Opinions on cashing out some silver
les.p...@gmail.com
10x face for the pre-1965 coins and 4x for the 40% Kennedys. I have
worked out that the break-even point for the silver is $13.82, as as I
write this, the price is $13.57. What is the opinion of "all y'all"
about such a sale: would you make the deal, would you hold on for
silver to hit $22 again. I am not in a position that I need to sell
the coins: just looking to turn it into "working capital" for
obtaining rolls to search or to buy other coins to work on my various
collections.
Thoughts?
Les
George D
Depending on what the economy does the silver could increase in value
soon and maybe a bunch. If it were me I would hold it until I needed the
money. However it is up to you if the enjoyment of getting rolls now is
worth the gamble of waiting. In another thread it is mentioned that
Coinstar is receiving more coins from cookie jars and sock drawers so
waiting for those coins to start reappearing may be a good thing too.
George D
RWF
"les.pet...@gmail.com" <les.p...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f3db1f31-a8f0-4b9d...@p13g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
I think silver could see $20/oz this year given the inflationary nature
of the so-called stimulus plan.
oly
> "les.peters+c...@gmail.com" <les.pet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I must agree with RF that the crap coming out of Washington will be
very inflationary. With a Democratic President and Democratic
Congress for the first time since James Earl Carter, Jr., it is now
Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
oly
Peter
>
> - Show quoted text -
A point that might be worth considering is how much you have in
precious metal, versus other liquid assets and how much cash you might
need. I agree with all the optimism about silver, but I wouldn't have
the foggiest idea when silver would make a big more (or which
direction the next one would be). It would be a shame for silver to
drop in value, just when you need cash.
Donald Weber
oly
> Didn't Willy have a Dem Senate and House for 1993 & 1994?
You are correct, according to Wikipedia. That doesn't much negate my
"it's now Christmas Morning in Washington D.C." observation.
oly
Johnny Doe
Sure, the big question is, what is pushing you to consider selling at
$13 / oz that wasn't there when silver hit $20? If that reason
(whatever it is) is compelling, go ahead and sell. Otherwise, feel
free to continue holding for $20 again (or $5, as the case may be).
les.p...@gmail.com
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:22:42 -0800 (PST),
> Sure, the big question is, what is pushing you to consider selling at
> $13 / oz that wasn't there when silver hit $20? If that reason
> (whatever it is) is compelling, go ahead and sell. Otherwise, feel
> free to continue holding for $20 again (or $5, as the case may be).
The reason for selling was to increase the amount of cash I had on
hand
to get rolls from the bank, nominally to search for more silver, but
yeah,
it isn't compelling, so I called off the sale.
Thanks, everyone, for your advise and opinions on this matter.
PC
"oly" <oly...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:78ca1d35-775a-4f52...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> I think silver could see $20/oz this year given the inflationary nature
> of the so-called stimulus plan.
I must agree with RF that the crap coming out of Washington will be
very inflationary. With a Democratic President and Democratic
Congress for the first time since James Earl Carter, Jr., it is now
Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
>>>
Considering the wonderful job the Republicans have done if your doom and
gloom is true then it is already hopeless.
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
Again, optimism is the mania for declaring all is well, when all is
going very badly. And, it is the Democorps that is lined up at the
trough now.
oly
realit...@ausi.com
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
Yep, we should be eternally grateful for the complete control that
Dumbya and his minions had for 6 years so that they could bless us
with an endless, meaningless trillion dollar war and a bankrupt
country.
Now, thanks to the Republican insistance on even more "tax cuts" in
order to pass the stimulus package, the goobermint is probably going
to give out another round of free $600 checks so that all the losers
out there can stock up on beer, weed, meth, cigarettes and video games
again. Yippppeeeeee!!
A You
I would sell gold as gold is up on a currency panic but as bad as things
are...faith in currencies can return.
I would hold silver, palladium, and platinum as demand for commodites can
return in 3 to 5 years. In fact copper and steel can regain some with
planned government infrastructure projects.
Of course with all metals low margin mines are on hold and so there is some
pullback in supply along with the loss of demand.
If you must sell your silver then buy something very low. So that would be
stocks or real estate or out-of-favor currencies.
Or put your funds into a forex futures account with 100 to 1 leverage.
Because the major currencies are just taking turns going in and out-of-favor
against each other. Or the currencies of countries with small trade deficits
are very strong but then they do get too strong at times...
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, and we should be grateful for how strongly and adeptly Nancy
Pelosi, Barney Frank et al opposed the Bushies for the last two years.
especially on the TARP I deal.
oly
mazorj
Conversely, pessimism is a defense mechanism when one's own views and
theories are not standing up well in the current situation. Neither
is inherently right or wrong.
Someone once observed that the difference between an optimist and a
pessimist is that the optimist thinks we are living in the best of all
possible worlds, and the pessimist fears that he's right.
IMO, in the optimist/pessimist discussions here WRT PM prices, the
opposing players are playing on different playing fields. oly et al.
foresee a coming wave of debt-funded spending that will cause a lot of
investment money to be shifted to stable or rising havens like PMs.
They undoubtedly are right. Others (and I am in this camp) wouldn't
deny this phenomenon, we're just focused more on the long run, which
historically always continues to rise unless and until something
really catastrophic comes along to really break the empire or the
market or the system. The two views are not incompatible because
they're actually philosophical differences between apples and oranges.
If you want to say that I'm playing ostrich to a coming massive
breakdown that will really wreck the system, well, I'll plead guilty.
