David Farrer Gold is an insurance policy - or a store of value - rather than an investment. Over the centuries it has tended to maintain its purchasing power. Only a small proportion of my savings is in gold but I would always advocate having some exposure to the metal. I purchased some gold shares last April and they are now up 33%. I got a better price in June and those ones are up 42%. Not bad in 5 months. Almost all western governments are now in high-spend mode. It seems a good time to have that well tested "insurance" in place.
29 November 2005, 18:08:45 GMT – Like – Reply
Robert Speirs Is there some reason why all the folks who say "gold's at the highest level in 18 years" are ignoring the effects of inflation? How stupid do they think people are? Don't answer that. $500 dollar gold is equal to about $200 in '80s prices. Great ROI, eh?
29 November 2005, 15:02:08 GMT – Like – Reply
Wild Pegasus Moral of these two graphs:
Buy whatever the Japanese can't make (oil, gold, land).
- Josh
29 November 2005, 05:20:30 GMT – Like – Reply
cuthhyra Under real socialism all such problems will disappear.
Indeed! I was in need of a chuckle on a cold Edinburgh Monday morning.
28 November 2005, 09:42:43 GMT – Like – Reply
David Farrer CRAP!!! Bloody Haloscan won't let me post my mile-long responce.
Under real socialism all such problems will disappear.
27 November 2005, 20:40:45 GMT – Like – Reply
Martin Kelly Ragnar,
I don't know if David would agree with this, but from where I sit your average Scotsman's lunch was eaten many years ago.
27 November 2005, 17:26:08 GMT – Like – Reply
cuthhyra logical socialism - the ultimate oxymoron
27 November 2005, 02:06:10 GMT – Like – Reply
Ragnar Danashold Huzzah! Victory is mine, you worthless pile of crap! Hahahahahha! Beating the system feels sooooo good.
Ragnar Danashold CRAP!!! Bloody Haloscan won't let me post my mile-long responce.
Let me try something...
"This goes WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY back, but here's my responces...
"Hmm. "Democratic rule of the economy by Citizens and Workers", eh? To what level? Does that mean other people should have a vote on whether I buy a cheese and tomato sandwich for lunch, or a ham salad? No? OK then, how about what kind of car I buy? No? What kind of house I live in? Its furniture? These are all economic activities which at whatever level have an effect on the economy, but I really don't see why they should be submitted to some sort of democratic decision. The consumer, voting with his own money, is a far more efficient at sending signals to producers than is some managed process of democracy. You only have to look at the failure of the Stalinist command model of the NHS, and how it wrestles with insoluble problems of resource allocation, to see that "democratic control" ie politically motivated decision-making, really shafts the consumer at every turn."
I don't want a command economy. I'm talking about people controling what gets built and where, and so on. The consumer-producer relationship will essentially be the same, except that more accountability will be held.
When I talk about economics, I'm just talking about the production and consumption relationship: who has the power over what gets produced, and what standards that's held to.
"Indeed. Yet there was a time when many socialists regarded the Soviet Union as a model state, some in the Trade Union movement did this into the 1980's (though most socialists had seen the light by 1970)."
Propaganda's a marvelous thing, init?
"And yet after Soviet Communism had self evidently failed, socialists started claiming "oh that wasn't really communism at all!"."
My boys (the Trotskyists) were saying that BEFORE it became evident to the rest of the world that Stalin was a fascist motherfuck.
"There are perfectly logical reasons why communism does not work, and all this guff about "Socialism is the democratic rule of the economy by the Citizans and Workers" is just more pie in the sky."
And your idea of total laizze faire capitalism being just and proper won't work either. It was our corrupt President Herbert Hoover who said, "The only problem with capitalism is capitalists."
"Communism and socialism: Great, humane philosophies, if only every layer of government could be run by a machine."
Hell, Maoism would work but for human nature. That's the thing about Trotskyists and Democratic Socialists: we arn't as trusting as Mao and Stalin. No, we set up checks and balances on power.
"Unfortunately, the petty corruption which always engulfs every attempt at either tends to remind us that even the people who enforce such utopic societies tend to create their own imperfect little free markets whenever the prospect of an extra few quid raises its head."
Socialism, in it's orginal form, doesn't seek to distroy the free market entirly. In fact, I'm a strong supporter of small businesses, and I consider small businessmen part of the Prolitariate. However, once Communism comes into place (that is, a moneyless classless yada yada yada...), small businesses will become redundant. If there's no money, what will be the point of starting a business.
"Unfortunately, the communists/socialists often believe that by benefitting oneself, the individual does so at the deliberate expense of others, which is of course a nonsense. This is as myopic an argument as that evinced by Digby Jones, CBI chief, that a "Chinaman or an Indian is after our lunch", by the simple act of those countries beginning to lift themselves out of poverty."
I believe in the John Nash theory of economics: The best result comes from everyone in the group doing what's best for themselves and the group." I don't think that self-interest should distroy the rest of society in the process. The whole Ayn Rand theory of "I'm better than you, get the fuck outta my way" is dangerous. You want logic? Go with logical socialism.
Sorry it's been so long. Hope everyone's alright on the other side of the pond."
4 comments:
Comments made on previous template:
David Farrer
Gold is an insurance policy - or a store of value - rather than an investment. Over the centuries it has tended to maintain its purchasing power. Only a small proportion of my savings is in gold but I would always advocate having some exposure to the metal. I purchased some gold shares last April and they are now up 33%. I got a better price in June and those ones are up 42%. Not bad in 5 months. Almost all western governments are now in high-spend mode. It seems a good time to have that well tested "insurance" in place.
