Centennial Precious Metals, Inc: Serving Gold Coin & Bullion Investors Since 1973 Open for business 6am to 6pm coast to coast!
(Home Page)	(How to Buy Gold)	(Gold Coin Images)	(Daily Market Report)	(Live Gold Price)
(First-time Buyers)	(Gold Discussion)	(ABCs of Gold Book)	(Gold IRA)	(Buy Gold Coins Online)
(European Clientele)	Online Information Packet			(About Us)

Welcome to the USAGOLD Gold Discussion Archives. Looking to buy gold coins and bullion? The archives of this gold discussion forum are a treasure trove of information to educate investors about protecting their wealth through portfolio diversification with private gold ownership. The discussion forum also covers the wider issues of the past, present, and future role of gold in international monetary policy and the dynamics of the modern gold markets. To join the debate request a discussion password here.

The opinions posted by all guests at this forum are expressly their own and do not necessarily represent the views of the management or staff of USAGOLD - Centennial Precious Metals. The hosting of this forum shall therefore not be construed as equivalent to endorsement by USAGOLD - Centennial Precious Metals of any of the opinions posted here.

ARCHIVED DISCUSSION FROM 10/22/2000
All times are U.S. Mountain Time

(Yesterday's Discussion.)

Gandalf the White (10/22/00; 23:18:11MT - usagold.com msg#: 39685)
Lesson from ThaiGold
ThaiGold (10/22/00; 22:42:51MT - usagold.com msg#: 39684)
Phantom Rice Merchant
Does This Sound Familiar.?.
======
Sawasdee ThaiGold Krup
Di Bot Rian Mak Mak Krup
<;-)


ThaiGold (10/22/00; 22:42:51MT - usagold.com msg#: 39684)
Phantom Rice Merchant
Does This Sound Familiar.?.
==============================================================
Once upon a time, far far away, in a Southeast Asian village,
there was a small open air marketplace. Local farmers would
bring their harvested crops and handcrafted items there for
sale daily on their little cubicle tables and mats. Each had
over the years, earned enough to have a small truck. One was
painted Red. The other was painted Blue. They drove in from
the North. Where the rice paddies were located, their homes.

For years, these two farmers setup their two competing tables
for their bags of Thai Sweet Rice. Each usually brought about
50 bags of rice. And each posted his price on a little sign
atop his own stall's pile of rice bags.

As the day wore on, each farmer would glance over at the other
farmer's sign and it's dwindling pile of rice. And each would
adjust/re-write his own price to be a tiny bit lower than
the competitor's price. The prices fluctuated, mostly downward
until by the end of the day, each farmer had sold all of his
rice. At which time each closed up and went home in their trucks.

Then one day a funny thing happend. A newcomer came to the
marketplace, on a bicycle. No truck. And he proceeded to setup
his sales-mat nearby the other two rice merchants. He placed
only a single bag of his example Thai Sweet Rice upon his mat.
It was of identical quantity and quality as the other farmer's
50 bag stacks.

Then, to their amazement, this newcomer placed a sign upon his
otherwise empty mat: "Rice for Sale -- Lowest Price Guaranteed --
U-Pickup at My Warehouse Tonight".

And as an initial price, he'd glance at the other two farmer's
signs, then write his own price in big numerals, 10 Baht *lower*.

Curious shoppers, couldn't resist his low price and upon examining
his single rice bag's quality and taste, would happily place an
order with the newcomer for one or two bags, whatever they had
intended to purchase that day. Each customer received a "chit"
from the newcomer, guaranteeing availability, later that night,
at his nearby "warehouse" at an address just south of town.

As the day wore on, the two competitor farmer's kept re-pricing
thier own stacks of rice lower and lower. To try to lure the
customers back to their still stacked stalls. But they had
virtually no customers. Everyone was buying instead, from the
newcomer, and happy as larks walking home with their rice-chits.

For, nomatter how much lower the two farmer's marked down their
own bags of rice, the newcomer always re-priced his to be lowest.

Needless to say, at the end of the day, the two old time farmers
had sold none of their rice. Yet the newcomer had sold 100 bags
of his "example rice" and had alot of Baht to show for it. Then
the newcomer closed up shop and rode out of town on his bicycle
an hour before the other two farmers normally would close.

Relieved that this newcomer had departed, the hapless oldtimers
remained at their rice-stacked stalls hoping against hope that
a few more customers might come late to buy at-least some of their
piled-high leftover un-sold rice.

And fortunatly, a customer did showup.!. With a cute Yellow truck.
And this customer first went to one of the two farmers and looked
at his by-now rock-bottom re-priced sign. He then bought all of
that farmer's unsold (50) bags of rice. The farmer was delighted,
and even helped to load the bags onto the Yellow truck. Then that
farmer went home.

Next, the Yellow truck customer went to the remaining farmer's
stall and was pleaded-with to purchase all of his unsold bags
of rice too. And at an equal or sometimes even lower price. And
since this seemed fair and acceptable, the consumer proceeded to
purchase those 50 bags as well. And the farmer was delighted to
assist in loading them upon the Yellow truck. And went home.

The Yellow truck departed as well, but towards the South.

In the cool of the evening, one by one, the customers who'd
bought individual bags of "chit-rice" showed up at the warehouse
and were greeted pleasantly by the newcomer. Each presented his
chit and received promptly and courteously a full bag of rice
of the identical quality and quantity they had seen earlier as
his "example" bag in the marketplace. One hundred chit-buyers
each received their rice and happily went on their merry way.

A satisfied customer, spreads the news to others. And soon, the
newcomer had a regular clientel each day in the marketplace.

And each day, the same ritual ensued. The hapless competitor
farmers kept marking down their unsold rice and by the end of
each fruitless day, were always amazed and relieved to see the
miraculous arrival of the mysterious Yellow truck arrive to
purchase all their unsold bags.

As weeks progressed, the newcomer's business grew, and soon he
was selling 300 chit-bags of rice daily, at guaranteed lowest
prices. But the two competing farmers were not disturbed much
by this. Because, fortunately for them, each day the mysterious
Yellow truck buyer bought up all their unsold rice. And indeed,
even arranged for each farmer to bring 150 bags of rice each day
instead of their usual 50 bags each. Which they were delighted
to do, even if they only got a rock-bottom and ever-lower price.

After one year of this brinkmanship, one of the farmers told
the Yellow truck that he wouldn't be bringing anymore rice to
the marketplace. He just couldn't afford to grow and harvest it
any longer at such dismal prices. He would sell his rice farm and
move away to Bangkok. At a meager price too, as he no longer cared.

Upon hearing this, the Yellow truck buyer offered to buy his rice
farm from him. And the farmer agreed. And did so. But the Yellow
trucker knew nothing about rice farming. Instead he just let the
farm go fallow. Meanwhile he was able to get the remaining rice
farmer to bring a full 300 bags of rice daily, to makeup the short-
fall. Which he did. For another year.

But by the second year, that farmer too had found rice farming to
be uneconomical at such continued low prices. He would sell his
farm to the Yellow trucker as well. And at a meager price.

Now the Yellow trucker owned two wonderful, but fallow rice farms.

The next day, the newcomer arrived in town at the marketplace
and setup his usual stall mat. But today, his sign was different.
It simply said:
"Rice Workers Wanted -- Minimum Hourly Wage Guaranteed -- Apply here"

Several unemployed rice paddy workers immediately applied, and
soon the newcomer was bringing 300 bags of rice daily into the
marketplace, where he was the lone remaining rice seller.

And his new sign said:
"Highest Quality Thai Sweet Rice -- New Crop -- New Price"
"Buy now -- While Supplies Last"
==============================================================
ThaiGold@OperaMail.Com
===============================================================


Journeyman (10/22/00; 22:00:25MT - usagold.com msg#: 39683)
Great minds & A libertarian takeover @Al Fulchino

Hi Al,

In fact, various Libertarian factions have tried taking over various Republican party chapters quite a few times. A group of California Libertarians had an organized plot for several years, headed originally, if I remember correctly, by Eric Garris and Justin Raimondo. It may yet be going on. As often as not, this didn't work -- although Ron Paul, who gave up his Republican House seat to run for President as a Libertarian, did rejoin the Republican party and got his House seat back.

The problem is at least three fold.

1. The Republican establishment doesn't want to be taken over and, usually controlling the purse strings and party establishment, squashes the attempt in short order.

2. There are few libertarians in relation to the number of Republicans, making a ballot-box putch to take over a chapter very difficult.

3. Even theoretically, libertarians only agree with about half of the usually ignored by Republicans Republican Platform. A friend once asked, "If Democrats are all heart and no brains and Republicans are all brains and no heart, where would libertarians stand." In a rare instance of "brilliant comeback on the spot," I somehow answered, "That's easy: A libertarian is the perfect balance between heart and brain." That is, libertarians believe you have an absolute right to spend BOTH your time AND your money anyway you wish -- free markets and strict respect for civil liberties.

In their washed-out spinned into the ground manner, democrats supposedly believe in civil liberties, but not so much free markets, while Republicans theoretically in free markets, but not so much in civil liberties. So libertarians often claim the Republicans and Democrats are each half right. From this perspective, you can see that theoretically at least, libertarians have as much in common with Democrats as they do with Republicans, which is to say, they agree about half of the time. Theoretically, at least.

If you believe voting will help, the clear choice is Harry Browne.

Regards,
Journeyman


John Doe (10/22/00; 21:59:54MT - usagold.com msg#: 39682)
Farel
I believe your model of America is basically correct. At the highest levels, America IS a fascist state. Although it is often advertised as a business-government "partnership", it is nothing of the sort. The corporations are in charge.

However, at a secondary level, the corporations request, allow, or perhaps permit the government structures to emit and experiment with all manner of socialist schemes. This allows corporations to either gain a persistent consumer base, at best, or perhaps to somehow absolve maintenance responsibilities for the lives they are enslaving. This setup is very much along the original Nazi model. The error the pure socialists (commies) made was to invert the relationship, forcing government control of business. This, as logic would dictate and as history has proven, is a non sequitur, as government is incompetent in conducting "business" in any long term sense.

The request for a "stronger" government to counterbalance the corporations is similar to the Teddy Roosevelt, trust-buster rhetoric at the turn of the century. Although not without merit, this approach contains the real danger of moving the entire system into top-to-bottom socialism, which, to say the least, is no improvement at all.

Since government is among the primary tools of the fascist corporate state. The ideal answer is less government, as this leaves the corporations with much less of a hammer with which to bludgeon the people.

The corporate state, on its own, is essentially a coward. It does not want to do its own dirty work. It much prefers to keep its hands lily-white, operating through proxies. It needs a strong government to point the guns, but not so strong a government that it threatens them, or, in a fit of incongruity, a government that actually enforces our constitutionally-guaranteed, individual rights, thereby empowering the very people for which the government was formed.

My only conclusion is to vote for less government and, by extension, weaker corporations. That means Libertarian, Natural, or maybe Constitution Party candidates, though the latter have a streak of theocracy running through them.

P.S. Isn't it interesting how the media tells us the only third parties of note are Buchanan and Nader? Also, keep in mind that if the public demands a "viable" third party, the corporations will either co-opt the most threatening one and run it aground (a la Reform Party) or invent or cultivate one under their indirect control. Sometimes, it sounds like Ralph is in this second category. Can you imagine the corporate interests raising up a candidate condemning corporate interests, while preaching even more government socialist control? They've done similar things before.

nickel62 (10/22/00; 21:42:56MT - usagold.com msg#: 39681)
Al Fuchino Great comment!
I have always been attracted to the libertarian ideals but have never had any interest in voting for any of their candidates because of the futility of it. Your idea is an excellent one.