I can get up and function every morning knowing that the dollar will
fall and gold will rise. I can't build my life around a certitude
that some morning during my lifetime, the whole thing will come
crashing down on our heads.
Being a reasonably sane and alert person, I make a few basic
preparations to defend myself against both the coming short-term and
hypothetical major long-term downturns. Some pertain to investing,
but if the really big balloon ever goes up, I'll be focused more on
keeping my firearms oiled, ammo and food stocks on hand, and having a
few contingency escape plans sketched out.
PC
On Feb 11, 4:46 pm, "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote:
Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
>>>
PM s? What is that?
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
One of the big attractions of coin collecting, for me, is how all the
various coins, medals and paper money readily illustrate history. And
there is nothing in the history of paper money and paper money regimes
that is very reassuring. Nothing at all.
The present pounds and pence of the United Kingdom/ Bank of England
are the longest/ eldest lived paper currency still in existence (from
the 1790s, MOL), and the present day pound is about 1/100th of its
pre-1914 value. The present U.S. Dollar must be in second place for
longevity (from the Civil War), and it is 1/20th of its pre-1913
value. Probably 90% of the paper money systems ever established/ the
paper money ever issued, by all countries in the world, is worthless
today.
I agree that you and I are on different wavelengths and I understand
the desire for the status quo to be maintained, but we are at a moment
in time where I see great discontinuities on the immediate horizon. I
feel that we will go through the wringer like the USSR did between
1989-1995. I don't expect complete collapse, but I would be (am I am)
preparing for problems, and generally agree with the Dmitry Orlov
proposition that America will be much more vulnerable than the
Russkies were. I feel that many of my friends are vulnerable and wish
that they had more PMs (precious metals) squirreled away than they do.
oly
PC
> that they had more PMs (precious metals)
Thanks!
-should have guessed
mazorj
Again, a valid but long-term observation. All good things must come
to an end, the only questions are when, and how soon will you be able
to see it coming? How long did it take for the citizens of Rome to
realize that the party was over? Prior to the collapse of the empire
they had many major ups and downs and betting the farm that the latest
one was "The End" would have been a bad wager, both economically and
politically.
> I agree that you and I are on different wavelengths and I understand
the desire for the status quo to be maintained, but we are at a moment
in time where I see great discontinuities on the immediate horizon. I
feel that we will go through the wringer like the USSR did between
1989-1995. I don't expect complete collapse, but I would be (am I am)
preparing for problems, and generally agree with the Dmitry Orlov
proposition that America will be much more vulnerable than the
Russkies were. I feel that many of my friends are vulnerable and wish
that they had more PMs (precious metals) squirreled away than they do.
So to paraphrase the old joke about self-prostitution, we've already
establish what we are, we're just haggling over price, timing, and
other details. ;-)
I just came into some unexpected money, will probably invest in a
dozen or two pieces "just in case" as soon as I find a source that
won't scalp me too badly over melt. The odds of losing significantly
in the short term are relatively small and I figure that I can turn a
buck or two if I don't get greedy and hang on too long.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
I just bought 14 JM "flats" today from the big local dealer. Somebody
sold 20 of them to him at 10 A.M. and all are gone by noon. The rest
of what he has is American Silver Eagles (with a bigger premium). He
does have a few American Gold Eagles 1 oz. dated 2009 - the first in
stock since Oct or Nov....
oly
mazorj
"PC" <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
news:gn49lh$lag$1...@news.motzarella.org...
A typo for PMS? :-)
oly
> "PC" <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
>
> news:gn49lh$lag$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>
>
>
> >news:78ca1d35-775a-4f52...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 11, 4:46 pm, "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote:
> > Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
> > very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
>
> > PM s? What is that?
>
> A typo for PMS? :-)
Around these parts, there never seems to be a shortage of PMS. Never.
oly
mazorj
That's not funny!
PC
"mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:B3kll.55$hm...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Pre-mediated suicide is a VERY serious subject and no laughing matter.
oly
> "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> news:B3kll.55$hm...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >news:4785533c-16d9-46f3...@z2g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 13, 1:02 pm, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> "PC" <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
>
> >>news:gn49lh$lag$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>
> >> > "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:78ca1d35-775a-4f52...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> >> > On Feb 11, 4:46 pm, "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote:
> >> > Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
> >> > very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
>
> >> > PM s? What is that?
>
> >> A typo for PMS? :-)
>
> > Around these parts, there never seems to be a shortage of PMS. Never.
>
> > That's not funny!
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
You need to get a better acronym guide. PMS is not what you think it
is.
oly
oly
>
> news:B3kll.55$hm...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >news:4785533c-16d9-46f3...@z2g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 13, 1:02 pm, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> "PC" <P...@Minneapolis.mn.us> wrote in message
>
> >>news:gn49lh$lag$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>
> >> > "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:78ca1d35-775a-4f52...@r37g2000prr.googlegroups.com...
> >> > On Feb 11, 4:46 pm, "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote:
> >> > Christmas morning for the Democrats. As for myself, I am clutching
> >> > very tightly to my PMs and adding more whenever possible.
>
> >> > PM s? What is that?
>
> >> A typo for PMS? :-)
>
> > Around these parts, there never seems to be a shortage of PMS. Never.
>
> > That's not funny!
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sheesh, it's even stated in Merriam-Webster's in the way that 99% of
Americans understand that acronym.
oly
les.p...@gmail.com
Okay, my 'funds' amount to just under $100, so I appreciate the
advice.
