Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;-jeffB, post: 1223387, member: 27832&quot;]When I&#039;m participating in a discussion, I often respond to points that previous participants have made. If this offends you, please feel free not to respond to my posts in that discussion, or to start a new thread.</p><p><br /></p><p>As for the point that &quot;gold will continue to rise&quot;, I&#039;m trying to tease out what that actually means. &quot;Gold will continue to rise against the dollar&quot; seems like a pretty safe bet, because it seems like a pretty safe bet that the dollar&#039;s purchasing power will continue to shrink. But it seems like you keep flip-flopping between &quot;gold will go up against the dollar&quot; and &quot;gold will go up <i>in value</i>&quot;, which (I assumed) means its general purchasing power would increase.</p><p><br /></p><p>The poster to whom I originally responded was trying to say that gold <i>maintains</i> its purchasing power over time, and was trying to support that by quoting the &quot;unknown PM dealer&quot;. I posted hard numbers to show that the PM dealer&#039;s example was laughably wrong. Bread is a representative consumer good, and therefore a perfectly reasonable example to illustrate &quot;purchasing power&quot;. If you disagree, you should show that the &quot;value&quot; of bread isn&#039;t representative of goods in general, and suggest your own representative goods.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you want to talk about gold&#039;s future relative to the dollar, or the dollar&#039;s future in isolation, that&#039;s fine. If you want to make the point that &quot;gold will continue to rise&quot;, please state explicitly what it&#039;s rising <i>against</i>.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in