaction and say that you want gold as a
hedge against inflation,” said Maxwell Bublitz, who helps oversee $3.5
billion as the chief strategist at San Francisco-based SCM Advisors
LLC and recommends investors hold no more than 5 percent of their
assets in the metal. “But the history of gold in regard to inflation
shows that it’s not a great hedge.”
Investors seeking to protect themselves against inflation should buy
commodities, which are cheaper than gold, said Wells Capital’s
Paulsen. Copper, after more than doubling this year, is still 28
percent away from the record $8,940 a metric ton reached in July 2008.
“Theoretically, it does have a spot in portfolios, a small one,”
Bublitz said. “You’re probably going to get entry points that are a
lot better than where gold is now.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Nicholas Larkin at
; Millie Munshi in New York at
.
Last Updated: December 7, 2009 06:48 EST


You logic of "people with gold would hang on to their gold" is only as
valid as "people with dollars would hang on to their dollars." *Both of
these statements are correct, you only get gold or dollars when they are
spent ...



but cash is king in a deflating economy, and you may have to sell
your gold at a reduced price, to raise scarce cash to pay your bills.
we are not facing hyper-inflation at the moment, and have not been
facing it for a couple of years now. in fact, we are facing deflation.
in deflation, cash is scarce, and cash is king. what is everybody
short of right now, well, its cash. so spend your scarce cash on gold.

Regards,
JS

On Oct 3, 9:18*am, John Smith wrote:
On 10/2/2010 10:27 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...
* explain away the private sector screwing people over gold. gold is a
impossible way to *back a modern economy. its deflationary in nature.
no country is willing to go back to the gold standard and starve.

Gold works just as any other currency or medium of exchange. *You can
scam people with stocks, bonds, dollars, etc. *Naturally, you can do it
with gold also ...



then its not a good way to back money then, if it can be a scam. you
just helped me blow away the gold backed money scam, thank you.

Truth is, the wealthy have large holding of gold and other valuable
metals. *They don't wish the slaves to have them. *You are one of those
slaves who just doesn't realize the game ...



in a free market economy, where the wealthy are vastly under taxed,
the wealthy will take their money out of productive activities that
they were forced into by a progressive tax, and put said money in non-
productive things such as antiques and other things that they think
will hold value in a depression. of course that is the wrong way to do
things, and invites a depression, and antiques and other so-called
hedges that were, or still are in a bubble due to under taxation,
plummet. just look at the antique artwork these days, the bubbles
popped, and prices have deflated.
the same will happen to gold and other commodities sooner or later.
cash will become even more scarce, and those commodities will have to
be sold at fire sale pieces to raise scarce cash to pay bills.


Regards,
JS

On Oct 3, 9:28*am, John Smith wrote:
On 10/2/2010 10:19 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...
* still does not refute a thing. and the last 30 years of thinking is
what has ruined america.

That is because you will never see anything as a valid repudiation of
the things you wish to believe. *That is only obivious ... and the last
30 to 40 years of the present system is what has ruined America.


what has ruined america is the free market cult.

*And,
that system has been kept in operation by BOTH republi-crats and
demo-cans; *It will remain so ... perhaps Ron Paul, or such a man with
such beliefs can change things. *But, the entrenched powers which be are
so abhorrent to change which would free the financially enslaved will
never allow that. *Even if they must bring down many more buildings,
assassinate many more people, cause many more wars, steal more oil, sell
more drugs, etc., etc.


the free market is a feverish cult, like all cults, reality will
never trump ideology.


Regards,
JS

On Oct 3, 9:34*am, John Smith wrote:
On 10/2/2010 10:18 PM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...
* that does not refute one thing i have proven. also,i have been active
on alt.politics.economics for well over a decade and a half.