I called off the sale as I was looking at the month-long track record
and saw
that silver was on a nice incline, then it started dropping again...
of course.
mazorj
True, but I still am obliged to give you a smiley for your riposte.
:-)
A You
> I would sell gold as gold is up on a currency panic but as bad as things
> are...faith in currencies can return.
>
> I would hold silver, palladium, and platinum as demand for commodites can
> return in 3 to 5 years. In fact copper and steel can regain some with
> planned government infrastructure projects.
>
> Of course with all metals low margin mines are on hold and so there is
> some
> pullback in supply along with the loss of demand.
>
> If you must sell your silver then buy something very low. So that would be
> stocks or real estate or out-of-favor currencies.
>
> Or put your funds into a forex futures account with 100 to 1 leverage.
> Because the major currencies are just taking turns going in and
> out-of-favor
> against each other. Or the currencies of countries with small trade
> deficits
> are very strong but then they do get too strong at times...
----------------------------------------------------
Les wrote:
Okay, my 'funds' amount to just under $100, so I appreciate the
advice.
I called off the sale as I was looking at the month-long track record
and saw
that silver was on a nice incline, then it started dropping again...
of course.
---------------------------------------------------
A You wrote:
Well I should have stayed with selling gold and holding silver...but I went
on to currency futures.
And with the currency futures where the broker breaks down their own
positiona into smaller positions of the customer there are micro-accounts
with 400 to 1 leverage. So your $100 gets $40,000 worth of EUR/USD. But if
it ticks the wrong way...
But go with 100 to 1 leverage, a $2,000 account, and put only half the
account into a position...
Well see...selling the USD/JPY is the same thing as selling gold.
mazorj
Which is what made it funny in the first placed. I guess you didn't
get. Ease up, oly! According to the guy on the corner with the
sandwich board, the end won't be coming until at least the end of the
month.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
I wasn't responding to you - it's PC who is way off.
oly
mazorj
I know that you were replying to him - which is why I am playing the
buttinsky here. His bon mot in response to my mock outrage made me
smile and even provoked a reply from me.
RCC needs its moments of comic relief just like any other forum where
tempers frequently flare and participants sometimes get their back up.
PC
> You need to get a better acronym guide. PMS is not what you think it is.
I'll trade you a sarcasm detector. :-)
PC
I wasn't responding to you - it's PC who is way off.
>>>
Seriously man... think about it for a second. I won't claim it was clever
or funny but I will claim it was a joke. :-)
PC
>
>>
>> Pre-mediated suicide is a VERY serious subject and no laughing matter.
>
> True, but I still am obliged to give you a smiley for your riposte. :-)
>
;-)
Bruce Remick
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow the
rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship remained
much the same over the past fifty years?
Peter
> As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
> average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
> our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow the
> rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
> things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship remained
> much the same over the past fifty years?- Hide quoted text -
Would you consider the issues seem the same to people on a fixed
income (typically retired folks)?
Wouldn't a progressive income tax still have adverse consequences for
working folks?
oly
You're beating your head against the wall with that fellow... really.
He has no idea what real money is, nor the three functions that it
must fulfill.
oly
RWF
news:seYll.2388$Si4....@newsfe22.iad...
> As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
> an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't
> see that our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing
> wages follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing
> its value or are things becoming more expensive? Or has the
> wage-price relationship remained much the same over the past fifty
> years?
That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!
Bruce Remick
"Peter" <w2...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:17e3333f-dae4-48d0...@k8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 12:25 pm, "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
> As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
> average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
> our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow
> the
> rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
> things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship
> remained
> much the same over the past fifty years?- Hide quoted text -
> Would you consider the issues seem the same to people on a fixed
> income (typically retired folks)?
Sure. The same today as 50 years ago. Both groups would feel the hurt, as
would the unemployed, if prices rose but their annual take didn't. But the
comment I meant to make involves prices of goods as compared to wages earned
over the years.
> Wouldn't a progressive income tax still have adverse consequences for
> working folks?
I'd leave that to the experts. ALL income taxes seem to have adverse
effects on working folks.
oly
Aristotle:
http://www.economictheories.org/2008/10/aristotle-and-plato-theory-on-money.html
Medium of exchange, unit of measurement/comparison, and store of
value.
oly
Bruce Remick
I suspect I've had as much and probably more experience with real money than
you have. Your insulting comment is typical of an acedemic who can't accept
any opinion that is not covered by a theorum in his textbook, so he is left
with stuff like "you're beating your head..." . Obviously all your
education hasn't helped you to make a convincing point or to argue against
mine. Yes, I do have opinions as well as questions, however unscholarly
they may seem to you, and they are based on my lifetime experience which
you're not qualified to correct. Yours opinions often seem unusual and
curious to me as well. Because I don't understand them isn't necessarily
my fault, eh?
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
You can't see the forest for the trees. You drag in peripheral shit
because you don't understand the basics.
Pray tell, where would you have had experience with "real" money???
None has existed in America for over 75 years.
oly
Bruce Remick
"RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
news:gnab4f$c1i$1...@news.motzarella.org...
My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to take it further.
Bruce Remick
Then why not treat me as a "pupil" and use your education to show me where
my observations are not valid, rather than quoting authors or giving
textbook links. I'd be glad to accept an good explanation as to how my
views are wrong.
> Pray tell, where would you have had experience with "real" money???
> None has existed in America for over 75 years.
C'mon, you're just spouting that Rush Limbaugh-type bullshit again. Don't
you ever have anything to contribute from experience rather than that
classic tired rhetoric?