29 November 2005, 18:08:45 GMT
– Like – Reply
Robert Speirs
Is there some reason why all the folks who say "gold's at the highest level in 18 years" are ignoring the effects of inflation? How stupid do they think people are? Don't answer that. $500 dollar gold is equal to about $200 in '80s prices. Great ROI, eh?
29 November 2005, 15:02:08 GMT
– Like – Reply
Wild Pegasus
Moral of these two graphs:
Buy whatever the Japanese can't make (oil, gold, land).
- Josh
29 November 2005, 05:20:30 GMT
– Like – Reply
cuthhyra
Under real socialism all such problems will disappear.
Indeed! I was in need of a chuckle on a cold Edinburgh Monday morning.
28 November 2005, 09:42:43 GMT
– Like – Reply
David Farrer
CRAP!!! Bloody Haloscan won't let me post my mile-long responce.
Under real socialism all such problems will disappear.
27 November 2005, 20:40:45 GMT
– Like – Reply
Martin Kelly
Ragnar,
I don't know if David would agree with this, but from where I sit your average Scotsman's lunch was eaten many years ago.
27 November 2005, 17:26:08 GMT
– Like – Reply
cuthhyra
logical socialism - the ultimate oxymoron
27 November 2005, 02:06:10 GMT
– Like – Reply
Ragnar Danashold
Huzzah! Victory is mine, you worthless pile of crap! Hahahahahha! Beating the system feels sooooo good.
26 November 2005, 22:26:39 GMT
– Like – Reply
Ragnar Danashold
CRAP!!! Bloody Haloscan won't let me post my mile-long responce.
Let me try something...
"This goes WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY back, but here's my responces...
"Hmm. "Democratic rule of the economy by Citizens and Workers", eh? To what level? Does that mean other people should have a vote on whether I buy a cheese and tomato sandwich for lunch, or a ham salad? No? OK then, how about what kind of car I buy? No? What kind of house I live in? Its furniture?
These are all economic activities which at whatever level have an effect on the economy, but I really don't see why they should be submitted to some sort of democratic decision. The consumer, voting with his own money, is a far more efficient at sending signals to producers than is some managed process of democracy. You only have to look at the failure of the Stalinist command model of the NHS, and how it wrestles with insoluble problems of resource allocation, to see that "democratic control" ie politically motivated decision-making, really shafts the consumer at every turn."
I don't want a command economy. I'm talking about people controling what gets built and where, and so on. The consumer-producer relationship will essentially be the same, except that more accountability will be held.
When I talk about economics, I'm just talking about the production and consumption relationship: who has the power over what gets produced, and what standards that's held to.
"Indeed. Yet there was a time when many socialists regarded the Soviet Union as a model state, some in the Trade Union movement did this into the 1980's (though most socialists had seen the light by 1970)."
Propaganda's a marvelous thing, init?
"And yet after Soviet Communism had self evidently failed, socialists started claiming "oh that wasn't really communism at all!"."
My boys (the Trotskyists) were saying that BEFORE it became evident to the rest of the world that Stalin was a fascist motherfuck.
"There are perfectly logical reasons why communism does not work, and all this guff about "Socialism is the democratic rule of the economy by the Citizans and Workers" is just more pie in the sky."
And your idea of total laizze faire capitalism being just and proper won't work either. It was our corrupt President Herbert Hoover who said, "The only problem with capitalism is capitalists."
"Communism and socialism: Great, humane philosophies, if only every layer of government could be run by a machine."
Hell, Maoism would work but for human nature. That's the thing about Trotskyists and Democratic Socialists: we arn't as trusting as Mao and Stalin. No, we set up checks and balances on power.
"Unfortunately, the petty corruption which always engulfs every attempt at either tends to remind us that even the people who enforce such utopic societies tend to create their own imperfect little free markets whenever the prospect of an extra few quid raises its head."
Socialism, in it's orginal form, doesn't seek to distroy the free market entirly. In fact, I'm a strong supporter of small businesses, and I consider small businessmen part of the Prolitariate. However, once Communism comes into place (that is, a moneyless classless yada yada yada...), small businesses will become redundant. If there's no money, what will be the point of starting a business.
"Unfortunately, the communists/socialists often believe that by benefitting oneself, the individual does so at the deliberate expense of others, which is of course a nonsense. This is as myopic an argument as that evinced by Digby Jones, CBI chief, that a "Chinaman or an Indian is after our lunch", by the simple act of those countries beginning to lift themselves out of poverty."
I believe in the John Nash theory of economics: The best result comes from everyone in the group doing what's best for themselves and the group." I don't think that self-interest should distroy the rest of society in the process. The whole Ayn Rand theory of "I'm better than you, get the fuck outta my way" is dangerous. You want logic? Go with logical socialism.
Sorry it's been so long. Hope everyone's alright on the other side of the pond."
26 November 2005, 22:25:32 GMT
– Like – Reply
David Farrer
Yes, and Gordon Brown sold half of the UK's gold reserves when the price was at its lowest for twenty years.
26 November 2005, 19:59:49 GMT
– Like – Reply
Martin Kelly
David,
Looks like old Mr. Inflation's on the way... and they won't be able to pin this one on the unions...
26 November 2005, 17:28:10 GMT
Post a Comment