re: Brown’s £2 billion blunder in the gold bullion market

'Yes, we all knew this.'

...and that mumble, not even a sentence, is what you learned in school? ...and, you completed your PHD course work? I doubt that.


If you ever had an original thought it would probably cause you cardiac arrest.

'I said that for the individual investor, taking physical ownership of gold is not a particularly good hedge against inflation and that there are better ways to meet that goal. This has nothing at all to do with whether a currency should be backed by gold or any other commodity'.

There are 80 times more paper gold than actual physical gold in the entire world. That includes both mined gold and gold that is still in the ground.

One of the current largest holders of the gold ETF (GLD) is now reported to be J.P Morgan, which is also a holder of one of the largest short gold positions on the COMEX. There was a bit of a row last year when it was revealed that the rules of the exchange would allow holders of short gold positions to make delivery good in, wait for it, the GLD ETF rather than in physical bullion.

If, as an individual you want to take possession of a GLD ETF instead of physical gold that is your perogative...not mine or anyone with half a brain. Paper is not gold. See this link for verification of Barrik/JP Morgans recent slap down in court...'Barrik Capitulates'... LINK

'If you want to talk about a gold standard instead of what you as an individual are wise to invest in, fine. That's a legitimate topic too, just not the one we've been talking about. One is a matter of personal investment strategy, the other is a matter of national monetary policy.'

I have not advocated for a gold standard although I do believe that a currency backed by a large variety of commodities would be an improvement over any fiat currency. One is real, the other can be printed, and has been, at the whim of monarcharys, empires, democracys, etc. Anything that can be printed, will be printed when times get tough...that can be seen today as the US runs $trillions in deficits...much of which is printed from thin air and backed by nothing. If you believe what the US is doing today is sustainable then, by all means, run out and buy yourself a stack of paper gold certificates.

'I do find it ironic though that you are quoting an article by Greenspan that argues we should trust in certificates. Backed by gold, sure, but still certificates. In other posts you have said this is a *bad* thing.'

At the time Greenspan made the comments you refer to the dollar was still convertable to gold/silver upon demand. Now it is not. Paper gold or ETFs today are not the same as the US Dollar of 1966. You are attempting to compare apples and oranges...again.

'So I am wondering why you cite Greenspan as an authority when he is arguing for something you explicitly disagree with.'

Again...the Greenspan essay that I often quote was penned by him in 1966. The US at that time was the worlds largest exporter, the worlds largest creditor nation, had by far the strongest economy in the world, etc. The US of today in no way compares to the US when Greenspan penned his 'Gold and Economic Freedom' essay.

Are you one of the idiots that believe that people should not change their minds if new evidence or new circumstances come to light? Do you believe that people should not change their minds no matter what happens? Would your best friend still be your best friend if you returned from work to find your best friend in the sack with your wife?

Over time, circumstances do change and anyone that does not change to allow for new circumstances has a low percentage of replication in the gene pool.

As a special favor to you and all that hate individual physical ownership of gold I am going to link to Greenspans 1966 essay every time that you declare that physical possession of gold is a 'bad idea'...So, if you want to see this link a thousand times, bring up the subject a thousand times...Only the last two paragraphs are below...remainder of essay at link at bottom.

'Gold and Economic Freedom'

'by Alan Greenspan
[written in 1966]

This article originally appeared in a newsletter: The Objectivist published in 1966 and was reprinted in Ayn Rand's Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal'

'In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.'

quote:

---

I point out the flaws in your quoting Greenspan, and now suddenly his comments don't matter because they were written in 1966?

---

Rivers does this quite often, if you have noticed. He gets confused and starts arguing against what he previously supported. He did it a week or so ago regarding the IMF/World Bank. He forgot which organization was European controlled versus U.S. controlled and he contradicted himself within the same thread.

I think he may have a touch of Alzheimer's....

Why don't you explain how you can criticize Greenspan and then praise him IN THE SAME THREAD for doing the same thing and make it appear that you know what you are talking about? I say you can't do it.

'Says the man who is most well known for cutting and pasting giant bocks of unreadable text from other websites.'

When I see interesting thoughts I put them here for those that want to read them. If you don't like it, tough shite.

I happen to realize that there are far smarter people in the world than any that post on this board...including you. If you want to remain ignorant that is your business, do not tell me what I can and cannot post. Take it up with Chicken, last I heard he was still running this board.

Thank you.

'I think he may have a touch of Alzheimer's....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'A touch of something, anway.'

And yet another insightful post from foshizzle...the PHD candidate that has completed all his course work...But where is his thesis? Looking at foshizzle's writing (I use the term loosely) anyone can understand that he cannot compose a single sentence, much less a thesis.

Hey, foshizzle...there is hope for you yet! Some folks will write you a thesis for remuneration! Look around campus...they are there and waiting for numbskulls to come along and pay them.

You are pathetic.

' His reply was rude and pathetic.'

The reply was crafted especially for you, WHOGAS.

quote:

---

At the Ph.D. level it's called a dissertation, not a thesis.

---

I've been waiting all day for you to correct him on that. I started to do it, but decided you would enjoy doing it even more than I would.



Is this Rivers?