I though of you when I read George Will's Op Ed column in this Sunday's Wash
Post. The tone of the article contrasted the past and current Doomsday
claims and predictions of acedemic economic and climatic types. GW's views
usually don't mirror mine or even interest me, but I though this particular
article made some interesting points.
oly
Bruce Remick
Aristotle:
http://www.economictheories.org/2008/10/aristotle-and-plato-theory-on-money.html
________________
Oly, you just lost another opportunity to dissect and correct any
errors in something I said. Instead, you post another of your economic
theory links, this time to Aristotle, someone most familiar with today's
issues. No wonder you have a problem understanding where I'm coming from in
some of my posts. If you had the time to reply here, you had the time to
offer comments in your own words. I'm thankful I never had someone like you
as a teacher. But then you'd probably have been frustrated to have had me
as a student.
RWF
I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.
RWF
>
> "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
> news:gnab4f$c1i$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>> "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:seYll.2388$Si4....@newsfe22.iad...
>>> As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage
>>> of an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I
>>> don't see that our currency losing its buying power as long as
>>> increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the
>>> dollar losing its value or are things becoming more expensive? Or
>>> has the wage-price relationship remained much the same over the past
>>> fifty years?
>>
>> That's a very inane comment.
>> Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
>> Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
>> than it once had.
>> For shame!
>
> My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or
> on fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years
> while everything else stays put.
That is NOT what you said. You said "So I don't see that our currency
losing its buying power..." then conflated that with "as long as
increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods"
Even a jackass would (or should) know that a dollar today doesn't buy
what it did 20 years ago.
Bruce Remick
"RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
He can't seem to find the stuff to show me where or how. How about you.
What have I said that is wrong? Your insult shows me nothing. If you
have a different opinion why not share it. Otherwise you simply sound like
one more blindered politician who is convinced that all his constituents are
ignorant and only he knows what's best for them.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yeah, you're way smarter than Aristotle, Brucie.
You've drank the hemlock but you're (marginally) still alive. The
hemlock just affected your brain.
And if I were a politician, I'd be a populist like Wright Patman, not
an elitist follower of Edmund Burke.
oly
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry to Socrates. Wrong Greek. Still, both Socrates and Aristotle
had it over Bruce. So did Wright Patman. So did Edmund Burke.
I think I would have preferred to have been Charles James Fox. Got to
stir a lot of shit, drank boatloads with the Prince of Wales. Simply
died too young.
oly
Bruce Remick
___________
When I saw your reply header, I hoped for something informative. What a
fool I was. Aristotle is dead. Apparently you cling to him as your
relevant savior. He's not mine. He never bought load of groceries or gas
for a car. He never had a bank account or a retirement plan. That you
continue to avoid correcting any of my supposedly misinformed points
suggests to me that you don't really have anything of substance to offer,
except to claim how ignorant I am or to point out what Aristotle said.
Great political skills. I'm willing to be taught or corrected, but it's
becoming more apparent that you lack the ammunition and the skills.
Bruce Remick
Y'know, who would I be to argue against any of those people. I'd like to
think though that I could kick any of their asses in many things more
important to me today.
> I think I would have preferred to have been Charles James Fox. Got to
> stir a lot of shit, drank boatloads with the Prince of Wales. Simply
> died too young.
I'd have to Google up Mr. Fox. Maybe some other time.
Bruce Remick
"RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
We're apparently not talking the same language here. Yes, I did say our
curency has not lost its buying power. But I don't see how the buying power
of our currency can be judged without putting it in context. Sure, the
candy bar that cost five cents fifty years ago may cost 49 cents today. But
if you say that the dollar is worth say 500% less today, you'd have to add
that the average wage may have increased 500% as well. They offset each
other, IMO. The number of dollars needed to make purchases has certainly
risen over twenty or fifty years, but so has the number of dollars received
in paychecks. I would agree with you if I found that I now needed thirty
percent of my pay to buy groceries, where I used to only need 15 percent.
If you or Oly can convince me otherwise, I'd be welcome to be enlightened.
I don't want to keep arguing, but I won't accept being labeled as a fool
unless someone can prove it.
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Another example of why you are an American who thinks he is educated,
but isn't (very common in our country). You were a technician, not an
educated man.
oly
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
My this google thing works poorly... third time I've had to retype
this... at least my response gets softened up every time...
Bruce's reply is just another example of violating Ockham's razor. He
can't think it through, so he drags in everything including the dead
cat...
Aristotle said that money must work as a form of stored value
(deferred payments) to be real money. If a form of money failed in
any of the three requirements, it was not money.
Millions of Americans have attempted to rely of savings in the form of
"money" to fund a comfortable future. These people have been lied to,
cheated, swindled and raped of a majority of their purchasing power by
the Federal and State Governments and the Federal Reserve for the last
45+ years (and one of the major groups of beneficiaries of this theft
have been federal retirees - the only way that they can get more than
they paid into the system is if somebody else gets less than what they
paid in).
Bruce confuses money with credit... and also fails to realize that the
credit system of the Western world is collapsing.
The spectre of the collapse of the USSR from 1989 to 1993 (or 1995)
looms large in the U.S.A. today. It is in large part because what we
use as "money" isn't. Our "money" violates two of the three things
that Aristotle posited (and is poised to fail in the third), and
accordingly, our money is doomed.
Sauve qui peut. Bruce will be out on the street corner with the old
Babushkas. Maybe we can drop him a Mercury dime or two.
oly
RWF
You claim that the value of our currency is unchanged because a loaf of
bread is still a certain % of income.
