From: Paul Bullock (paulbullock@EBMS-LTD.CO.UK)
Date: Sat Dec 11 2004 - 16:26:47 EST
So Allin, As you clearly say, for you the dollar is now 'the most trustworthy asset', this is the difference between us, for me in this realtive world, gold remains, precisely because of its physical nature and the consequent labouring effort for those who extract it, the most trustworthy asset, and not your paperweights. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allin Cottrell" <cottrell@WFU.EDU> To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 3:16 AM Subject: Re: [OPE-L] gold and the struggle against US and European imperialism > Paul B: > > > The emphasis both here and in other responses on the actual > > immediate function of gold, I think , misses the point. Gold has > > been pushed to one side as far as a means of exchange for some > > time... > > me: > > > As in Titus Oates's "I'm just going outside and may be some time." > > Paul B: > > > NO Allin , ...As in The Wall Street Journal Dec 9 2004... > > 'Although the euro is challenging the dollar in the global > > marketplace, the US currency remains the gold standard' > > In my view, gold has "gone outside and may be some time". When the > WSJ says that the dollar "remains the gold standard", in relation to > the Euro, I'd say that supports my point: the dollar (according to > the WSJ, of course) _is_ "gold". Which means that gold is not > "gold" any more. "Gold", in WSJ-speak, is an honorific, applied to > the most trustworthy asset, and is not to be confused with the > element with atomic weight 196.966543. > > Allin. >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 12 2004 - 00:00:00 EST