I have watched many elections where they can hardly even get a republican to run because the electorate is so overwhelmingly democratic in this area. To splinter it further is a little silly. I do appreciate that the Libertarian party is needed to focus the issues but they could then move under the Republican banner to accomplish more of their goals.

Journeyman (10/22/00; 21:27:06MT - usagold.com msg#: 39680)
Tragedy of the commons @Goldfan

The idea of a "commons" is, unfortunately, while embedded in our archaeological (and probably genetic) past, apparently unworkable, or at least very dangerous in the current highly populated but ideationally primitive or biased era.

As the native americans learned too late, "common property" (or "common wealth" as in "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" for example, etc.) ensures major disadvantage vs. those groups who believe in ownership of land. In the case of the term "commonwealth," it dates back to the time of what was called the "enclosure movement" in Europe and echoed somewhat in the west when ranchers began fencing their land as an antidote to over-grazing, a classic "tragedy of the commons."

I don't pretend to know the answers to this tension, however in the modern current world, "commons" is the foot in the door for government. While government claims they only husband the commons --- someone has to --- not only do they do a poor job because of a lack of adaquate financial motivation, but they actually control "commons" in a way equivalent to owning it outright.

In short, in the long run it turns out to be better if so-called commons are "owned" outright by some private entity that receives gain. Which forests are managed better -- government controlled forests, or Weyerhauser's forests. ANSWER: Weyerhauser's. Who channelized streams, causing incredible environmental damage. ANSWER: The Army Corps of Engineers. Who did a supposedly controlled burn near Los Alamos during high winds? ANSWER: The National Forest Service.

I'm not particularly fond of this situation, but it is what it is.

It seems commons only work in very small (by today's standards) groups. In larger groups, commons serve as an excuse and target for plunder by governments, or at best, inept bureaucratic management in perpetuity.

Regards -- and condolences to us both,
Journeyman

P.S. You interpreted "honest money" as I hoped. I indeed meant gold.


Hugh Akston (10/22/00; 21:16:44MT - usagold.com msg#: 39679)
Why libertarians aren't Republicans
The short answer is: because Republicans aren't. The Republican platform sounds fine, for the most part, but unfortunately has absolutely nothing to do with the behavior of Republican candidates for president (or almost any other office). Since the Republicans refuse to pay any attention to their platform, other than at their conventions, I see no reason why libertarians should take it seriously either.

Al Fulchino (10/22/00; 20:32:36MT - usagold.com msg#: 39678)
Headline: Libertarians Outwit themselves.
All the latest talk here of voting for Nader and any Libertarian candidate amuses me. Especially the latter. No the former does too <smile>. But the latter is the one that puzzles me. Why would such smart people as Libertarians ever leave the Republican Party? While it can be said that the current Republicans themselves have abandoned so many of the principles this country was founded on, they DO have a viable political network.The only one that can at least keep foreign and domestic enemies at bay. And since there are so many races countrywide that have few or even no candidates running for office, why would these smart Libertarians stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Follow me. It would be easier for them to invade the Republican party and establish positions, both elected and non-elected ones, in order to further their agenda. Further, they would be responsible for re-establishing the good name Republican. Perhaps, they are just a bit too elite? Too intellectual?
If, present Libertarians are waiting for the rest of the electorate to catch up to them, they will have to wait for history to beckon a need for them. Instead, they could initiate their usefullness, by recognzing the common ties that they and the Republican party DO have.

Sometimes, some people who have a better idea won't bring it to the market if they feel their customers are too dirty for them.

Journeyman (10/22/00; 20:29:28MT - usagold.com msg#: 39677)
Resoruce allocation @Farfel

"According to the free market crowd, an efficient marketplace is supposed to correct those
aberrations and prevent them from happening. Yet such is not the case, and that is because all
variety of inefficiencies exist in the marketplace, preventing desired results in terms of proper
allocation of capital and resources." -Farfel

I'm trying quick answers for a change. I have little hope they will be adaquate, but here goes anyway.

1. First we don't have a free market. (Greenspan to Ron Paul) So what ever abberations indeed happen can't be blamed on non-existent free markets.

2. Second, it is a perversion of free market principles to say it will correct all inefficiencies and be perfect. It is typically a socialist distortion to make that claim. Free market advocates just say that as imperfect as free markets are, reflecting an imperfect reality, they're better , far better, than any of the alternatives.

3. Third, resources "allocated" to a burn unit, etc. aren't available for, say, firefighting squads -- or aids research.

4. Fourth, it's really easy to decide there was a mis-allocation AFTER the fact. "Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future." -Yogi Berra

5. Fifth, there are two sides to allocation. Who's going to be forced to spend the hours of their lives providing what YOU think they should be allocated for. Who are going to be the involuntary slaves to your perceptions of what should be?

6. Sixth, what is the alterntaive to having the market allocate scarce skills, hours, and money? The government? Look at government's record anywhere. How about how it was done in Russia? The U.S.? The reason is simple: an economy involving the individual tastes of hundreds of millions of people in constant flux is simply too complex for any accurate forecasting, and "central planning," always done by stodgy bureaucrats, simply isn't and can't be nearly nimble enough to compensate and adjust.

Regards,
Journeyman


SHIFTY (10/22/00; 20:21:37MT - usagold.com msg#: 39676)
PPU Periodic Ponzi Update
http://home.columbus.rr.com/rossl/gold.htm
Nasdaq 3,483.14 + Dow 10,226.59 = 13,709.73 divide by 2 = 6,854.86 Ponzi

Up 100.39 Ponzi points


RossL: I just saw the Ponzi coin under the ponzi chart.

I love it!
It should be above the chart.
It says it all.

$hifty

TheStranger (10/22/00; 20:20:45MT - usagold.com msg#: 39675)
And Another Thing...Or Two
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/001021/c.html
I just read the above referenced article, entitled "The Perfect Storm Plays On Wall Street". I think it is worth a read as it shows how much of what we have discussed here at the forum the last couple of years (inflation, weak Euro, etc.)is now showing up in main stream reportage!

There is no question that the U.S. is now headed toward recession. Case in point: Denmark just paired back an aircraft order from the U.S. by 25% because of the strong dollar. But whether we actually have a recession in the near term or not is, of course, a matter of whether the Fed will actually let one happen. That is a political determination more than an economic one. (Gosh, it's complicated being a prognosticator). But recent statements by various Fed members lead me to believe that they are still underestimating the inflation threat. Furthermore, like dentists, they all want a reputation for getting the job done without any pain. Ergo, look for the Fed to retreat this time before the task is complete. Higher inflation, here we come.

***********

Al, thanks. I think I have enough now for a book on posts. Your message will make a nice epilogue.
Dave

Gandalf the White (10/22/00; 20:18:09MT - usagold.com msg#: 39674)
Alchemy 101
Questions, Questions
Lady Leigh asks (10/22/00; 16:28:00MT - usagold.com msg#: 39655) "Gandalf, do you think Trail Guide's going to send in his address for the gold flakes?"
*****ONLY IF he wants them ! <;-)>>
But the Bravehearts Founders addresses come E-mailing in !!
Thanks all.
<;-)

Journeyman (10/22/00; 20:03:25MT - usagold.com msg#: 39673)
Historical fantasy @Farfel, ALL

"What we really need today is NOT less government, rather we need the RIGHT government, and
that would be a government that is responsive to the public's interest, NOT the corporations'
interests." -Farfel

Only problem is that that will rarely happen and never persist. The closest was the original U.S. Maybe Switzerland. The reason it won't persist is that there is simply too much money to be had by the government-industrial complex, gotten at gunpoint or threat of same. Just ask yourself how the fascist amalgam which is today's U.S. got this way given it began so well 224 years ago.

Given that insight, the best we can do for our posterity is to move as far toward no government as we can. That means, if you think voting will help at all, vote Libertarian.

Regards,
Journeyman




Al Fulchino (10/22/00; 19:52:44MT - usagold.com msg#: 39672)
The Stranger
Based on experience, I can suggest a method to remove those fenceposts, if you ever need to. (smile) I, in a younger day thought it would be neat to own a horse for me and the family to ride etc. So I built a modest corral, after building a modest barn. <these horses can be expensive> After a few years, a lot of shoveling and several family members getting pretty sore bones and muscles, we got rid of the fellow. I turned the corral into a play court, but first had to remove the fenceposts. Since mine had to be totally removed and not just chainsawed, and not wanting to do any digging, I simply flooded the spots until the soil was so soggy that I just lifted them out. You might want to buy some garden hose, get your W$J out and smoke a stogie and let them get loose themselves. <smile> That is IF you ever do decide on removing them.

TheStranger (10/22/00; 19:37:01MT - usagold.com msg#: 39671)
Tokyo, Oil , Gold, Cisco and Six Holes
Tokyo is down a little this evening... not following Wall Street higher. Oil is up another thirty-something cents and gold is higher by another 20 cents.

If trouble in the Middle East is an obstacle for the markets, I have a hunch there's plenty more to come.

Barron's ran a very detailed examination of Cisco's books this weekend. The author, a highly respected retired CPA, argues persuasively, and in great detail, that this most sacred of all tech bellweathers uses accounting gimmicks to report earnings when in fact it is losing money. Cisco's PE, with such tricks as seller financing and pooling of interests included, is still somewhere north of 150. But now we are told the company doesn't even have a PE because it doesn't have an E. It will be interesting to see how the crowd reacts tomorrow, but this can't be good news.

**********

I am now the owner of six hard-earned three-foot post holes in my yard. I wondered if it might be smarter just to bury my Philharmonic in one of those holes, but then I realized I would have to dig it up again in a few weeks. Anyway, thanks to all those who advised me on this project. It really was helpful. Tomorrow, it is off to the lumberyard for me.

I hope everybody has a great week!

turkey hunter (10/22/00; 19:29:12MT - usagold.com msg#: 39670)
He Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules
@Canuck
I'm glad you found the site interesting. I've been keeping up with it for around a year now. Jeon Veon is a very informed person. She attends all the conferences of the UN and other NWO meetings. At the end of the article she concludes that the CB's are driving the small countries out of business. Seems like once a 3rd world country gets tangled up with the IMF they really go down hill and have to sell the very assets that pay the bills. A lot of the 3rd world countries are the very producers of gold as well as other materials. But that is how big business works! Drive the little guy out so it can be controlled by just a few. Once just a few have it they make the rules. Have you ever read "The Protecols of the Elders of Zion"? There are 24 protcols and 4-5 times they state that they will have all the gold. They claim that Europe will be the power to be reckoned with. Some claim that it is propaganda but after one reads it as far as I can tell it all has come true. Europe will be the power and they will have all the gold. I wonder if they have been getting the gold these last 20 years.

Turkey Hunter

Cavan Man (10/22/00; 19:24:33MT - usagold.com msg#: 39669)
SteveH
I'll tell you what I think. I hope you get physical.

A gold advocate without physical is liken to a member of the NRA without ammunition for his/her (legal) hobby.

silvercollector (10/22/00; 19:04:58MT - usagold.com msg#: 39668)
Confiscation
If gold rises to $800/oz. would it be confiscated?

No.

If gold rises to $30,000/oz. would it be confiscated?

Yes.