You are confusing our standard of living with the value of a dollar.
You are clearly wrong yet refuse to admit it.
PC
And if I were a politician, I'd be a populist like Wright Patman, not
an elitist follower of Edmund Burke.
>>>
More like Chicken Little...
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
Have you thoroughly licked your picture of Obama this morning???
oly
Bruce Remick
__________
You have a warped idea of what an education entails. I fear you may have
dissed a number of us poor souls in rcc, if recalling the name and historic
significance of Charles James Fox is a requirement for being educated. You
love that shit, don't you. You sure are lucky to be one of the educated.
And you don't have a clue as to what I was, so stop looking so stupid (to
me, at least) with your assumptions. Not what I'd expect from an educated
man. Makes me wonder more about how you arrive at all your other
conclusions.
Bruce Remick
"RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
I see my standard of living as tied to what my dollar will buy. The value
of the loaf of bread as a percentage of the average hourly wage seems more
relevant to me than some of the textbook rhetoric I'm seeing If I'm
wrong, I'll gladly accept it and will appreciate learning something, but all
I've seen so far are Aristotle quotes and rants about how I just don't get
it. Can you offer anything besides calling someone wrong if he doesn't
have the same opinion you do. If not, who needs your input?
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
You do. RF knows enough to ask the questions (actually, he knows a lot
more than just that first step). You can't even ask the questions
because you can't formulate them. Too fat, too comfortable. But none
of us will be for much longer.
oly
Bruce Remick
________________________
Out on the street? If so, I'll most likely be watching you pace by with
your doomsday sign lighting cigarettes for people with those useless dollar
bills and wearing a hardhat for protection from all those impending
collapses. And hey, thanks for that 5% raise you gave me this year. My
wife thanks you, too, for her 5% SS raise. The only Mercuries I'll need may
be slabbed. And please come up with some different jargon. You keep
repeating your cute little sayings like those Rush Limbaugh-types. You
must have more textbooks around with some different 18th century pundits to
quote.
I was one of those people who relied on savings in the form of "money" to
fund a comfortable future. And believe it or not, it's working great, in
spite of the crap I'm hearing here! I must have missed the part where I
was lied to, cheated, swindled, and raped of my purchasing power. The more
you rail about federal employees, the more I think I am enjoying having been
one-- if only to piss you off and to reap the benefits each month from your
taxes. Your jealousy is obvious.
Bruce Remick
________________
If I need help and input, why not offer it? Sure, I don't speak economics
jargon and may not be able to formulate an opinion using the proper
ecospeak. Work with me here. It seems like I have asked the same questions
several times but all I get from you two is oblique, political comebacks
that never address my questions. I guess that's why they never let an
engineer try teach things to a non-engineer.
And the sky's starting to fall now, is it? I figured that was coming.
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
You're the perfect foil Brucie. Maybe you will miss the boat, but
since you have to have the last word, this thread can be run ad
infinitum, hopefully alerting those with a little more mental
flexibility.
oly
George D
>
> My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
> fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
> everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
> same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
> Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to take it further.
>
Bruce this is an interesting subject. I have wondered if there is a way
to actually compare the living standards of today as compared to 50
years ago.
I would assume that you would have to have the average wages of several
fields. For instance a carpenter, auto mechanic, grade school teacher,
accountant, cab driver, printer, bank teller, etc. For this exercise I
do not know if you would include doctors, lawyers and other professionals.
Than compare that set of figures as an average to the cost of several
things. A loaf of bread, gallon of milk, gallon of gas, new medium price
sedan, one months electric bill, trip to a doctor, etc.
Than to be fair I would have to ask how you would include a TV set that
is almost a need today and was not even common in the 50's.
To start of a bottle of soda was 5 cents plus deposit, today it is close
to 25 cents no deposit.
IIRC a hair cut was 75 cents and today it is $10.00 or more.
I think minimum wage was 75 cents an hour and today it is $6.55 soon to
go to $7.25
The value of a silver dime in 1964 was 10 cents today that same 1964
dime is worth a little over a dollar. Just to keep this on topic.
George D
Bruce Remick
______________
From that elusive response, It's apparent you still have nothing to offer
except your pseudo-intellectual doom speak. So I'll take you up on the
offer to have the last word and pledge to stay out of any more discussions
of this type. You're obviously unable to use what's in those dusty
textbooks you've read to explain today's realities, unless of course it fits
your preconceived notion of the end of the world.
RWF
"George D" <geo...@arizona.com> wrote in message
news:04hml.11934$lk5....@newsfe13.iad...
> Bruce Remick wrote:
>
>>
>> My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or
>> on fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the
>> years while everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread
>> DOES cost about the same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50
>> years ago. No shame. Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should
>> choose to take it further.
>>
>
> Bruce this is an interesting subject. I have wondered if there is a
> way to actually compare the living standards of today as compared to
> 50 years ago.
Problem is that Bruce stated that US currency has retained its value,
not that our standard of living is unchanged (which I also dispute).
Trouble is he is too obstinate to admit that he was wrong and keeps
making irrelevant arguments about the price of a loaf of bread.
Fact is that one dollar today won't buy what it did 10 years ago and no
amount of his sophistry can change that.
PC
> More like Chicken Little...
Have you thoroughly licked your picture of Obama this morning???
>>>
This speaks volumes about you.
