Global Economic Manipulation?

Sofa_King Good

I came across these articles

http://seekingalpha.com/article/109210-the-manipulation-of-gold-prices?source=article_sb_popular

http://www.hardassetsinvestor.com/features-and-interviews/1307-gold-in-backwardation-not-so-fast-.html?start=1

and they aroused my suspicion, if the world's economy and stock markets are being manipulated. If the stock markets will crash from downward pressure? and be picked up for pennies on the dollar by the super-wealthy.

Such as here: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi/noframes/read/39506

Also, if the worlds economies fail, can a gold/part gold (world) currency be introduced? And if so, who currently is holding the gold?

This guy here http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/salinasprice/2007/0529.html quotes the IMF and claims that 81% is in private hands.

I am totally out of my depth on this, and would be interested if someone with more economic understanding could comment.

Économiste Monétaire

A gold standard could be introduced. One way would be for governments to nationalise all gold holdings (although they wouldn't need to do this)--like F.D.R. did the in the 1930s in the U.S., except for the opposite reason--and set a parity value for notes and slowly release it again to private individuals. A gold standard actually leaves economies more open to private manipulation than you would think, they simply need to horde it and induce deflation and a massive depression. Stocks have been manipulated for much of the last century in different forms, it was far more pervasive and blatant in the 1920s in the United States before regulation. If the economies of the world were to 'fail' then having a medium of exchange for a non-existent market isn't much of a problem

A more amusing economic conspiracy theory would be to try and link the IMF, the World Bank, and the Bank for International Settlements (a central bank for central banks). I'm sure someone could link this into a tripartite system and, ergo, to the NWO :pac:

Time Magazine

I saw a video on YouTube providing FACTS that they want to bring in a gold standard so that they can put RFID's into the bullions.

Mahatma coat

care to link to that youtube Ibid

dunno about the BIS, but werent the World bank and the IMF both set up through the Bretton woods conference, arent they both based in washington, arent they mutualy interdependant, so they aint connected in one litle bit is what you are saying?

Économiste Monétaire

Mahatma coat wrote: »

care to link to that youtube Ibid

dunno about the BIS, but werent the World bank and the IMF both set up through the Bretton woods conference, arent they both based in washington, arent they mutualy interdependant, so they aint connected in one litle bit is what you are saying?

They were created at BW, and they are based in Washington D.C. (BIS is Swiss), they're actually right next to each other and about 400 meters from the Whitehouse. I'm looking for the more super secret link between the BIS, IMF, and the World Bank group vis-a-vis the lizzzzards/NWO. The BIS can control the gold, the IMF can coordinate lizard gold movements, and the World Bank can bankrupt any remaining 'free' nations with structural loans, with conditionality of replacing national currency with lizard gold...

I think The Economist is on to something with the RFID... Probably cheaper putting RFIDs into the gold than paper...

Mahatma coat

back to the old point of why bother, the gold is already in bullion form and stamped, any attempt to sell it would involver melting it first or playing by the rulewes .

so if ya play by the rules then its just another inconvienience, and ditto if ya dont.

WhaLofShi

Économiste Monétaire wrote: »

They were created at BW, and they are based in Washington D.C. (BIS is Swiss), they're actually right next to each other and about 400 meters from the Whitehouse. I'm looking for the more super secret link between the BIS, IMF, and the World Bank group vis-a-vis the lizzzzards/NWO. The BIS can control the gold, the IMF can coordinate lizard gold movements, and the World Bank can bankrupt any remaining 'free' nations with structural loans, with conditionality of replacing national currency with lizard gold...

I think The Economist is on to something with the RFID... Probably cheaper putting RFIDs into the gold than paper...

Looks like you're getting the hang of this CT thing.

seriously though ...

and the World Bank can bankrupt any remaining 'free' nations with structural loans, with conditionality of replacing national currency with lizard gold...

Didn't (I think it was the) Bolivia "sell of it's water" to Bechtel as part of it's deal with the World Bank (or somebody)? Leaving aside corrupt politicians and dictators, is this practice common when structural loans are given? (Genuine question ... I'm not well informed)

Ok, just checked the Bolivia thing here ,and it seems they did do a deal with the dictator Banzer (or a company they owned part of did) to control the water supply (and probably had nothing to do with funding).

My question still stands btw. Are utilities (or resources) forced to be sold to help repay structural funding?

Économiste Monétaire

WhaLofShi wrote: »

Looks like you're getting the hang of this CT thing.

seriously though ...



Didn't (I think it was the) Bolivia "sell of it's water" to Bechtel as part of it's deal with the World Bank (or somebody)? Leaving aside corrupt politicians and dictators, is this practice common when structural loans are given? (Genuine question ... I'm not well informed)

Ok, just checked the Bolivia thing here ,and it seems they did do a deal with the dictator Banzer (or a company they owned part of did) to control the water supply (and probably had nothing to do with funding).