So where is the cut-off ladies and gentlemen?

silvercollector

Canuck (10/22/00; 18:43:17MT - usagold.com msg#: 39667)
@ Turkey Hunter
http://www.womensgroup.org/
Article: He Who Has The Gold Makes The Rules

Excellent article; interesting site.

I will re-read later this week; your thoughts?

ThaiGold has me a little rattled over the week-end, glad I'm
diversifing into AG.

Canuck.

auspec (10/22/00; 18:20:03MT - usagold.com msg#: 39666)
GOLD FLAKES!! Why Didn't I Think Of That?
Hello amply rewarded Fellow Founders,
First the Victory and now the Spoils. Maybe we can get the Wizard to make good on a few of Govt's hollow promises since he is so gracious! You don't think fellow Forum members are going to associate us in their mind with flakes, do you? You know none of them are going to be able to sleep tonight knowing that they missed this once in a lifetime opportunity for FREE GOLD. Green??? Why did they ever doubt???
Regarding housekeeping Sir Peter; it was post #39243 from nickel62 that made you, once again, mention a Hall of Fun. Would like to know your original request #, months ago, if you can come up with it {for posterior sake}. As mentioned, it was not so much youthful exuberance {do you have to be young to be impetuous?} as it was boordom {spelled correctly} that caused the frontal assult. You see, the wife and children were away for 4 days. Apparently zaniness can take on a life of it's own given sufficient opportunity and nutrients.
Cb2- I hope your computer comes back on soon, so you know you are now a {rich} hero. Regular mail may beat E-mail this time.
Regarding all the various contacts with the Castle- this gives new meaning to the term secret diplomacy! Hope they aren't too hacked to take my next {enormous} gold order. Wonder what I can get for a bottle of flakes............NEVER!!!
Fellow Bravehearts, Founding Founder, Most Generous Wizard, Esteemed USA Gold Forum Hosts, Future Entrants into CLHE-HoF, this esteemed place will never again be the same!
Godspeed,
auspec


TheStranger (10/22/00; 18:15:27MT - usagold.com msg#: 39665)
Inflation Update
We are well into earnings season now on Wall Street and one thing is clear. The weakened euro and higher oil prices are messing with results for American multinationals.

Did everybody notice Greenspan's remarks last week about how rising oil prices have not infected general prices yet? To be fair, he then warned that they still may. But, if they haven't yet, then the Fed Chairman might want to ask himself why one corporation after another has lately been reporting a reduction in margins due to higher costs?

By the way, this notion that somehow corporate managers will just keep eating cost increases flies in the face of reason. Were it not for so much distortion in official inflation reports, you can bet we would be seeing even more price increases than we already have. And, believe me, as the weeks tick by, more and more companies are realizing all the talk about how the consumer won't accept higher prices is just silly. Demand pull is what got us in this fix, boys. Just look at debt lebt levels throughout the economy. Look at the trade imbalance. This is where the proof is. Americans can hardly restrain themselves nowadays. Companies which continue to buy this nonsense about consumer resistance are going to have more lowsy earnings reports and still lower stock prices in the months directly ahead.

Almost a year ago, in these pages, I scoffed at the fuel "surcharges" being levied by the various package delivery services. I said then that the "surcharges" would be here to stay and that management at these companies were acting out of timidity because they just couldn't believe the times were actually a-changin'. Well, we haven't seen any of these "surcharges" rolled back yet, and I promise you we won't. Come to think of it, judging by the revenue numbers just released by UPS, we haven't seen any sign of consumer resistence to the increases, either.

But you ain't seen nothin' yet. There is a break in the dollar coming. When that happens, then you will see inflation rise even from its current levels.

Trail Guide (10/22/00; 18:04:22MT - usagold.com msg#: 39664)
Reply

Apollo's golden chariot (10/21/2000; 17:57:20MT - usagold.com msg#: 39611)
Inquiry of Sir Trail Guide

---Specifically what I had in mind was the broader political economic implications from the decline of the US dollar as an international numeraire that you perceive will occur in the future.-------

=========

Hello and welcome to the golden vehicle upon which Apollo is the Charioteer!

Oh how much indeed does your driver's fame precede you, sir. Few here count a god of poetry, music and most importantly prophecy as their close advisor. (smile)

I enjoyed your post, as it's content showed no indolence of spirit. Certainly a quality inspired during your streaks across the constellation. Yes, we have all seen bright starlight before.

Apollo,
The political and social ramifications of the changes before us would take a large book of posts to discuss. Perhaps titled the History Of The World, vol. 6 thru 8. But for the benefit of brevity can we just keep it down to something in the order of a James Chavell novel? I think Gai - Jin (foreigner) would do. OK, I'll work on it. Nice to talk with you.

Trail Guide



wolavka (10/22/00; 17:48:13MT - usagold.com msg#: 39663)
P.S.
Thought you'd like to know, dec gold is inverted. Expect fireworks.

wolavka (10/22/00; 17:45:58MT - usagold.com msg#: 39662)
Gold ---only way to remain free
Human rights will depend on the time, the conditions and the circumstances. They will always be in step with the revolution and its principles. Saddam Hussin

In other words, there aren't any.

Shermag (10/22/00; 17:45:22MT - usagold.com msg#: 39661)
goldfan (10/22/00; 13:18:18MT - usagold.com msg#: 39645)


Your post raises numerous disparate points that deserve a rebuttal.

Your statement:
"Sure the risk-takers and finders etc. deserve all the profits. This is just another way of saying might is right."

My response:
It is quite the opposite IMHO. The risk takers and creators deserve protection from those who, by might, seek to confiscate their productive results.
--------------------------------
Your:
"Surely there is a difference morally, in the ownership of money got from theft or from inheritance, compared to that got from hard work or ingenuity?"

My:
Why would you seemingly equate inheritance with theft? Inheritance is likely the product of someone's hard work or ingenuity. It strikes me as an act of theft to declare this wealth as belonging to someone other than the bequeathed. Further, the act of an individual passing on his wealth to his progeny is an effective means of wealth preservation, in that the inheritors will most likely attempt to carry on the business in the family's name.
-------------------------------
Your:
"What if the price of oil goes to 500 $ per barrel, not because of the ingenuity of the finders or producers of oil, but merely because the overinflated US$ and US military might, controls all sales of oil everywhere."

My:
If the US militarily "controls all sales of oil everywhere" why would they allow $500 oil? If the price does rise to this level, it will be certainly due to US inflation, past and present, and certainly out of the control of the US.
-----------------------------------
Your:
"In Canada, even if the owners of oil in Alberta wanted to, they could not do deals to supply other Canadians with lower priced oil, even though the prices are not fair market, but are rigged market, because the NAFTA and WTO forbids this "unfair" favoritism."

My:
As I understand it, the trade deals cited do NOT prohibit an oil company from selling to anyone they choose, at any price they agree to. What is prohibited is a Canadian legislation, for example, that prevents a US buyer from having equal access to that oil.
---------------------------------------------
Shermag


auspec (10/22/00; 17:40:25MT - usagold.com msg#: 39660)
Book- On the Trail of the Secret Treaty {Gold}
New Book at www.solari.com/goldtreaty/
Looks enticing along lines of what Sir Oro reveals to us.

goldfan (10/22/00; 17:05:18MT - usagold.com msg#: 39659)
Farfel (10/22/00; 14:11:17MT - usagold.com msg#: 39647)
Sir Farfel Here is a more straight reply to you.

My thoughts in<...>.

@GOLDFAN...re: Alberta
I find your comments concerning Alberta's oil windfall to be emblematic of an Ontario culture long accustomed to getting its own way within the confederaton.

<Didn't say I agreed with Ontario hegemony, just described it. Barrick uses all kinds of trickery and deceit, don't agree with them either. What Alberta will get, unless they change their creed is their share and more of Barrick's and Shell Oils, (which moved from Ontario to Alberta a few years back).>

Nothing upsets the Ontario crowd more than the concept of an economic power shift away from Toronto to Calgary or Edmonton.

Somehow, the fact that Ontario has controlled the Canadian economic destiny since 1867 and exploited the remaining provinces to the advantage of Ontario is defensible, but now that Alberta is moving into the catbird seat in Canada somehow in your mind that is not allowable.

< I'm not defending Ontario. What I ask is, so what if Alberta gets the catbird seat, what will they do with it that's any different from the might is right power stuff we've had for the last 10 000 years? I guess I'm really asking, can any nation long endure that has a monopoly of something others need for their survival, if they insist on charging so much, everyone has to be bankrupt to pay them? I remember a long time ago, when my then wife had a series of very expensive surgeries, most of which were due to the incompetence of the first surgeon, me complaining in the presence of a doctor of how much this all cost, and he saying "what is your wife's life worth any way?" I felt like punching him out. >

Well, I say, "Get used to it," I do not empathize with your viewpoints in any way shape or form.

Albertans are becoming the economic leaders of Canada, and that is no more or less offensive than the former Ontario dominated status quo in Canada.

< I agree, so I don't really care which of them continues on with the same dysfunctional neurotic power plays.. I want a different attitude altogether.>

I happen to love Alberta, I think it's a great province, the people are wonderful. For almost a century, Alberta had to suffer the slings and arrows of Ontario hegemony (e.g., most foreign industries were strongly urged to set up plants in Ontario before other provinces were considered) and it is great to see a little underdog province like Alberta supplant Ontario as the most important province in Canada.

<How do you get to be important merely by being rich in US$?? I don't know what your definition of important is, but mine includes being open and honest in my business dealings, honouring my contracts, and being compassionate towards those who who for whatever reason, have less than I do, through no fault of their own>

< Ontario is wonderful Province, the people are great, it's the leaders and the banksters and the system of Western Economic thinking, that aren't so hot IMHO. Also, Alberta has benefitted by being part of Canada. I remember when we in Ontario in th 50's-60's agaareed to pay more than the world price of petroleum products, in order to support the fledgling oil industry in Alberta, by buying their oil, rather than importing it. We did this on the understanding this would be a Canadian resource.So, now it costs Albertans a bit of money to honour their contract tney want out. >

It gives hope for gold investors that maybe someday, the underdog goldbugs may supplant the bullion bank owners as the economic leaders of this country.

< I don't want any more economic leaders, we have enough of them already.>

<Thanks for your thoughts, good opportunity to refine my thinking. I admire your spirited attacks on the establishment.>

Goldfan




goldfan (10/22/00; 16:57:04MT - usagold.com msg#: 39658)
Journeyman (10/22/00; 12:38:00MT - usagold.com msg#: 39644
Sir Journeyman, thanks for your reply, I've put my remarks in<...>. the rest is repost of yours..
Free trade and who wins and who loses? @Goldfan, ALL

"And to Journeyman, isn't this an example of how a free trade
agreement can really stiff a small country to benefit a larger??" -Goldfan (10/22/00; 10:38:19MT - usagold.com msg#: 39640)


A quick insight might cast some more light on the situation: Montana is a lot closer to Alberta than Quebec. Why couldn't Montanans claim THEY should share in the benefits of forcing oil-owners to sell oil cheaper to THEM -- since they are closer than the people who live in Quebec?

