Silver getting crushed today

Because, yeah, there's not enough Randian claptrap and drivel out there in pop econo-culture.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Classy! (lol) Color me shocked you would attack the character, of someone not here to defend themselves. Your's is a fake science but I think you might be so indoctrinated, you don't realize that?

I'm being nice and giving you the benefit of the doubt. (lol)

 

The truth can be downright scary. In a few years, interest on the national debt might be the third largest expenditure in the Federal budget. That money would buy a lot of schools, highways, bridges, medical research, etc.

 

The dude who wrote Creature was "Alex Jones" before Alex Jones was "Alex Jones".

 

... or you could be so indoctrinated as to not realize you're all about an extremist ideology and/or values system.

The truth is NOT that economics is "95% common sense", but that 95% of correctly analyzed economics is counterintuitive to those without formal training in it.

Macroeconomics in particular is a field in which what often gets described as "common sense" will pretty instantly lead one astray in a 180 degrees out-of-phase sense. You'd do better to take what your "common sense" suggests is right in macroeconomics and do the exact OPPOSITE.

Now microeconomics? Yeah, something akin to "common sense" can apply to that.

 

As far as Econ lessons . . . At some point we should have a thread on inflation itself and how it could/or could not affect the value of bullion - since it so often comes up in connection with bullion. It could 'probably' be done apolitically.

 

Hey, I'm a microeconomics, of course with education in MacroEconomics first.

Economics is not Easy once you get into economies. Economies can be generalized in a Macro aspect, though it's still very complex. Whereas in a micro aspect of smaller segments/areas can get more complex.

But still Global monetary economies are based on people and their spending/ saving/ investing habits and impacts. And there's nothing "easy" about that.

There 5 things you learn about people posting things about Economists:
1 - 95% of people do not have common sense, even though they think they do.
2 - Most people don't make common sense.
3 - People are political; and thus normally lack common sense.
4 - Never trust people who think they know Common Sense.
5 - Economists always typically know better.

 

The key question always boils down to one - does one believe that the "money supply" is destiny regarding inflation or not? I would've thought the 2008/09 and since experience would have taught us the answer is "no" pretty irrefutably. And if not that, then my 2011 Money Talk at Rosemont/Chicago should have done it, as I attacked the issue head-on.

You can get a DVD of that talk from www.cointelevision.com. The title is, "Why Precious Metals Can Be Risky: A Contrarian Viewpoint". The catalog number is ANA11-052, and my brilliance in it runs 56:22 in length.

Metals? Risky? In summer of 2011? Yeahhhhh.

 

"Thou dost protest too much."

Are you sure your not a closet Randite?

Oh how careless of me. I forgot to post the link to Franscisco's money speech:

http://capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/

 

On an episode of Big Bang Theory, the character Sheldon Copper says to Penny, "Oh Penny, I'm a physicist, I understand everything." He was close. He meant to say "economist".

 

Maybe. I just moved and even my closets are "open concept" now.

 

speaking of which.
one could ask why are all the big moves in the US market time?

 

If we look at almost every instance of noteworthy inflation over the last century, it always starts on the ground with rising prices that stick due to a variety of scenarios. 2 stand out the most for me - real or imposed shortages of a particular high-demand commodity, sometimes due to consolidated control, such as 70's oil; and 3rd party cost involvement such as we see with tuition and medical care.

The Gov't/Fed either takes effective or ineffective measures once it is involved. It's a 'coping mechanism', not the 'source'. Even in scenarios of hyperinflation the problem starts at the bottom - falling productivity, shortages, hoarding, often war-strain, etc. and consumer goods skyrocket. Of course you can always blame gov't for policies that led to such inflation, but not the inflation itself.

If fiat money has no intrinsic value, does it really matter how much of it there is? It's all relative.

Bullion is being hoarded by major nations/institutions, so clearly it must have substantial value. But whether inflation makes a difference is another matter.

Anyway, one opinion, would love to hear more.

 

Money is covered by military strength. You do realize it's been almost 60 years since it was removed from coins entirely. You also do realize that means that there have been been several yes several generations who have only known the money system we have now. Fiat money isn't a new construct either and has been around for thousands of years, it doesn't need to be backed by anything but the military the same thing that has given money it's desirability throughout human history.

 

it does have intrinsic value, it's written right on the bill what it is. This idea that gold or silver is money in a minuscule one in the actual world outside of the buy my gold and silver for fiat money ads. Numerous generations have never seen anything but the money we have now. Economics have no hard rules of nature, they're entirely a human construct.

 

Some people know, and the rest need an explanation.

 

I would argue denomination is an 'assigned' value, not 'intrinsic'.

 

Which makes it it's value that is intrinsic to it's creation. Intrinsic value is another completely made up human concept. There are really only three things with actual intrinsic value air, water and food. Anything else is humans assigning wealth to it the same way they did with money.

 

So how does one assign a Intrinsic value, or even an assigned value to a PM ?
correlating a PM to a Dollar amount would make no sense if currency has no intrinsic value. Though currency definitely has an assigned value, it says so stamped on it.

So PMs have some value not correlated to a currency?
or maybe it's value is based on an Extrinsic value ?

Maybe currency is an extrinsic value as a government backs and guarantees a currency that is identified on the note.

Does then gold have an intrinsic value based on it's perceived equivalent amount of currency ?

 

"perceived".... The magic word. Until one can justify logically it is really "actual" instead, it is just a thought exercise.