You still can't bring yourself to admit that this economic fiasco has a lot
to do with the Bush Administration. It is mildly amusing watching you
squirm in order to avoid admitting it.
oly
George, You must be drinking store brand soda or buying name brands in
cases. It isn't uncommon for a 20 oz Diet Pepsi to go for $1.49 at
retail nowadays. My haircuts cost $13.00 plus a small tip (and as the
mon vieux Professor will attest, I am follically challenged).
I remember buying Mercury dimes for 35 cents in 1973 and bought a
couple for $1.05 yesterday (the guy at the flea market had them
slightly underpriced IMHO). I am pretty certain that I could have got
more for 35 cents in 1973 than $1.05 today.
oly
Johnny Doe
wrote:
>>> My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
>>> fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
>>> everything else stays put.
>>
>> That is NOT what you said. You said "So I don't see that our currency
>> losing its buying power..." then conflated that with "as long as
>> increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods"
>> Even a jackass would (or should) know that a dollar today doesn't buy what
>> it did 20 years ago.
>
>We're apparently not talking the same language here. Yes, I did say our
>curency has not lost its buying power. But I don't see how the buying power
>of our currency can be judged without putting it in context. Sure, the
>candy bar that cost five cents fifty years ago may cost 49 cents today. But
>if you say that the dollar is worth say 500% less today, you'd have to add
>that the average wage may have increased 500% as well. They offset each
>other, IMO. The number of dollars needed to make purchases has certainly
>risen over twenty or fifty years, but so has the number of dollars received
>in paychecks. I would agree with you if I found that I now needed thirty
>percent of my pay to buy groceries, where I used to only need 15 percent.
>If you or Oly can convince me otherwise, I'd be welcome to be enlightened.
>I don't want to keep arguing, but I won't accept being labeled as a fool
>unless someone can prove it.
>
>
Bruce, you are confusing the value of LABOR with the value of MONEY.
Your example shows that LABOR has maintained its value over the years,
in that you can trade an hour of today's LABOR for the same goods that
you could trade an hour of LABOR for in the past. The value of MONEY,
on the other hand has DECREASED by 90% in your scenario, in that, if
you put away 5 cents fifty years ago, instead of buying a candy bar,
today it only buys 1/10 of a candy bar. Don't you see that the money
has lost 90% of its value if you can only receive 10% of the products
that you could have purchased with it 50 years ago?
If you put $20,000 away in a non-interest-bearing account 50 years
ago, instead of buying that nice house in the suburbs, what type of
house will that money buy you today? THAT is the loss of value that
inflation causes.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Good post.
oly
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
Oh no, this debacle does have a great deal to do with the Bush
administration.
But my objections are almost all in regards to what the Treasury and
Fed did during the last four months of 2008. Their actions (or
reactions) since the Lehman Brothers failure are simply
uncomprehensible.
Your objections are because you have a problem with white conservative
men in a position of authority.
Butt there's never a good reason to vote for a Franken or an Obama.
oly
Johnny Doe
Thanks.
Of course, he will probably come back with some spew about how he
wasn't talking about the value of the dollar, which has OF COURSE been
losing value, but the value of MONEY in general, which still spends
just as well regardless of inflation, as long as you earn it and spend
it before the value of the DOLLAR falls further. This MONEY, as a
facilitator of commerce, does work fine, but isn't worth squat as a
store of value.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agreed on both (1) the spew and (2) failure to store of value
observations.
oly
mazorj
You accuse others of speaking in generalities, oly, but you also speak
only in generalities.
For example, what exactly are you predicting in the impending storm?
All I can tell about your expectations is that people like Bruce will
be on the street selling apples, but it won't quite be the end of
civilization as we know it. In between, there's a lot of territory to
debate over and the degree of the economic meltdown is of critical
importance to all of us because the degree of the impending events
determines what actions a prudent person should take. Given that plus
your trenchant treatment of those whom you ironically accuse of being
"inflexible," you're going to have to be a lot more specific than
merely laying out such an immensely broad range of results and
proclaiming "Ta-da!":
So perhaps you would like to show off your economic expertise for us
dunces by answering a few helpful specific technical questions. These
are speculative so you do get a little slack in your estimated answers
and you don't even have to answer every last one of them (except #4 &
#5). But do try to be specific and answer as many as possible because
otherwise all your dire declarations boil down to "There be some bad
mojo coming" and we already know that.
1. Within +/- 0.5%, what will be the U.S. inflation rates for 2009,
2010, and 2011?
2. Within +/- $100, what will be the high and low prices for gold in
each of 2009, 2010, and 2011?
3. Within +/- 10%, what will be the highest and lowest valuation
point of the dollar against Chinese, Japanese, British and any three
other major currencies of your choosing for the entire period
2009-2011? (Just the high- and low-water mark for each currency
anywhere within the 3-year window will do.)
4. Starting with 2008 (or the latest year available) as the baseline,
what will be the dollar purchasing power of the average U.S. family in
constant dollars in each of 2009, 2010 and 2011?
5. What are the major metrics by which we can measure the collapse of
the "phony money" you postulate, what are their current values, and
what are their "trip wire" values that signal a massive and
irreversible collapse?
There, that's it. The list could have been much longer but this is
rcc, not an economics forum, and this should be sufficient to show
that you're basing your predictions on something more than your
readings of history and some twinges in your bones that may be nothing
more than gout. If you have any other metrics where you start with a
current baseline and project into the next three years, please add
them.
Just don't try to answer these or any other questions by reciting
history or philosophy. History tells us what has happened and
probably will happen again. We already understand and accept that.
