Replies to post #358041 on Zeev's Turnips Patch-No Politics (ZEEV)

[zztops]

I received a lot of interesting replies to my post, including this one. I just scanned your posts that you listed concerning the gold standard and I will study those posts much more closely. It is a question I have wondered about but have, at this point, no opinion on (because of my severe lack of knowledge on the subject, I am sure).

As usual, I continue to learn, almost on a minute by minute basis, from what I read in this room.

[Public Heel]

Were you falling behind in your word-of-the-day calendar? <g> OK, obnubilation and kinephantom are easy enough, but asteisticon? Did you spell that right?

[zztops]

Zeev, I just finished reading your listed posts; here is one sentence that you wrote in sept, 2003 that caught my eye:

<<Simply put, a major move in gold is not going to be tied to gold's fundamentals anytime soon. Gold price, IMTO, simply reflects the relative strength or weakness of the dollar. >>

That was a tad prescient of you

[langostino]

nice one Zeev

obnubilation. sent me scurrying for a dictionary. you win the "Scrabble" award for the day. (Again, lol!)

[orkrious]

If we stayed on the gold standard, the economic cycle would drastically amplified and we would go from massive inflation followed by depressions every decade.

good post in rebuttal

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21043233

[lee kramer]

Hi Zeev: After wading through your few lovely and incomprehensible words; after taking three advil to ease my crashing headache, I agree with you that it would be prudent for us to have a tie, even a tenuous tie, to gold...if only to put a "limit" on the printing press capers the boys occasionally enjoy.