<Montanans don't have a deal with Alberta to bail each other out in times of economic distress, share social security and universal medical care. The people of Ontario paid a lot more than the world price for gas and oil in the 50's and 60's buying it from Alberta so as to support the fledgling oil industry in Alberta, as a future benefit to Canada. Montanans weren't part of this contract. Now that Alberta doesn't need the deal, they think, they want out. Also, Montanans tried to assassinate Sitting Bull, while Albertans gave him and his people shelter. So they have a different cultural history, less empathy for each other, but empathy doesn't count for much in the .com me first and only age.>

Suppose you grow sunflowers for a living and someone in Russia is willing to pay you twice the price for sunflower seeds as are your neighbors. Should you sell to your neighbors at a reduced price anyway? The real question: Should you be forceably PREVENTED from selling to the Russians at personal cost to you?

<I guess I'd like to sell to whomever I please, unless I had a prior contract to be in economic relationship with my neighbours. I hope I'd honour that contract, even if it cost me money. What is money? Is it worth more than personal honour? Is it worth more than citizenship? What does citizenship mean, if not putting your neighbours ahead of foreigners?
The freely elected government of Canada tried to force the retention of oil in Canada, tried to force the Albertans to live up to the contract they had tacitily agree to in the '60s. It didn't work. As a result, of this and other abrogations of honour as .com mentality proceeds apace, we're going to eventually be carrying pistols, becasue we cannot trust our neighbours, because we all live in fear.>

There's another question here too: What does "Canada" get in return for the oil? Yea. But what if it were honest money instead? Would you feel the same way? Why or why not?

< I don't understand this question. Are you asking what if it were gold? If it were, then I say the compact we have as Canadians is to share our wealth, our good and bad times, and honjour our contracts with each other. That's the meaning of citizenship. Same as the meaning of family, brother or sister.>

Of course things are incredibly more bolixed up because of lack-of-universal-trade-value-standard.

Regards,
Journeyman

P.S. What really obfuscates the thinking along these lines is what I sometimes call the "map mentality." That is, people tend to act as if those lines on maps signify real dividing lines between people, and they act accordingly. I remember my mother's story about the first time they told me they were going to take me across a state border. As near as I can figure, I was about four at the time. She said my eyes got big and I asked if it were safe and what would happen. Someone joked and said the car would drop ten feet and have to crash through a barrier. Everyone laughed. That was the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland. - - - - Now think about Alberta, Montana and Quebec. And the Berlin Wall. And the barrier part.

<Well we are all brothers and sisters. I get really morose when I think how much economic trouble is coming to my good friends who are totally unprepared for it, and who will maybe suffer greatly, with me unable to do anything sufficient for them. I will be wishing for a loaves and fishes miracle, but it won't happen. Just now, one of my best friends has discovered she has breast cancer, and lung and bone and liver spots. She has a 14 year old daughter whom I've known since the child was born. The girl's father is in hospital with an incurable brain tumour, he'll be gone in two years or less. Community is to look after these friends as best I can, anad hope for miracles... >

Thanks for the dialogue

Goldfan




RossL (10/22/00; 16:44:28MT - usagold.com msg#: 39657)
Farfel - The wasted vote myth

Farfel - you're right, you voting for Harry Browne would be a wasted vote. You obviously aren't a libertarian, since the principles of activist intervention and that of liberty are at odds.


Farfel (10/22/00; 16:35:32MT - usagold.com msg#: 39656)
@Goldfan, I don't get it, @Dave C, an elaboration
@GF, I must be too obtuse, your response goes over my head.

@DaveC, concerning my earlier post, as I was typing faster than my thoughts, a correction in the following paragraph:

" Although the corporations and the corporate-led media decry Nader as being a socialist, in reality, he could be better described as a CITIZEN INTERVENTIONIST, somebody who would demand more responsibility from corporations toward the society."

Leigh (10/22/00; 16:28:00MT - usagold.com msg#: 39655)
Gandalf the White
Gandalf, you have absolutely made the day for all us Founding Members! Gold flakes, carefully vialed up by your own hands, and thoughtfully sent out as a memento of our efforts to get a Hall of Fun! You can rest assured that those gold flakes will NEVER be torn away from me (along with my treasured gold and silver prize Eagles from USAGOLD). Thank you ever so much.

Fellow Founders, this was a lively week, was it not? And now we have the promise of a Hall of Fun! This was a lot better than sitting around grousing about why the price of gold might be going down.

Gandalf, do you think Trail Guide's going to send in his address for the gold flakes?

goldfan (10/22/00; 16:14:50MT - usagold.com msg#: 39654)
Farfel (10/22/00; 14:11:17MT - usagold.com msg#: 39647)
Concerning
@GOLDFAN...re: Alberta

Farfel, Taking my CLHE-HoF duties seriously, I've taken the liberty of copying your post to me, with my thoughts in <.... > after your words.

I find your comments concerning Alberta's oil windfall to be emblematic of an Ontario culture long accustomed to getting its own way within the confederaton.

<And Jack climbed up the beanstalk, ventured across the plain to the Giant's castle, whom he spied throught the windows, singing bawdy songs, slapping fat slave wenches on their behinds and munching and slurping pon the bones of many fat and even skinny confederationists who looked just like poor wee Jack>

Nothing upsets the Ontario crowd more than the concept of an economic power shift away from Toronto to Calgary or Edmonton.

< After Jack grabbed the fat goose or hen or whatever, said to lay golden eggs, he ran like H. For the beanstalk with the Ugly Giant in hot rampaging pursuit>

Somehow, the fact that Ontario has controlled the Canadian economic destiny since 1867 and exploited the remaining provinces to the advantage of Ontario is defensible, but now that Alberta is moving into the catbird seat in Canada somehow in your mind that is not allowable.

<Screams Jack, impudently to the Giant, as he leaps for the beanstalk and begins to slide down>

Well, I say, "Get used to it," I do not empathize with your viewpoints in any way shape or form.

< Says Jack, listening to the Giant's imprecations and shouts of death and revenge and threats to foreclose on Jack's mortgages>

Albertans are becoming the economic leaders of Canada, and that is no more or less offensive than the former Ontario dominated status quo in Canada.

<Yes sirree, we too will become big ugly Giants, and slap fat wenches on the behind, and gobble our food without chewing, and kick the bone-eating curs under the table.>

I happen to love Alberta, I think it's a great province, the people are wonderful. For almost a century, Alberta had to suffer the slings and arrows of Ontario hegemony (e.g., most foreign industries were strongly urged to set up plants in Ontario before other provinces were considered) and it is great to see a little underdog province like Alberta supplant Ontario as the most important province in Canada.

<And as Jack slid the last few feet down the beanstalk, hitting the ground with a thud, still clutching the gold-egg laying chicken, he shouted, Hurray, Hurray, Mom, come see, now we're the big honchos!! at which point the beanstalk snapped, the Giant crashed down on Jack. They were both killed, and the chicken ran away to be eaten by a mangy fox somewhere.>>

It gives hope for gold investors that maybe someday, the underdog goldbugs may supplant the bullion bank owners as the economic leaders of this country.

<As the chicken said, just before she was about to be snapped up by the fox, I'm tired of owners, what I want is a few fellow chickens, a nice rooster, and a fox-free pen>

Thanks for this opportunity Farfel

Goldfan

Farfel (10/22/00; 16:12:18MT - usagold.com msg#: 39653)
@Dave C. One final thought...
In a nutshell, Dave, I see America today as a government of corporations...where the politicians are little more than servants of the corporations even as they suggest that they act as their regulators...where the media are also servants of the corporations even as they pretend to act as their watchdogs.

Hence I do NOT believe the main issue of the election is the one that you (and all other Libertarians) see, namely the individual vs. government. That is because, since the government today is no more than a subsidiary of the corporations, then the main issue in the coming election is this: the individual vs. the corporation.

What we really need today is NOT less government, rather we need the RIGHT government, and that would be a government that is responsive to the public's interest, NOT the corporations' interests.

Once America has a government that compels corporate responsibility to its citizens, instead of a corporate-controlled government, then we will actually need MORE government involvement to free the economy from years of subjugation to the parochial interests of the corporations.

Thanks

F*

Farfel (10/22/00; 15:45:56MT - usagold.com msg#: 39652)
@DAVE C. re: Nader
Believe me, there is much in the Nader platform I do NOT like or which I simply think cannot be applied to the real world.

Some of the concepts are naive (e.g., excessive taxation... that ALWAYS results in corporations or individuals moving offshore to avoid it) and some of the concepts are too extreme, especially in their socialist perspective.

However, I disagree with you in regard to your label of Nader as part "fascist."

Let us re-examine the definition of fascism: it is political control by the corporations, and that is certainly what exists in America today. In effect, the country has surrendered to corporate fascism. It is so extreme today that a man like Nader could not even gain entry to the presidential debates, as a mere spectator. That is absolutely pathetic!

Nader opposes that, he would never tolerate the kind of collusive, market rigging crap that the bullion banks are pulling. So he represents a much needed swing toward corporate intervention, an antidote against rule by the corporations, and that is a swing sorely needed. For the past eight years, we've had a government bought owned and paid for by Wall Street...and if it were elected, a Republican government, although radically different in social policies, would be more of the same with respect to economic policies, namely complete subjugation to corporate America's interests.

What I like about Nader is this: he wants to restrain the corporations and make them responsible to the people...he wants to address infrastructural problems that the corporations do not give a damn about (e.g., severe shortage of burn wards all over the nation, crumbling highways, lack of skilled teachers, etc.)...he wants to put some kind of cap on the outrageous profits flowing to corporations or individuals.

Contrary to Adam Smith's ideology, the invisible hand is NOT leading to efficient results in the marketplace.

Getting back to my baskbetball example....isn't it pathetic that today, we are faced with a possible situation where a group of people watching a basketball game, watching their favorite idols who earn $20 million a year, could find themselves in an explosion or fire, badly burned, yet discover that there is a major shortage of burn wards in most metro cities, and a major shortage of specialist burn nurses, because those nurses don't earn enough money to entice others to enter the nursing field?

According to the free market crowd, an efficient marketplace is supposed to correct those aberrations and prevent them from happening. Yet such is not the case, and that is because all variety of inefficiencies exist in the marketplace, preventing desired results in terms of proper allocation of capital and resources.

These various inefficiencies have come into effect because of the huge overwhelming power of corporate monopolies and oligopolies all across the land. Somehow this neo-fascist dilemma must be resolved, and Nader is a move in the proper direction. Although the corporations and the corporate-led media decry Nader as being a socialist, in reality, he could be better described as a corporate interventionist, somebody who would demand more responsibility from corporations toward the society.

Is he too extreme? Yes.

Is he too much of a socialist Pollyanna? Undeniably.

Are his environmental policies over the top? Sure seems like it.

Would he be able to carry out all his policies if were elected? Almost impossible, he would have to adjust many of them to reflect the realities of the marketplace and the world in general.

For example, where mining is concerned, Nader will learn quickly just how sorely diminished that sector really is, as a result of huge misallocations of capital and resources from hard assets to high tech development, especially the internet. He will likely demand more responsible behavior from mining firms (nothing wrong with that, who wants cyanide in their drinking water?), then once reality dawns, enhance the economic conditions allowing them to develop at a faster (yet safe) pace and correct the almost ten years of capital underallocation.

Bottom line: he is a wake-up call, a populist cry against the unbridled hegemony of corporate America, but most importantly, as the (non-mainstream) polls reveal, he is the third party candidate with the best chance of getting more than 10% of the vote.

On the other hand, a Libertarian candidate is complete pie-in-the sky, because for most Americans, the abolition of the Federal Reserve, etc. is meaningless, especially in these times of (apparent) prosperity.