We also understand that past performance is not a guarantee of future
results. Nor do we need quotes from experts supporting your views.
Just as in a court trial, both sides can summon experts with totally
opposing views.
You are going beyond historic generalizations and predicting the time
and place of an economic collapse - but you haven't even defined
"collapse" as you are using the term. So how can anyone judge the
merit and accuracy of your views? Furthermore, you accuse your
opponents of not having the erudition and understanding that you do.
So it would be nice if you would give your critics something specific
to respond to instead of your vague generalities. Speak now or forever
hold your peace.
mazorj
Some agency - probably Commerce or Labor - publishes a "purchasing
power" index for U.S. households. Just as the COLA index uses an
"average" market basket of goods (they literally send shoppers to
supermarkets with a standard list to purchase) the purchasing power
indices (sometimes thought of or even referred to as "standard of
living" indices) use an "average" household of all occupations and
incomes. You have to know exactly what is being measured in order to
use them and know their limits, but as long as the methods and
definitions don't change, such indices are good for broadly measuring
changes over time.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Because of the nature of my personal employment, I think that it is
best to post in generalities. Nor do I know all the nominal % and
nominal specific dollar information that you desire. Nobody does,
nobody anywhere. Mr. Jim Sinclair has been better than most. Also
Messrs. Harry Schultz, Richard Russell, Prieur du Plessiss.
Mr. John Williams of Shadow Statistics defines a hyperinflation as an
inflation where the highest value banknote that was in circulation
prior to the terminal period becomes totally worthless. In other
words, where a USD 100 note will become worthless. That is MOL what I
think will happen. This inflationary period will have periods of both
acceleration and deceleration.
As Yogi Berra says, "Never make predictions, especially about the
future." My spin is "Make a prediction, or predict a time, but never
do both or you will be wrong". But I believe "soon".
The financial system is collapsing, imploding, at the very top of the
system. Both in this country, in the European Union, and in Japan.
There are only two allowable political responses. Either the PTB can
allow the resulting depression, or they can print large quanities of
money and hope for the best. I bet the latter.
oly
PC
>
>
> We're apparently not talking the same language here. Yes, I did say our
> curency has not lost its buying power. But I don't see how the buying
> power of our currency can be judged without putting it in context. Sure,
> the candy bar that cost five cents fifty years ago may cost 49 cents
> today. But if you say that the dollar is worth say 500% less today, you'd
> have to add that the average wage may have increased 500% as well. They
> offset each other, IMO.
I suspect that the reality is much more complex in that some things have
risen dramatically such as for a professional athlete, musician, model, and
specialized medical and legal practices. What was a computer programmer (my
first job out of college) paid in the 1960s vs the 1990s vs 2009? How about
CEOs? Secretaries? Surely some professions have lost ground and some have
disappeared entirely.
Compare that to the rice in prices of goods and services and I am sure you
will find the same thing. Some things are more expensive relatively and
some things are not.
There is no simple answer.
PC
"Johnny Doe" <n...@home.net> wrote in message
news:3e7jp41st53j1j55c...@4ax.com...
> Bruce, you are confusing the value of LABOR with the value of MONEY.
> Your example shows that LABOR has maintained its value over the years,
> in that you can trade an hour of today's LABOR for the same goods that
> you could trade an hour of LABOR for in the past. The value of MONEY,
> on the other hand has DECREASED by 90% in your scenario, in that, if
> you put away 5 cents fifty years ago, instead of buying a candy bar,
> today it only buys 1/10 of a candy bar. Don't you see that the money
> has lost 90% of its value if you can only receive 10% of the products
> that you could have purchased with it 50 years ago?
>
But if you also earn 90% more money then it is a wash. So which is more -
the loss of money or the increase in wages? Answer that then you may have a
point.
PC
>>>
You're the perfect foil Brucie. Maybe you will miss the boat, but
since you have to have the last word, this thread can be run ad
infinitum, hopefully alerting those with a little more mental
flexibility.
<<<
All I see is Bruce asking for some subtance behind the rehtoric you spew and
you repeatedly failing to produce.
oly
It is not a wash for people who have saved in terms of paper money.
Old people, retired people on fixed incomes who rely on their savings
are systematically cheated through continual debasement. Not everbody
is working throughout the 50 year period. People age and can't work
any longer. Not everybody has a pension plan, let alone a good
pension plan with a COLA. Even people who are still working shouldn't
be cheated on the money that they saved ten and twenty years back.
Money that does not have a reasonable ability to store value over time
isn't "real" money.
oly
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
The only thing that I am "producing" is a warning to fellow coin
collectors that they really should hold some PMs. More than normal.
I am Cassandra to your and Bruce's Priam.
oly
PC
I had no problem with George Bush, Sr. So you are wrong again. You could
not have possibly known I thought he was a good president since you are
close-minded. In my relatively short lifetime other than the esteemed Sr.
Bush I have not seen a competent white conservative man in a position of
authority. And no, Ronald Reagan does not count either. He was an icon and
nothing more.
Clinton was a *fiscal* conservative and our country prospered under his
leadership.
Bush Jr was a very poor president and leader in every aspect. Admit it and
move on. If it wasn't for Bush we likely would not have Obama in the White
House. Think about that.
> Butt
Freudian slip, I presume.
> there's never a good reason to vote for a Franken or an Obama.
So you advocate voting for Norm Coleman? You advocate voting for Sarah
Palin in 2012? You obviously do not think things through and just go with
whatever the current FOX News talking points are. Stop getting brainwashed
by liars like Hannity and Limbaugh.
