Posted on 07/06/2006 6:40:55 AM PDT by Hydroshock
this is why Bush brought Paulson on at U.S. Treasury - to "manage" the $USD fall in order to try and avoid this financial meltdown. Bush knows Bernanke was a mistake.
I know you are, but what am I?
You cherry pick one short period which fits your theory and ignore the rest.
How about something a little more recent?
Under a gold standard, we'd have had severe deflation (over 30%) from January until mid-May and severe inflation (over 20%) from mid-May until mid-June. Yeah, that sounds more stable than an unbacked dollar. LOL!
You show me a chart with the price of gold up one hundred dollars an ounce over a few months and you use that to indict gold for instability? You are becoming very tiresome, go and play with the other children.
The booming housing markets that we have just seen were and are products of past negative real interest rates. Interest rates are rising and for very good reasons. Rising real interest rates increase the cost of buying a house. The resulting price changes in housing must therefore be, in aggregate, down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I can't imagine any way that you could be wrong on this but you could have mentioned that along with negative real interest rates that loan requirements have been dropped drastically, I see posts to the effect that the norm is to buy a house costing five years gross income, this would have been considered insanity forty years ago. Also there is no way that housing prices can continue indefinitely to rise faster than incomes.
Breast enhancement surgery can easily be moved from the debt to the asset column, if properly promoted.
BUMP for Dave Ramsey. His baby steps helped me see the light and get out of all debt except the house (working on that step but it'll take a while).
Actually, that was a rise of over $200 an ounce in 6 months and a drop of $140 in a month. I guess in your world a 50% jump in 6 months and a 20% drop in 1 month is a sign of gold's stability? LOL! Maybe you can show me a time where our fiat money showed such giant swings in value?
You are becoming very tiresome, go and play with the other children.
Only if you promise to go play with the rest of the senile goldbugs.
Senile goldbugs at least have better sense than to judge the value of gold by the fluctuations of a paper dollar. Gold is fluctuating in terms of the dollar because it is once again returning to its true value which it has not been allowed to do because of international manipulations. The gold bubble in 82 came about precisely because the dollar was no longer backed by gold and the right to own gold had been restored to the people after a long period in which they were forbidden to own gold bullion. You are reversing cause and effect to justify your position. Somehow I think you are aware of this but don't want to admit it. I suspect that if you had to choose between holding an ounce of gold for forty years with no interest earned or holding the equivalent in paper dollars for the same time with no interest earned you would have sense enough to choose the gold. Don't bother replying with some non-sequitor such as that you wouldn't hold a dollar without earning something on it. If you bother to reply at all deal with what I said and not what you wish to make of it.
Right, because gold doesn't fluctuate!
Gold is fluctuating in terms of the dollar because it is once again returning to its true value which it has not been allowed to do because of international manipulations.
Wow, international manipulations. How can it be manipulated if it is stable?
I suspect that if you had to choose between holding an ounce of gold for forty years with no interest earned or holding the equivalent in paper dollars for the same time with no interest earned you would have sense enough to choose the gold.
Holding paper dollars for 40 years with no interest is just as stupid as claiming that gold is the only real store of value.
Holding paper dollars for 40 years with no interest is just as stupid as claiming that gold is the only real store of value.
...........................................................
I knew you wouldn't deal directly with what I said, you couldn't possibly be stupid enough to hold the paper dollars, hell even if I grant you the prospect of drawing interest and you pay taxes on the interest you would still come out in the hole and you know it.
You said gold was more stable than the dollar. I showed you a gold chart from this year that shows you were wrong. No luck finding a time frame where the US dollar fluctuated as much as gold? I didn't think so.
I knew you wouldn't deal directly with what I said
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And you still haven't, or are you just incapable of understanding what I said?
I don't understand what your point is. Yes, in 1966 one ounce of gold was a better purchase (oh, right, you couldn't) than holding $35 with no interest until now.
In 1980, one ounce of gold was a worse purchase than holding $800 with no interest until now.
Buying the S&P 500 index would have beat gold and cash over both those time frames. So, what was your stupid point again? That gold is more stable? I'm still laughing at that one.
OK, I misjudged you, you obviously ARE in fact incapable of understanding me. Goodby.
I understand you perfectly. You believe gold would somehow cure all our problems. You don't understand economics and are allergic to facts.
Goodby.
Run away. You wouldn't want to learn anything. The shock of it could kill you.
Okay, one last attempt, please see if you can wrap your little brain around this and not wander off into something else.
IF I were to offer you the choice of;
1. A free ounce of gold with the understanding that the only thing you could do with it is keep it locked in your safe for forty years at which time you could take it out and do as you pleased or it would go to your descendants if you were deceased or,
2. The equivalent of one ounce of gold in paper dollars at today's gold price with the same stipulation as I made on the ounce of gold above.
If either one were available to you today as a gift which would you take? Forget past history and all that, which would you take? Anyone of normal intelligence should be able to understand the question and give a straight answer, if you insist on clouding the issue I will know that you are simply an evader.
Chances are, inflation would make the gold more valuable than the paper dollars. I would have said the same thing in 1980 and I'd have been wrong. So what is your point? Is there inflation? Yes there is. Is gold a hedge against inflation? Sometimes.
Now, how about answering my question? Are you claiming that inflationary and deflationary swings have been more severe since we left the gold/silver standard?
Now, how about answering my question? Are you claiming that inflationary and deflationary swings have been more severe since we left the gold/silver standard?
Inflationary, yes, I haven't seen a deflation problem yet.
So after all you have said you still admit that you would consider the gold a better bet over a forty year period, interesting but not surprising.
Interesting. Despite all the evils of fiat money, even you admit deflation is no longer an issue. Do you admit that while we were on the gold standard, deflation was a major problem in the US?
We all know that you are buying, and you're just not being honest about it.
You know full well that when you get your check in US dollars that you'll be able to use it to pay your food bill. Just like we all know that the problem with that idiot gold standard was that it never supported an economy where people could eat as well as you can now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.