So if you really want to send a message to the politicians that the current status quo of corporate dictatorship is unacceptable, if you want to send a message to the bullion banks that they can no longer break the rules of the marketplace upon mere whim to the disadvantage of those who play by the rules, then Nader seems to be the best focal point for such dissent at this particular time. IMHO.

Thanks

F*

SteveH (10/22/00; 15:08:58MT - usagold.com msg#: 39651)
So, what do you all think of this...
http://sheck.com/forums/International_Issues/posts/2.html
Bring a cup of coffee or a beer.

Peter Asher (10/22/00; 14:58:59MT - usagold.com msg#: 39650)
Attention all Forum members!!

A proclamation has been issued from the mighty Wizard, Gandalf, regarding FREE GOLD

Early in the week upon reading an excellent post by Sir auspec, I
proposed that a wing in the HOF be created for posts that use satire
and allegory to get across a philosophical or economic point of view. I
also mentioned that I had proposed this before but there was no
response. Sir auspec was seized by an overwhelming emotion of youthful
exuberance and launched a Crusade in the form of a frontal assault on
the Castle walls and through enlistment and conscription put together a
formidable battle group. The fray was becoming rather violent and I
became alarmed that in carrying my banner the assembled host of "Young
Turks" might suffer unwanted casualties. I decided to open up back
channel diplomatic communication lines by E-pigeon and as it turned out
auspec, who had apparently become alarmed at what he had let loose, did
so also.

Meanwhile Gandalf had mounted Shadowfax and flown over the fray.
Observing the brave attempts of the left brained warriors to scale the
insurmountable walls he also opened up diplomatic channels and though
the frontal attack failed, the Castle hosts, though alarmed by the
degree of aggression, were so impressed by the valiant attempt of the left brained warriors, that they were willing to negotiate. An announcement of the agreement is forthcoming from the Town Crier after the details have been technically defined.

Well the Wizard has just informed me that he has performed some alchemy
on a sacred crucible of crushed quartz (and other secret items) and has created flakes of 97%+
raw Gold! He is announcing that he will place a few of these flakes in
small vials and make good on auspec's outrageous promise of Free Gold to
all the warriors that joined sir auspec in the now legendary CHLE-HOF battle. He is also
awarding this Boone to Town Crier for the stoic manner in which he
conducted himself under this surprise duress

In order to receive this Free Gold, Gandalf has requested (in order to
maintain the secret of the location of his Wizard's Keep) that I obtain
the mailing addresses of the recipients at my ‘known to all' E-pigeon
landing , peter@peterasher.com The Wizard will then use The US Postal Service to convey those rewards to those that he has dubbed "Bravehearts,"






ThaiGold (10/22/00; 14:33:37MT - usagold.com msg#: 39649)
Virtual Gold Confiscation: Today's Grenade
The Fat Lady Hasn't Sung Yet...
Good Afternoon Everyone.!.
====================
I'm back. (BAAAaaaaccck).
Rain_Dog took me for an envigorating run and Peter (Asher)
you will be glad to hear that some cobwebs were rearranged.

I'd like to thank you all, for your many posts and comments,
including the deluge of e-mails I've received. One cannot
appreciate the worldwide coverage of this Forum and the very
depth of it's many Lurkers. And their incredible knowledge.
Until one includes his/her e-mail address at the bottom of
his/her posts. (hint to all).

My earliest post of yesterday (10-21-2000) about a possible
scenario by worldwide governments to extricate themselves
from widespread financial collapse and the resulting chaos
(while hypothetical at this point) still served to awaken some
of us to such a probability, or at very-least, stimulate us all
into doing some serious thinking along those lines.

As expected, most of your responses were well thought and
in many cases, well written and informative. We all gained
as usual, from everyone's intellect. And that's as it should be.

The consensus seems to be that it was unworkable folly, at
best, and at worst (as PH_in_LA alluded) communism ala 2K.

As I read each comment and mentally formulated a response,
I came to the conclusion that it would be best for me to wait
until I have finished writing and (coming soon) posted the full
white-paper report with all it's myriad details and gotcha's and
catch-22's etc. Because that will fill in many of the blanks that
were of concern to you all, and may exonerate some of the
report's theories and conclusions. We shall see. I hope.

But during the process, I reached another (astounding) [to me]
conclusion. And I shall now put it forth as today's gredade or
bombshell, into the forum. Spoil your day, so to speak.

Here it is:

Just re-read my previous report, but as you do, substitue the
price of US$275/oz wherever I used the figure US$ 50/oz and
where I used 1% annual IRS excise tax, substitue 100% Cap
Gains tax. Or anything inbetween.

And then ask yourself, "Isn't This what we already endure?"

What I mean, is this: The USA and other world governments
have already locked the price of Gold. At US$ 275/oz. Plus or
minus a few bucks, to make it appear as if Gold FreeTrades
in the marketplace. It doesn't. Can you say m-a-n-i-p-u-l-a-t-e?

Think about it. Plan "A" has already been enacted. Mine will
be their Plan "B". Now does that spoil our day... or what.?.

Cordially,

ThaiGold@OperaMail.Com
============================================




Cavan Man (10/22/00; 14:25:09MT - usagold.com msg#: 39648)
POO
Sure miss Black Blade. It's been a rough weekend in the ME--very rough. Just read that Chairman Arafat told Mr. Barak to, "Go to hell". Still, Secreatry Richardson was trotted out once again to proclaim that OPEC will pump more oil. This proclamation despite the fact that even if OPEC client countries did pump more oil from the ground, there is no place to put it, transport it or refine it.

Farfel (10/22/00; 14:11:17MT - usagold.com msg#: 39647)
@GOLDFAN...re: Alberta
I find your comments concerning Alberta's oil windfall to be emblematic of an Ontario culture long accustomed to getting its own way within the confederaton.

Nothing upsets the Ontario crowd more than the concept of an economic power shift away from Toronto to Calgary or Edmonton.

Somehow, the fact that Ontario has controlled the Canadian economic destiny since 1867 and exploited the remaining provinces to the advantage of Ontario is defensible, but now that Alberta is moving into the catbird seat in Canada somehow in your mind that is not allowable.

Well, I say, "Get used to it," I do not empathize with your viewpoints in any way shape or form.

Albertans are becoming the economic leaders of Canada, and that is no more or less offensive than the former Ontario dominated status quo in Canada.

I happen to love Alberta, I think it's a great province, the people are wonderful. For almost a century, Alberta had to suffer the slings and arrows of Ontario hegemony (e.g., most foreign industries were strongly urged to set up plants in Ontario before other provinces were considered) and it is great to see a little underdog province like Alberta supplant Ontario as the most important province in Canada.

It gives hope for gold investors that maybe someday, the underdog goldbugs may supplant the bullion bank owners as the economic leaders of this country.

Thanks

F*

ET (10/22/00; 13:53:05MT - usagold.com msg#: 39646)
goldfan

Hey goldfan - how are ya? You wrote;

"And maybe you would say the system will work all this out, in time the US$ will collapse, and those who relied on it
for their power will suffer the same fate. IMHO this is not enough, to say our present system will collapse of its own
dead weight. I need to think of what I would support in its place. I am struggling to understand what form of civil
creed I would agree to, and how it could be enforced."

If it was me I would support the idea of free markets of free men. Only a free market will bring about what you seek. You can learn more about these ideas by reading the works of Mises, Rothbard and others. On the web you can check out some of this stuff at www.mises.org and www.lewrockwell.com. Good reading!

goldfan (10/22/00; 13:18:18MT - usagold.com msg#: 39645)
ORO (10/22/00; 11:10:34MT - usagold.com msg#: 39641)
ORO and Journeyman thanks for your responses. I know from following your stuff that you don't believe "might is right" and that you have a set of principles that aim to produce a civil society, with no unfair advantages. I hope I am not putting words in your mouth in saying that. In what follows, I am trying to find out how the idea of a "commons" shared by all, fits in with with the notions of every person for themselves, or whomever they can coerce or persuade into being part of their army.


Sure the risk-takers and finders etc. deserve all the profits. This is just another way of saying might is right. It's just a question of who has the army and the courts on their side. Why do not the finders or inventors, get most of the profits and the risk takers, financially, much less? What is so great about finance, that the gallery owners should make twice as much as the artist, merely because they own all the gallery property in town, which they maybe got from their fathers money, not their own?

Surely there is a difference morally, in the ownership of money got from theft or from inheritance, compared to that got from hard work or ingenuity? Why is a man's son or daughter, the inheritor of his wealth, suddenly so much more able to demand and command than someone who has not the advantage of being "owned" by a rich man? Yet, our value system kowtows as much to the rich boss of a biker gang, as it does to a Nobel prize winner.

I know an old lady in a nursing home, 104 years old, she lived an absolutely exemplary modest life, and "saved" enough to care for her old age. But because she is living so long, she is at the mercy of successive nursing home operators who constantly drain money and resources from that place, because they have the idea they have to compete with .com s for profits. Is she at fault because she didn't properly prepare for her old age?? She did everything the so-called financial advisors told her to...This is a moral question, we ought to revere anyone who lives that long, instead, she has to compete with .com billionaires on the same reasoning that says that if I have all the money, or the property, or the oil or whatever I have the right to make myself king of the world if I can.

What if the price of oil goes to 500 $ per barrel, not because of the ingenuity of the finders or producers of oil, but merely because the overinflated US$ and US military might, controls all sales of oil everywhere. In Canada, even if the owners of oil in Alberta wanted to, they could not do deals to supply other Canadians with lower priced oil, even though the prices are not fair market, but are rigged market, because the NAFTA and WTO forbids this "unfair" favoritism.

I think it is just as much confiscation, to have oil priced only in one currency, as it is to tax away what some people would like to call excess profits. I am not allowed to do things which block my neighbor's access to the common street we both need to do business, even if I am the guy whose labour built the street. I think we would have constant warfare, if we didn't all live by enforceable rules when it came to building and using streets. The same reasoning IMHO applies to certain goods such as oil, gold, air and water. There ought to be an enforceable right to trade oil or gold in whatever currency the owner wishes, without the need to go through a US$ money-laundering.

And maybe you would say the system will work all this out, in time the US$ will collapse, and those who relied on it for their power will suffer the same fate. IMHO this is not enough, to say our present system will collapse of its own dead weight. I need to think of what I would support in its place. I am struggling to understand what form of civil creed I would agree to, and how it could be enforced.

In the First Nations way of thinking, Bear is the one who travels the forest, making sure all the rules are being followed, that everyones behaviour is appropriate. Notice that Bear is big and has claws and teeth, which he may use from time to time. What do we call appropriate, and what are our claws and teeth?


FWIW

Goldfan



Journeyman (10/22/00; 12:38:00MT - usagold.com msg#: 39644)
Free trade and who wins and who loses? @Goldfan, ALL

"And to Journeyman, isn't this an example of how a free trade
agreement can really stiff a small country to benefit a larger??" -Goldfan (10/22/00; 10:38:19MT - usagold.com msg#: 39640)

A VERY good question, Goldfan, and one that may just kick me in the other side enough to get back to that pesky "Free Trade" series! At any rate, I'll try to do it justice, but not just now. I promised to take my organic burglar alarm on a long walk today, and talk things over with one of my more radical pens. As in "The PEN is mightier than the sword."

I think ORO did an excellent job on the who-owns-what aspect, so I'll try to hit the "free trade" side of things.