PC
It is not a wash for people who have saved in terms of paper money.
Old people, retired people on fixed incomes who rely on their savings
are systematically cheated through continual debasement. Not everbody
is working throughout the 50 year period. People age and can't work
any longer. Not everybody has a pension plan, let alone a good
pension plan with a COLA. Even people who are still working shouldn't
be cheated on the money that they saved ten and twenty years back.
Money that does not have a reasonable ability to store value over time
isn't "real" money.
>>>
So - our government created this mess but our government should do nothing
to help the aged in this situation since that would be "wasteful liberal
spending". Right?
PC
>
> All I see is Bruce asking for some subtance behind the rehtoric you spew
> and
> you repeatedly failing to produce.
The only thing that I am "producing" is a warning to fellow coin
collectors that they really should hold some PMs.
>>>
Well lately it sure beats a savings account. I have to agree with you
there.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hannity and Limbaugh are entertainers. Actually, you can find an
audience for any viewpoint, as long as you are consistent.
In the crowd that Minnesota had, yes, I would have voted for Coleman.
He went to high school here in Springpatch and he has been highly
criticial (correctly so) of certain aspects of this fine capitol
city. His Senate record was fine. He can't be bad.
oly
Johnny Doe
This isn't about what you earned today, it is about the loss of value
of the money that you ALREADY earned and haven't spent yet. You know,
like what is stashed under your mattress, sitting in a checking
account, in a jar on your dresser. Does this make sense to you? You
DO have some money that you didn't make in the last year, don't you?
And you do know that it will buy less than it would have if you spent
it at the time, right? THAT is the loss of money - It has nothing to
do with you getting a raise as a wal*mart greeter.
oly
> "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
Your pallative would only fuel further currency debasement, making the
situation worse for all.
oly
note.boy
>
> "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
> news:gnbt94$f6g$1...@reader.motzarella.org...
>>
>>>
>>> "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:gnamg6$o7f$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "RWF" <R...@200902.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>> news:gnab4f$c1i$1...@news.motzarella.org...
You are engaged in the worst case of troll feeding that I have ever seen,
please stop soon, thank you. Billy
RWF
>Hannity and Limbaugh are entertainers.
Actually they are mean-spirited, loudmouthed assholes.
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Aw Billy, your nation's banking system will be gone long before
America's!!! It almost didn't open up this morning!!!
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Archives2009/OrlovBestPractices.html
Enjoy!!!
oly
Mr. Jaggers
Entertainers whose disciples have become totally unreachable, like automaton
zombies. I've lost three good friends to them, one of those my favorite
coin dealer.
James
Mr. Jaggers
Finally, someone here has said what I've wanted so bad to say for so long.
They, along with a half dozen others of their ilk, are responsible for the
death of civil political discourse in this country, and at a time when we
need it most.
James
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oprah has the same effect on many people's wives. Perhaps your
friends will tire of Limbaugh and Hannity given enough time. It's all
a genre/ kind of schtick. I don't know anybody that is that
overboard, though I love to taunt the leftists with "Rush is always
right".
oly
oly
> RWF wrote:
> > "oly" <oly2...@aol.com> wrote in message
You fail to see that the mainstream media has done more to quash civil
discourse than Rush or Hannity. The MSM makes the assumption that
there is only one way to think, which is on the left end of the
spectrum. The MSM dominates what little information reaches most
people. The MSM rarely mentions news from anywhere besides the east
left coast and the west left coast of America. How many times do you
see a story on the problems or interests of Houston or Milwaukee or
Cincinnati??? How many times a week does the MSM cover a foreign story
of any form??? Thank goodness for the internet.
Again, Rush and Sean are just entertainers.
oly
Mr. Jaggers
I go back 40 years with one of those friends, who will not return to his
normal self without some form of intense deprogramming. I enjoyed 20 years
of a great relationship with the coin dealer before he decided that the
first thing that his customers would hear upon entering his shop was El
Rushbo yelling from the radio about libruls. Then more recently he started
delivering Bible-thumping lectures about evolution, abortion, and homos.
Such pathologies rarely heal on their own. Sad.
James
oly
I'm sad to hear about those things, but it's gotta be more than just
two men who play their form of schtick a couple of times during the
week. Your friends' reactions don't occur in a vacuum. They have to
feel, somehow for some reason, that they have been betrayed, cheated,
abandoned or lied to by our mass national culture. That has to occur
first. Then the disappointed go off to find their messiah.
Happens on the left too, but the left has mostly co-opted what used to
be the apparent center of civil discourse. So extreme leftists don't
seem so extreme, despite the fact that they are.
oly
Mr. Jaggers
We'll then have to agree to disagree. Personal experience with my former
close friends serves to validate my views here. They both admit to spending
15 hours a week with Limbaugh and another 15 hours a week with Hannity.
That is not entertainment, that is pathology. I have zero friends who are
so into MSM that I can't talk to them any more. With their schedules what
they are, their exposure to MSM is necessarily minimal. MSM are feared by
the backward because they "bring up ideas that we just don't want the folks
to be hearing about." The American author Jesse Stuart portrayed that
mentality so profoundly in the person of Pa in his short story Split Cherry
Tree.
James
oly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Perhaps it is pathology, but what readied you friends for the
infection??? Most diseases strike hardest those whose immune systems
were already weakened for some reason.
My complaints about the MSM are as much their sins of omission as
their sins of commission.
oly
oly