On Sep 13, 9:08Â am, "Sean"
now.com.au> wrote:> "tg"
earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:bcd16365-02b0-4859-b55a-1eeb4a0247fd@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 10, 9:33 pm, "Sean" now.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> "tg"
earthlink.net> wrote in message>
>
>>> "tg"
earthlink.net> wrote in message>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>> Thx Sean
>
>>>>> --
>>>>> "Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it."
>>>>> RFK
>>>>> 1968
>
>>> Ok Sean, you are getting to be a bottom-feeder like Bret---what kind
>>> of challenge do you expect from those guys? Let me offer a question
>>> for you that your other post got me thinking about:
>
>>> How is a gold standard different from the current one? It seems to me
>>> that both rely on faith in the gummint, and an artificial 'value'
>>> attributed to the standard.
>
>>> -tg
>
>>> ----------------------
>
>>> Hi tg, you're bein' a bit hard on me aren't you, comparing me to Bret?
>>> :-(
>
>> Tough love, dude, tough love. ;-)
>
>>> Someone's gotta clean up all the garbage settling on the floor of our
>>> ocean
>>> of ideas. :-)
>
>>> OK to your good question.
>
>>> I think the main difference is that Gold can neither be created, nor
>>> destroyed. Just lost at sea, or maybe even stolen. It doesn't rust,
>>> doesn't
>>> take up much space vs value, which is why god made it heavy. :-)
>
>>> Cash notes on the other hand ....... well, it's real cheap to print,
>>> some
>>> folks like to light their cigars with a $1000 bill, and the biggy is no
>>> one
>>> has yet found a way to counterfeit Gold.
>
>>> So that's a primary principle, imho, but it does I'm sure fail to
>>> address
>>> to
>>> your satisfaction the larger "economics" issues .... that's where all
>>> the
>>> mirrors start working and it gets harder to see the truth from the
>>> fiction.
>>> Or under which shell is the real pea.
>
>>> Now, if I may add, even if Ron P is saying what he says, doesn;t mean I
>>> know
>>> enough to know if changing back to gold is a good idea or not. But, for
>>> me,
>>> it's one of the things that has changed the last century, with the speed
>>> of
>>> changes these last 20 years especially, well it;s one hell of a
>>> scrambled
>>> egg isn't it? And really I am not sure what the solutions are, but I;m
>>> pretty confident that what is happening now is a major problem and not
>>> the
>>> solution.
>
>> Ok Sean, I think this part is basically an honest reply---which is, "I
>> dunno".
>
>> What's you say below is I think the real point though. If we had
>> wonderful philosopher kings to run things, then I suspect that almost
>> any kind of system would work, at least as well as it can with too
>> many people for the available resources.
>
>> But the converse is true as well. Follow all the principles of RP, and
>> there will still be people who will find a way to turn things to their
>> advantage and the detriment of most. Consider the 1930's, which
>> followed on a period of zero gummint control of anything. What people
>> don't seem to realize is that the gummint acting as a damper on things
>> is actually a *good* thing much of the time. Systems need a degree of
>> inertia otherwise you get endless booms and busts.
>
>> The best political argument there is for the Dems v the Republicans is
>> that Dems will tend to hire government types to run things, and they
>> will pay attention to all the little nitpicks that infuriate people,
>> but slow things down enough that thinking and long-term planning is
>> possible. Sorry, but that's the best you're going to get with the
>> world the way it is.
>
>> If you don't believe that profound excursions are a problem when a
>> system gets overheated, try growing some grain in Australia, eh?
>
>> -tg
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> I appreciate the tough love, love! :)
>> And I'm not 100%% sure, but doesn't australia grow more grain the USA? Even
>> if it doesn't, aussie is far superior in quality grain for grain, than
>> anything scratched out of the ground in the ol USA. Sorry, one good turn
>> of
>> love, deserves another!
>
> I was talking about the drought and AGW there Sean---as a metaphor for
> how economic systems cause trouble in particular sectors when they get
> overheated. Australia *was* a major supplier of grains until that
> ubiquitous resource water stopped being ubiquitous.
>
> I leave the rest without comment since you have demonstrated often
> enough that you have a good idea of how things work, and can
> articulate it better than I. Â We each have our wishful thinking; same
> goals but different fantasies about how to get there. :-)
>
> -tg
>
> --------------------------
>
> O love a good fantasy myself, hey. :-)
>
> and aha, yes, ur right about that less than ubiqutous water .... I mean we
> are known as the scientifically proven driest continent on Earth.
>
> Yet our visionary agribusiness self-interest decided that growing Rice and
> Cotton in the western Murray-Darling basin with irrigation as if we were in
> the Asian Tropics. To them it was a shit hot idea and another example of the
> wonders of new technology, albeit, at the same time as a series of the worst
> droughts in known memory. Brilliant I say. Simply brilliant!!!
>
> What I can't seem to work out [ I must be a complete idiot ] is how come the
> People, via the Govt are required to buy back for $ Millions on Millions the
> "irrigation water rights" from Companies that got them for about a dime a
> megalitre they should never have recieved in the first place given it was
> utterly and obviously unsustainable in the first place despite their
> Professionally prepared and "scientific" Â Environmental Impact Statements,
> and comprehensive Business Plans?????
>
> Does business ever have to pay for their own mistakes, or get told to "hey,
> just piss off with your stupid ideas." No one *forced* them to start such
> idiotic businesses in a dry land in the first place, so why should I fund
> their EXIT from Agri-business?
>
> Again, I say, brilliant, simply brilliant are these "free enterprise
> capitalists" and their self-interests.
>
> And so great for the economy, for a few minutes at least!
>
> ok ..... moving on, and thanks Tg.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Only a partially completed idiot would think he's complete.:-)
Some things just 'have' to be known.
Does the money recycle like the water?
As above, so below and all that :-)
BOfL