A quick insight might cast some more light on the situation: Montana is a lot closer to Alberta than Quebec. Why couldn't Montanans claim THEY should share in the benefits of forcing oil-owners to sell oil cheaper to THEM -- since they are closer than the people who live in Quebec?

Suppose you grow sunflowers for a living and someone in Russia is willing to pay you twice the price for sunflower seeds as are your neighbors. Should you sell to your neighbors at a reduced price anyway? The real question: Should you be forceably PREVENTED from selling to the Russians at personal cost to you?

There's another question here too: What does "Canada" get in return for the oil? Yea. But what if it were honest money instead? Would you feel the same way? Why or why not?

Of course things are incredibly more bolixed up because of lack-of-universal-trade-value-standard.

Regards,
Journeyman

P.S. What really obfuscates the thinking along these lines is what I sometimes call the "map mentality." That is, people tend to act as if those lines on maps signify real dividing lines between people, and they act accordingly. I remember my mother's story about the first time they told me they were going to take me across a state border. As near as I can figure, I was about four at the time. She said my eyes got big and I asked if it were safe and what would happen. Someone joked and said the car would drop ten feet and have to crash through a barrier. Everyone laughed. That was the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland. - - - - Now think about Alberta, Montana and Quebec. And the Berlin Wall. And the barrier part.


Golden Truth (10/22/00; 12:06:15MT - usagold.com msg#: 39643)
To Canuck
Hi Canuck "good work", I laughed my head off :-))))
I hope this really plays out the way you described it.

Oh how i long for sweet poetic justice!!!

Gold get as much as you can carry! While you still can.

G.T






Journeyman (10/22/00; 11:48:11MT - usagold.com msg#: 39642)
Do "speculators," "securities investors" and "gamblers" have anything at all in common? @ALL

Consider the following scholarly excerpt from the classic on the
subject, "The Futures Game:"

*WHY DO SPECULATORS SPECULATE?*

....
Certainly the greatest [motivation] is the
opportunity to make an important amount of money in
relation to the capital base used. Not many speculators
are naive enough to compare their activities with those
of more conservative investors. Most of them are well
aware of the risks that they take in return for the
large and quick profits possible, although there are
some who, like gamblers, are so convinced that they
will win that they are unable to admit even to
themselves that they might lose. Most of them learn
all too quickly that it is a rare opportunity indeed
that provides an important potential profit without an
attendant large risk.
Other speculators are attracted almost as much by
the stimulation of the speculation itself as they are
by the opportunity for profit. For some it is the sheer
excitement of the game; for others, it is the dynamics
of the involvement with world politics, trade, currency
fluctuation, wars, and other events that come to affect
their own positions rather than just provide newspaper
headlines. Aside from those who receive some
masochistic pleasure from losing, it seems likely that
even those motivated in large part by the desire to
have something to get up for in the morning find the
pleasure of speculating more satisfying when they win
than when they lose. -Richard J. Teweles, Frank J.
Jones, The Futures Game, (New York: McGraw-Hill 1987)
p. 14 [ISBN 0-07-063734-2]

Now remember Yogi: "Prediction is very difficult, especially of
the future."

And von Mises: "... to acting man the future is hidden."

In the next section, entitled "SPECULATE ON WHAT," Teweles &
Jones call up, and I quote, "the Mississippi land schemes of John
Law in France and the South Sea Bubble that was perpetrated on
the English public." On the next page, there is a section
entitled, "FUTURES VERSUS SECURITIES AND OTHER SPECULATIONS.
Catch the drift?

Regards,
Journeyman



ORO (10/22/00; 11:10:34MT - usagold.com msg#: 39641)
Private oil is not a National Resource, in Canada or elsewhere
The situation described by goldfan: Alberta getting rich on oil and the rest of Canada green with envy and fearing a move in the center of gravity of financial power away from them. The possible "solutions" to this are simply the description of popularly backed plan to steal the products of successful business. People who had not made the investments, not taken the risks and not had anything to do with oil, now want to call it a "National Resource" and unilaterally change the contracts with the oil and gas producers as well as steal land owner's profits.

Even if 99.999% of the population "feels" the oil is "rightfully" theirs, it does not make it so, and it does not make taking the oil profits or restricting the oil production into anything more than stealing, nor is it any more beneficial to Canadian's economy to loudly proclaim that the returns on investment will be taken away in greater proportion if very successful. Investments would simply be curtailed because of the reduced prospects for reward. All Canadians would suffer as a result. Albertan oil men would just suffer more.



goldfan (10/22/00; 10:38:19MT - usagold.com msg#: 39640)
Questions for ORO, Journeyman, whomever...
On the "Price" of Oil

When the world price is too a high a price to pay...

Summary:
Seems to me, a key question is,
why should we pay the world price compounded by an extremely adverse exchange rate, for our own stuff? Isn't this the question asked by every small country with gold in the ground? Or oil?

Does Alberta oil belong to all Canadians? Or are they entitled to treat the rest of us like foreigners, so that we have to pay US$ prices for their oil, while they get to take part in the benefits of being under the Canadian economic umbrella and the Canadian way of supporting each other in times of personal or collective crisis?

Exposition:
I've been pondering lately the spectre of the return of the NEP. In Canada, in the early ‘70's the sudden rise then of the price of oil, in US $, world markets, was creating a situation of windfall profits for large oil companies, and sudden riches for the people of Alberta, the province with most of our oil. The rest of Canada "viewed this with alarm".

The Federal government, and the rest of the country, asked,
Why should a country which was self sufficient in oil, (and now natural gas), have to endure vast increases in the prices of these, paying world prices and maybe exchange rate penalties, just to enrich a handful of people who didn't invent the stuff, nor even the means of finding and extracting it?

After all, the people of Alberta get to keep their oil partly because of the willingness of Canada to provide armies, international treaties, etc. so they won't have it taken away by force. In addition, they get the benefit of "equalization payments" from the other provinces in times when oil prices are low, and the Alberta economy is suffering as a result.

And of course, the Federal government, virtually owned by Ontario and Quebec, was under pressure by the financial moguls in these provinces to somehow stop the Albertans from becoming so rich, they would begin to have a real voice in National business and finance.

So the Federal Government invented the National Energy Policy, the NEP, designed to cap oil and natural gas prices in Canada, and prevent excessive export of these outside Canada, keeping it for the long term use of Canadians, instead of the short term depletion by foreigners.

Well, the policy failed, the Liberals lost Western Canada forever out of it, and Canadian oil and gas is being firehosed out of the ground to the USA mostly, and will soon be depleted forever.

However, today, with rapidly rising world oil prices and natural gas prices, windfall profits are once again accruing to Albertans.

Canadians, including myself, are beginning once again to ask, why should we pay the world price compounded by an extremely adverse exchange rate, for our own stuff?

As I see it, there are only a few ways this can resolve.

1. The Federales somehow confiscate Albertan oil for the use of all Canadians, something they can't do without breaking the NAFTA with the USA and Mexico.

2. The Feds rebate Canadians some or all of our current high taxes on oil products.

3. The rest of us outside Alberta adopt alternative energy strategies as fast as possible, and cut Alberta out of the loop of Canadian economics, leaving them at the mercy of international exchange rate vs. the US dollar, and ourselves somewhat freer of this particular form of slavery and imperialism.

I'd sure welcome comments. And to Journeyman, isn't this an example of how a free trade agreement can really stiff a small country to benefit a larger??

Goldfan



DaveC (10/22/2000; 9:26:17MT - usagold.com msg#: 39639)
WAC (Wide Awake Club) (10/22/2000; 3:36:47MT - usagold.com msg#: 39635)
OOPS! Not retroactive.

Trying to do too many things at once.

Effective after 12/31/99.

DaveC (10/22/2000; 9:23:33MT - usagold.com msg#: 39638)
WAC (Wide Awake Club) (10/22/2000; 3:36:47MT - usagold.com msg#: 39635)
Funny how this works. A few people buy some precious metals and WHAM! like a freight train Congress wants to tax you.

AND IT'S RETROACTIVE! You see, they got away with it once, so they think they can do it again. These are Republicans and Democrats sponsoring I believe. Wake up folks.



Zenidea (10/22/2000; 7:36:42MT - usagold.com msg#: 39637)
A hard and slippery subject

OPEC to increase oil output: US
From AP
22oct00

3.30pm (AEDT) CARACAS:
OPEC was expected to increase
oil production by 500,000
barrels a day later this month,
US Energy Secretary Bill
Richardson said today after
meeting OPEC's president.

But OPEC President Ali
Rodriguez said a decision to
boost output would first need
approval from the entire
11-member Organisation of
Petroleum Exporting Countries.

"The will to increase production
at the end of the month, if it is
necessary, exists within OPEC,"
Rodriguez said he told
Richardson.

However, the decision "will be
made with consensus, not in an
isolated manner", he said at a
separate news conference.

The oil cartel is to meet in
Vienna on November 12.

Rodriguez, who serves as
Venezuela's oil minister, also said OPEC would only increase its
production by 500,000 bpd if prices exceed the established price
band of $US22 to $US28 a barrel.

Under the price band mechanism, OPEC increases production by
500,000 bpd if its reference crude price stays above $28 a barrel for
20 straight business days. The US thinks a healthier price for crude,
between $22 to $25 a barrel, is acceptable for both producing and
consuming nations.

Richardson's visit to Venezuela comes as oil prices hover close to
10-year highs due increased demand worldwide, refining bottlenecks
and fears that tensions in the Middle East will prompt an Arab-led oil
export embargo.

US oil refineries are operating at 96 per cent - near full capacity -
and may not be able to transform more crude as it arrives.

But Richardson downplayed the situation, admitting that "there have
been some problems" but later calling refining capacity "adequate".

The increase would be OPEC's fourth this year for a total of 3.8
million barrels.

If oil prices remain high next month even with an OPEC output, the
Clinton administration will consider untapping strategic petroleum
reserves as it did last month, he said.

Clinton gave the order to release $US30 million ($57.42 million)
barrels into the domestic market in September in what Richardson
said was a precautionary measure.

Canuck (10/22/2000; 6:09:59MT - usagold.com msg#: 39636)
@ Townie
Thanks T.C.,

Wow! What a difference a year makes. When I read this a year ago I was alarmed that C.B.'s were going to sell all their gold. Oh no!!

This years take is a little different. After scanning 44 pages of goobly-goop here is what sticks out......

"It is clear that
if governments lent out all their gold but wanted to keep open the possibility of using
it in a crisis, they would have to structure their loan contracts so that they could
get their gold back immediately in a crisis. It is not clear how difficult it would be
to incorporate the necessary provisions into loan contracts."

These super-geniuses go through 44 pages of hypothetical reasoning, graphs, equations and theories and in conclusion
they say '..it is not clear how to get the gold back...'.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha........ha,ha,ha,....ha,ha.

Thanks again. I have printed out the conclusion pages 44-46
for further chuckles in the future.

Imagine the BOE boys to the Queen or something.

"Your Majesty, we understand there is financial crisis and the war in the Middle East is escalating but they won't give us back our gold"

"And why not you little peasant"

"Because it was NOT CLEAR how to get it back"


Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ...............

This is too funny.