Here we go, again ... as I stated, nothing will ever be good enough to
repudiate anything you believe.


not really, i am a liberal, liberals are open minded. i own gold, i
did back in the early 1970's. but after many years of watching the
gold market. i have come to the conclusion that its really a poor
investment. that investment is being driven by fear, the same fear
that conservatives are so successful with the ignorant. i hope gold
goes thru the roof, then i will sell mine that i bought almost 40
years ago. otherwise, its been a really poor investment, a real money
loser. like any other bubble, yes gold is in a massive bubble right
now. you have to be lucky enough to get out when the getting is good.

*You have chosen to believe what you
choose to believe and that is that ... I accept that, indeed, don't feel
alone. *How do you think we got here, why do you think we are staying
here, and why do you think many believe we will be here in the future?
It is because many have been brain washed like you and no amount of
sanity, logic and reason will dislodge the mind-screwing which has been
done by the system ... they haven't spent trillions on plans which don't
work!



i have a long history of understanding economics.


Regards,
JS

On 10/3/2010 9:13 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...
are you saying that children can identify a scam quicker than a adult
can


NO! I am saying a child can recognize reason and logic quicker than YOU
can ...

...
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! gold is
not money. you figured it out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now what
happens when money is in short supply? why, the owners of assets sell
said assets, to raise scarce cash to pay bills. and they snicker at
those who over pay for a asset in deflationary times. like gold bugs,
who are being goosed into over paying for a commodity used in
electronics and jewelery.


Gold = money. Indeed, there can be no money without precious metals or
things of value. The money only represents the gold. You can back
money with other things, those other things just don't have a lifespan
of eternity ... indeed, you can back money with a promise ... and that
promise can have a very short lifespan, indeed!

...
then little green pieces of paper, mean more to them than gold


That logic is why I consider you insane ... and a damn good example at that!

Gold,
for the most part, stays in places such as fort knox (yeah, I know, it
is empty, or else someone elses gold is stored there) or the large
holdings in china, middle east, etc. in large storage areas. Just like
people with money, people with gold have to trade part of their wealth
for things they purchase. People also go broke on large gambles, and
supplies of gold come onto the market.


you are making my arguments, thank you so very much.


Indeed, at least you agree with me here ...


Gold is a way to secure and hold wealth in a stable form, where years,
decades, centuries, etc. it can be liquidated and spent and used.



that is not true. it can hold wealth sometimes, sometimes it leads to
massive wealth loss. and it pays no income or dividends, its a very
poor way to hold wealth. anyone who bought gold in the early 80's can
testify to that.


You attempt to make gold and the actions and transactions surrounding
gold one and the same ... they are not ... gold is gold ... paper is
paper ... scams are scams ... other than money being a representation of
gold, a heavy substance hard to carry, gold has little to do with scams
which can be created to steal wealth or the fact a dollar actual worth
is the paper and ink ...

this article says it all, you still have not beaten a checking
account.

gold is a lousy investment, cash is scare in a deflating economy, cash
is king:since 1980:Gold Can’t Beat Checking Accounts 30 Years After
Peak, average U.S. checking account rose at least 92 percent. On an
inflation-adjusted basis, gold investors are still 79 percent away
from getting their money back


Gold is an excellent investment to hold wealth in a stable form, indeed,
only precious metals will work for that. An OZ of gold in 1849 would
buy a very nice suit, today in 2010 it still will buy that very nice
suit ... indeed, it will even buy a nicer suit today. A $20 bill might
buy you a polyester tie to go with that suit (and look tacky!)

...

All the rest of your crap is mainly obfuscation meant to tire one out
and you win by "the last man standing rule." Lose that childs' ploy to
be taken seriously ... a fool needs a book to describe his point(s), a
wiseman a paragraph ...

Regards,
JS

On 10/3/2010 9:20 AM, Nickname unavailable wrote:

...

More tiring obfuscation and desperation ...

Truth is, dig up an old Roman gold coin, it will still hold near the
same value it had back then ... dig up the first gold coin ever created,
it will still hold near the value it was given then.

You won't be digging up any dollars from then ... but it you did manage,
they would only have a collectors value ... they financial worth would
be ZERO!

Regards,
JS