WAC (Wide Awake Club) (10/22/2000; 3:36:47MT - usagold.com msg#: 39635)
From the GE site re: Confiscation, Taxation etc
@Sysdude (Humbug) Oct 22, 04:06

Legislation was entered into both the Senate and the House back in June of this year. Click on the following.
http://www.congress.org/congdir.html
Scroll to the bottom, click on legislation, enter S.2678 for the version of the bill, or enter h.r.4170 for the House version of the bill. They're basically the same bill. There appears to have been an attempt to have gold, silver, and platinum bullion reclassified to receive the same capital gains treatment as stocks and bonds. It appears to have been put on the back burner, I'm not sure where it is at atthis moment. What a deal huh ?


DaveC (10/22/2000; 3:21:54MT - usagold.com msg#: 39634)
OT: Green Party Platform
Sorry, but once I get going I can't stop.

The platform reads like a combination socialist/fascist party. What they don't want the Federal government to own, they want it to control.

I think the following statements are relevant to US voters comtemplating voting for Nader:

Living Wages: A family-supporting minimum wage. Start at $12.50 per hour in 2000 and index to the cost of living.

30-Hour Work Week: A 6-hour day with no cut in pay for the bottom 80% of the pay scale.

Social Dividends: A "second paycheck" for workers enabling them to receive 40 hours pay for 30 hours work. Paid by the government out of progressive taxes so that social productivity gains are shared equitably.

Maximum Income: Build into the progressive income tax a 100% tax on all income over ten times the minimum wage.

Wealth Tax: Enact a steeply progressive tax on net wealth over $2.5 million (the top 5% of households).

End all commercial exploitation of public lands by private timber, mining, and cattle grazing interests.

These are just some of the "highlights." It makes for some very interesting reading.

If the minimum wage is $12.50, equal to $25,000 per year, then the MAXIMUM wage is $250,000 per year. Since I have made more than this maximum in one year, I obviously cannot support this.

If your talents and skills allowed you to make more than $250,000 a year, Farfel are you listening?, would you want it all taxed away?



Peter Asher (10/22/2000; 1:40:19MT - usagold.com msg#: 39633)
Sorry about the bandwith on the double entry #3822-3
Made the same oversite as back then when the rollover went past midnight.

Peter Asher (10/22/2000; 1:31:42MT - usagold.com msg#: 39632)
Hill Billy Mitchell (10/21/00; 18:28:56MT - usagold.com msg#: 39615)

Using your >>> synopsis of ANOTHER's thoughts in this area: E. A deal has been cut with, presumably Saudi Arabia, to the affect that whatever US$ price Saudi Arabia sets per barrel (bbl), it will require settlement in 50% US$ or Euros and 50% in physical gold.<<<< as the lynchpin of the gold for oil thesis, It is impossible to the order of several magnitudes! 17 months ago there was an extensive discussion on this. I've culled out the posts that maintain a continuity of subject. It's a long read but more on subject now then it was back then

Peter Asher (3/23/99; 21:39:40MDT - Msg ID:3765)

Check me out on this arithmetic. The difference between an average price of $ 15.00 a day per bbl. and the $30.00 the Saudis allegedly want made up in gold, would require an oz. of gold at $300.00, for each 20 bbl. That's 250,000 oz., or 7.8 tons per day! Or 32 tons per day for all of OPEC. However, did I see something in ‘Footsteps' about counting the weight at a much higher price?

Even at $3000 an oz., the .78 ton would have to come from somewhere, did some one say it's from the Fed, today? How much was, or is, in Fort Knox?

The Stranger (3/23/99; 22:51:55MDT - Msg ID:3768)
Peter
Your arithmetic checks out just fine with me. You've got me wondering, 'Why didn't I think of
that?'
night, everybody!

Peter Asher (3/23/99; 23:30:54MDT - Msg ID:3771)
Jade
They, The Saudis, more likely have to support the national standard of living they became
accustomed to at $30 + per barrel. There probably isn't any "discretionary" income to buy the
gold with.

jinx44 (3/24/99; 7:34:44MDT - Msg ID:3780)
Beesting at 15%
Reference your post of yesterday---"My opinion, they may cut oil supplies to countries who pay
in dollars simply because at some point in time they may want to cash in EURO'S for the 15%
Gold content". I have posited this question too, and don't feel I have ever received a good
answer.

I have yet to receive any confirmation that the ECB will give up ANY gold if you want to cash
in euros. They will take gold in exchange for euros but it is a one-way street. They have gold
backing but no convertability to gold. The euro is just another fiat currency like the dollar, but
without the debt associated with it. Hence, if the OPEC nations switch to the euro for oil
settlement, the demand for the euro will far outstrip the supply. This demand is what I see
bolstering the euro, not the 15% gold "backing". It is not a perfect currency, it just doesn't have
the debt baggage the $US has. That is its' secret.

The Stranger (3/24/99; 8:35:10MDT - Msg ID:3782)
jinx44
I think an OPEC switch to the Euro is very plausible. However, with so many other variables
affecting currency valuation, such as relative rates of inflation, economic growth and so on, I do
not have the courage to predict Euro vs. dollar.

One other point: Opec oil doesn't normally sell to countries. It sells to international oil
companies. Opec would have difficulty denying delivery to selected nations.

By the way, how or why the oil companies have kept the secret of history's greatest transfer of
gold from their stockholders is beyond me. If the theory were true, I suspect there would be a lot
of law suits coming.

Jade (3/24/99; 9:54:36MDT - Msg ID:3790)
Peter Asher
That would make a good argument, but they have only seen 30 dollar oil in 3 years.
1980-1981-1982. The average over the last 30 years has been 21 and if it you look at the prices
year by year they run in the 15-19 dollar range. About right where we are now. What I have
proposed here has nothing to do with the Euro. This is an engineered plan [no doubt by Rubin]
to add fresh liquidity using Gold as an option to increase the percentage in the play. It also buys
Rubin time [friends of Rubin] to unwind some of their Gold Shorts before the time runs out. So
they are killing two birds with one stone, with that stone being Gold at 282-286. Also I would
add, if we can not really figure out if Buffet still holds his Silver, how are we going to see
200-400 tons run thru Dubai into Saudi or some dumb Central Bank handing over 100's of tons
in trade for electronic fiat USD's. I think these oil producers are a little smarter than we give
credit. They have survived the insanity that rules in that part of the world over the last 30 years.


Jade (3/24/99; 19:31:50MDT - Msg ID:3812)
Detailed Calculations for the Gold/Oil Exchange Rate
Gold/Oil Exchange Rate for the years 1968 to 1998. These calculations are approximate.

Oil in USD per Barrel [Avg. for Yr]….Date….Gold Price [Avg. for Yr]….Gold/Oil Exchange
Rate [Barrels of Oil per 1 OZ Gold]
2.7...1968…..38..14
2.7...1969..…41..15
2.7...1970..…36..13.5
2.7...1971..…40..14.9
3…..1972…..58..19.3
5…..1973…..97..19.4
10.….1974…159..16
11…..1975…161..14.6
12.5...1976…124…9.9
14…..1977…147...10.5
15…. 1978…193....13
20…..1979…306…20.4
30…..1980…612…18
32…..1981…460…14.3
27…..1982…375…14
25…..1983…424…17
24…..1984…360…15
22…..1985…317…14.4
14…..1986…367…26.2
15…..1987…446…29.7
14…..1988…436…31.1
15…..1989…381…25.4
17…..1990…383…22.5
15…..1991…362…24.1
14…..1992…343…24.5
13…..1993…359…27.6
12.5.. 1994…384…30.7
13…..1995…384…29.5
14.5...1996…387…26.6
14…..1997…325…23.2
13…..1998…305…23.46
11.5..Dec98...297…25.8 Averages for Months
12.8..Jan99…287…22.4
12.3..Feb99…287…23.3
Event [Gold manipulation downward and rise in Oil]
15.25.Mar99…282-284…18.6..18.5
Average is 21-1 for 1968-1999…Average for 1986-1999 is 26.5 to 1. The exchange rate as of
mid March has now shifted to Oils favor. Again when we see Oil at 17-18 and the exchange rate
normalizes back to a historical average we will no doubt see 400+ Gold.

Gandalf the White (3/24/99; 23:18:48MDT - Msg ID:3821)
Re: Peter's question
somehow I got the idea that the crude oil "contract" was for a set low price per barrel -- plus
gold based on the price of say $30,000. per oz. This would not be anywhere near your large
quantity of physical. Does this make sense to you ? Whom is the buyer?- I have no idea. From
where does the physical come?- I have no idea. your comments please.

Peter Asher (3/25/99; 0:00:34MDT - Msg ID:3822)
Jade, AEL, ET, One thing led to another here.
Jade: Whatever time the Saudis were getting whatever price for their oil was not really my
point. My understanding is that they, like the rest of the planet, are living beyond their means at
the moment. Therefore, they wouldn't have funds for gold hoarding, unless they raided the
national "grocery jar".

The storage of value in gold, requires one to have some unspent value available to store.

Oil trades in the marketplace. Producers sell it by whatever deal they can achieve with users
who desire it. Maybe next week the best deal for some producers of oil may be 50 cumquats or
100 oranges per barrel. Or maybe a couple of thousand barrels for an SAM missile. The
marketplace may never again trade gold for oil at its historic rate, or maybe it will.

Suppose the world collapsed back to basics. You (and certainly Aristotle) may have by then
accumulated a substantial stored value in gold. I, on the other hand would probably have
prepared for that eventuality by acquiring a wheatfield, a stone grinder and an oven. Unless you
use some of that gold to acquire the means to produce something for exchange, I will eventually
have all your gold and still have my wheatfield, grinder and oven.

So let's move on now to AEL's lovely reality check regarding the Japanese postal bonds.

I am fascinated how similar this is to the WWII War Bond. These were ‘pay interest at maturity'
10- year instruments where you paid out $75.00 for a bond of $100 face value. After the war, as
the maturity date came up, the government tried to get people to keep them longer and have the
redemption value increase over time according to a table of value that I believe was printed on
the back. Basically, perpetual IOUs until cashed. They also came up with new issues, which
they then called ‘Savings' bonds, to replace (or create) the money paid out in redeeming the War
Bonds.

Bonds, stocks, Savings accounts, money market funds and CD's all have in common the simple,
but I think often overlooked, fact that the money which purchased them has been SPENT! The
most paramount factor in mankind's economic life is what that money gets spent for. When
government spends on welfare, social programs or weapons; nothing which can pay back
anything can be produced as a result of that expenditure. Likewise, when individuals spend
borrowed money for things that are consumed, such as food or movie tickets, no productive
capability is created.

Believe it or not, in the 1940's people who bought things on time payments were considered "the
poor". Houses were mortgaged, but that was pretty much it. As the post-war economy got revved
up, auto loans became socially accepted, and then appliances. However, in those days, the loan
spans were definitively shorter than the life spans of the products. Since the convenience and the
personal labor saving which was derived from possessions allowed one to produce more in
life, there was still some productive payback, even from consumer credit.

I think the moment in time when the world began to go hell in an economic handbasket was when
the banks came up with the Vacation Loan. I was a young man at the time, no more interested in
economics than I was in an old age home. But I remember thinking, "I don't believe this! They're
going to lend money for something that will be gone before the loan's paid back!" What once
made no sense is now considered totally logical. That, by the way, is the key to the dwindling
spiral of our society. Getting people to accept as normal, that which a sound and sane mind
would reject out of hand.
ET: That's what's happening to these generations you were referring to the other day. Ever hear
the expression "Values Neutral"? It's what the New World Order folks are having the shrinks put
into our school systems to create a nation of psychopathic "Epsilons" who won't have the ethics
or the intelligence to use the law of the land to defend themselves against the Masters of the
Universe.

All our analysis of monetary function will be to no avail if we don't get a grip on the underlying
activities of those who wish to create their wealth by the enslavement of everyone else. Take a
starved man, feed him well, chain him to a Galley Oar and only whip him occasionally. He may
perceive he's doing better!


Peter Asher (3/25/99; 0:06:56MDT - Msg ID:3823)
Jade, AEL, ET, One thing led to another here.
Jade: Whatever time the Saudis were getting whatever price for their oil was not really my
point. My understanding is that they, like the rest of the planet, are living beyond their means at
the moment. Therefore, they wouldn't have funds for gold hoarding, unless they raided the
national "grocery jar".

The storage of value in gold, requires one to have some unspent value available to store.

Oil trades in the marketplace. Producers sell it by whatever deal they can achieve with users
who desire it. Maybe next week the best deal for some producers of oil may be 50 cumquats or
100 oranges per barrel. Or maybe a couple of thousand barrels for an SAM missile. The
marketplace may never again trade gold for oil at its historic rate, or maybe it will.

Suppose the world collapsed back to basics. You (and certainly Aristotle) may have by then
accumulated a substantial stored value in gold. I, on the other hand would probably have
prepared for that eventuality by acquiring a wheatfield, a stone grinder and an oven. Unless you
use some of that gold to acquire the means to produce something for exchange, I will eventually
have all your gold and still have my wheatfield, grinder and oven.

So let's move on now to AEL's lovely reality check regarding the Japanese postal bonds.

I am fascinated how similar this is to the WWII War Bond. These were ‘pay interest at maturity'
10- year instruments where you paid out $75.00 for a bond of $100 face value. After the war, as
the maturity date came up, the government tried to get people to keep them longer and have the
redemption value increase over time according to a table of value that I believe was printed on
the back. Basically, perpetual IOUs until cashed. They also came up with new issues, which
they then called ‘Savings' bonds, to replace (or create) the money paid out in redeeming the War
Bonds.

Bonds, stocks, Savings accounts, money market funds and CD's all have in common the simple,
but I think often overlooked, fact that the money which purchased them has been SPENT! The
most paramount factor in mankind's economic life is what that money gets spent for. When
government spends on welfare, social programs or weapons; nothing which can pay back
anything can be produced as a result of that expenditure. Likewise, when individuals spend
borrowed money for things that are consumed, such as food or movie tickets, no productive
capability is created.

Believe it or not, in the 1940's people who bought things on time payments were considered "the
poor". Houses were mortgaged, but that was pretty much it. As the post-war economy got revved
up, auto loans became socially accepted, and then appliances. However, in those days, the loan
spans were definitively shorter than the life spans of the products. Since the convenience and the
personal labor saving which was derived from possessions allowed one to produce more in
life, there was still some productive payback, even from consumer credit.

I think the moment in time when the world began to go hell in an economic handbasket was when
the banks came up with the Vacation Loan. I was a young man at the time, no more interested in
economics than I was in an old age home. But I remember thinking, "I don't believe this! They're
going to lend money for something that will be gone before the loan's paid back!" What once
made no sense is now considered totally logical. That, by the way, is the key to the dwindling
spiral of our society. Getting people to accept as normal, that which a sound and sane mind
would reject out of hand.
ET: That's what's happening to these generations you were referring to the other day. Ever hear
the expression "Values Neutral"? It's what the New World Order folks are having the shrinks put
into our school systems to create a nation of psychopathic "Epsilons" who won't have the ethics
or the intelligence to use the law of the land to defend themselves against the Masters of the
Universe.

All our analysis of monetary function will be to no avail if we don't get a grip on the underlying
activities of those who wish to create their wealth by the enslavement of everyone else. Take a
starved man, feed him well, chain him to a Galley Oar and only whip him occasionally. He may
perceive he's doing better!

Aragorn III (3/25/99; 3:23:55MDT - Msg ID:3827)
The Stranger and turbohawg: Oil, Gold, & the Dollar

What is OPEC up to? What is the euro for?

Surely you are not so inclined to think your brilliance is not distributed around the world? You
have an exit strategy--gold. Or rather, a Survival strategy. You are not alone. But recognize that
national concerns are not the same as individuals' concerns. You have options not available to
nations, and nations have options not available to you. The euro. In the past I have explored the
many sides of the euro, some as pure exercise. "This is not the gold standard of your fathers"
I've said before. This remains true. It shall be a contractual currency, unencumbered as is the
dollar with debt that cannot be serviced. Yet in its euro price gold will display its true value.

What folly is it to suggest that a body is impoverished that commands a position atop a
commodity needed the world over. Impoverished, no. In dire need of contract renegotiation to
undo past mismanagement? Yes. Much like the United States renegotiated its debts in 1971 by
saying "no more gold shall be paid to settle accumulated dollar-denominated debts". Dollars at
that point became very cheap and easy to come by. OPEC is in the position to do likewise,
though they will say "no more oil will be paid to settle accumulated dollar-denominated debts".
By pricing oil in euros, the U.S. will find that euros are not easy to obtain as the U.S. is a net
importing nation. And what more need will any net exporting nation have for U.S. Dollars as
balance of trade when oil requires euros? Suddenly, the outside world is not eager to accept any
few dollars for its real products. Exchange rate of the dollar falls, and all countries use these
newly cheap dollars to settle all accumulated dollar-denominated debts. That is the exit strategy
of nations. The U.S. will be at a disadvantage until it achieves meaningful balance of trade. It
cannot continue to print its primary export value. This will not kill the future demand for oil. The
world is a much larger place than 50 united States, and any group of nations would be equally
happy to rise to the occasion to be the fat consumer of last resort.

These are the few remaining days of easy money. I suggest you use them wisely. Here's a
hint...gold is the universal currency. Here's another hint...

got gold?


ORO (10/22/2000; 0:13:57MT - usagold.com msg#: 39631)
ThaiGold – interesting but unworkable
ThaiGold – interesting but unworkable

1. The closure of the gold trade is a repeat of the 20s and 30s. The main cause for global chaos and economic constriction and contraction was the introduction of irredeemable currencies during the war and the failure of renewing the gold standard after it. The switch to permanently irredeemable currencies immediately raised the cost of trade, thus moving the center of gravity of many industries producing internationally traded goods. The US was among the last to do so but suffered the same consequences of reduced trade due to other nations adopting funny money (among other things).
The whole point of the "rescue" you propose is that international trade continue. Without gold settlement (gold import and export), it would stop altogether for a while till markets can figure a way around it and choose a new settlement mechanism. Once it is figured out, trade would still be reduced compared to where it was, and would never grow as quickly as it could otherwise.
"Virtual Confiscation" after a currency meltdown would bring a severe reduction in trade because of the illiquidity of substitutes for gold. As I stated before, at the end of a profitable business venture is profit, the purpose of the venture was to gain that profit. Out of profit, part is reinvested, part is "stored" as wealth. Of all items that are wealth gold is most liquid and the most useful for "non specific" storage of purchasing power. Without gold trading anonymously and freely, the liquidity of the wealth portion of profit would be reduced and thus introduce a further inefficiency into the market another cost from which none benefit. You should note that the Asian countries, where gold is actively used for wealth accumulation, grew much more quickly in physical output than the West for 4 decades despite crony "capitalism" and abysmal banking practices, as well as dollar debt and often incompetent governments.
To make it clear, some 10% of profit is traditionally put into wealth and not consumed. Of that, liquid real assets (a.k.a. gold) take a portion – say 10% without considering liquidity issues. When liquidity is considered, gold is 20-30% of the "exit" (estate liquidation) value of the wealth accumulated simply because gold loses much less of its value upon quick sale than does a painting or a Ming vase. Limiting the gold trade would raise the return on investment required by the large worldly investor in proportion to that loss, which at 20-30%, say 25%, leaves 75% - which raises the required return on investment by 1/0.75=1.33 or 33%. This means that large scale business opportunities would not be taken up till expected profits grow by that proportion. Furthermore, upon getting wind of the planned "confiscation" ("virtual" or otherwise) investment would simply stop dead in its tracks as everyone converts all possible portions of their profit into wealth in order to compensate for the expected loss of 1/4 of their wealth.
We saw this in the 30s BEFORE confiscation when the decoupling of the dollar from gold was proposed by Democrats, Keynesians, and bankers. People withdrew specie in droves, and many took it out of the country, many others melted it into jewelry and "artwork". FDR and his backer's program was the cause for the continued bank panic, and the subsequent destruction of the banks that survived the initial meltdown – which was most of them, 80%. The other 40% that died before FDR took office were destroyed because decoupling gold from the dollar was expected by enough people, and they hurried to take their gold out of the banks and put it wherever they felt it was safe.
It took another 10 years for investment to start over when WWII started and the new business opportunities were made available. And even then, the owners of great fortunes could still retrieve their profits in gold somewhere abroad – since the gold window operated till 1971. Among the results of the closure of the gold window was the rise of the minimum return on investment level that resulted from the need to assure conversion of the dollars into gold in a floating exchange market – which contributed to the intensity of stagflation in the 70s as the needed investment in industry was delayed till margins allowed sufficient profit to compensate for the risk in exchange for gold once parity was removed.


2. It is an absolute necessity for credit money to expand following a prior period of expansion. Thus the "Virtual Confiscation" and new "gold backed" dollars can not coexist with the current rules of the game – of what money is, who creates it, and how. The rules would have to change according to the new gold standard. They would mean that banks and their clients in industry and politics – as well as the average mortgage and car borrower – adjust to having their power curtailed by an order of magnitude.
In short, it would create the same problem that the above are trying to avoid.

3. The program, so far as I can understand it, does not seem to serve any purpose nor any set of identifiable interests. The dollar reserve system is the equivalent of a seignorage tax (through interest rate premiums, or spreads) on the world that ranges from 9%-30% of international trade for Europe (9% for government, and up to 30% for business), to 60% for many South American countries, and was 50-70% for many in Asia. The cost translates to about 3% of GDP for the EU at the bottom end, and at the high end: 25% of GDP for Korea before the crisis and some 45% of GDP for Korea during the height of the crisis and some 30% today. I consider these figures to be underestimates, by the way.

This simply raises the question of why would anyone outside the G-1, the US, would want to suffer America's "exorbitant privilege". Why would the G-11, 10, 7 continue with this?

4. TrailGuide made the point that the US must stay within terms acceptable to the world community in order to retain access to oil and other raw materials at prices that allow its industries to remain competitive. It can't be done by force because the world will not let the US do it without a war, and we are not willing to have WWIII (at least not yet), and we are not assured of "winning" it. The terms that make it possible are the terms of the "neutral" currency; gold. At the end of the day, the leftover portion of trade that did not settle in currency must be settled in gold (and silver…). This can only be replaced by settlement in the goods of wealth – important art, antiquities, etc… but not without paying for the reduced liquidity – meaning that the portion that is not settled in currency would double or triple to compensate for the reduced liquidity of alternatives to gold.






ViewYesterday's Discussion.

Permission to reprint is hereby granted where the USAGOLD name is cited along with our web address, mailing address and phone number. For electronic reproductions, citing the post heading and the http://www.usagold.com/cpmforum/ website address as the source is sufficient.

Centennial Precious Metals Gold coins & bullion since 1973 P.O. Box 460009 Denver, Colorado 80246-0009 We educate first-time investors!

We invite you to contact our trading