My question still stands btw.

I honestly have no idea about the Bechtel thing. Conditionality was a big part of loans by the World Bank, and the IMF when countries had an perceived inability to manage their own macroeconomic affairs, but, more recently, the levels of conditionality have reduced. They now prefer the countries to 'own' their development programmes to a greater extent, rather than the indigenous people seeing some obscure NGO telling a sovereign nation what to do.

The actual contents of structural loans varied, and I can't remember all the specifics, but privatising certain public works was one of them as well as reducing budget allocations for defense and glory projects that made no sense in terms of a rate of return. There are a few books on the issue, most famously by Joseph Stiglitz (the most cited economist in the world) who absolutely rails against the IMF and World Bank, and The World Bank conducted a review of its conditionality back in 2005 (the paper is here, be careful though, it's a link to a lizzzzzzard site ).

Mahatma coat wrote: »

back to the old point of why bother, the gold is already in bullion form and stamped, any attempt to sell it would involver melting it first or playing by the rulewes .

so if ya play by the rules then its just another inconvienience, and ditto if ya dont.

Well, one would need to know how much gold is actually mined to be able to issue a world currency backed by gold. The BIS monitors its members balance sheets, so national central banks would be accounted for to an extent.

Run_to_da_hills

The Economist wrote: »

I saw a video on YouTube providing FACTS that they want to bring in a gold standard so that they can put RFID's into the bullions.

:eek:

Mahatma coat

No, I was saying why bother RFID chippin the gold when its already stamped and stored insecure facilities, well the stuff used for international trade anyway and the soverigns in my sock drawer;)

for thos interested inhow the IMF/Worldbank function have a read of 'Diary of an economic Hitman'

one would presume that if the lizzzzards control every other aspect of the financial systems then it would be rather remis of themto establish the BIS and not control that too

thecommander

I also thought that RFID radio waves wouldn't be able to transmit through a block of gold if they are in the middle.

Mr. Incognito

No,

You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold.

Gold is a rare commodity. As such it's price is relatively stable as there is only x amount of it in the world. When times are good there are higher investment yields elsewhere and most traders don't bother with commodities bar commodity traders.

When the economy goes to the toilets there is a run on gold las it is seen as a very safe investment leading to the aforementioned price spikes.

The stock market is people gambling all day long on the price of everything. one bloke thinks corn is going increase so he buys up corn and sells it on for a profit if he can. The market manipulated every day with rumours, innuendo, "hidden signals" etc. It's a fecking game.

However, lets take corn for example, there is only X amount of corn, trader one reckons it's going to be 100 a bushel, so he buys up to 99, trader two reckons 105 so buys up to 104 and so on. Eventually the price will come out and it'll be 103, one guy makes a profit- one guys gets burnt.

The problem that exists in the modern global economy is that everyone was speculating that all these financial instruments were worth more than they were, (US subprime mortgages that were given to people who simply could not afford the repayments) they were all sold on for a slice and in the end most of them were worthless so everyone gets burnt.

This makes banks nervous of other banks so they stop lending to each other. Central banks step in and inject capital to shore up the banks, governments step in to invoke consumer confidence by guaranteeing bank accounts. The problem is that everyone got caught with their hand in the fire so they've put down the gambling tongs for a while. Ordinary punters and investors are investing in much more stable investments and the over reaching and silly over-pricing of stocks is slowing down. Companies are making paper lossess from paper profits. Stock prices are falling and people who bought at the top are losing out. Eventually stuff will start to look cheap again and people will go back to the trough and artificially drive the prices up again.

The real prices is somewhere in the middle but that's what happens with the markets. Alwasys has, always will. You cannot control it, as it's based on greed and human nature.

Mahatma coat

thecommander wrote: »

I also thought that RFID radio waves wouldn't be able to transmit through a block of gold if they are in the middle.

ah but shur wouldnt it be easiest to set the chips with the stampa

thecommander

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah but shur wouldnt it be easiest to set the chips with the stampa

I don't get what you mean?

Time Magazine

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold.

Really? I want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them, please.

Mr. Incognito

Really? I want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them, please.

No,

though it's nice to hear please.

I know better than to fall into the this bait and subject everyone to three pages of eye bleed.

You cannot "do" anything to markets. They'll "do" it themselves.

Here, on topic, have a read of this

http://sovereignspeculator.com/2008/08/27/just-an-ordinary-crash-no-conspiracy-to-manipulate-the-silver-or-gold-markets/

P.s The Economist is a rag.

"The magazine is written by young people pretending to be old people," according to Michael Lewis.[54] “If American readers got a look at the pimply complexions of their economic gurus, they would cancel their subscriptions in droves."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist#Criticism

Time Magazine

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

No,

though it's nice to hear please.

I know better than to fall into the this bait and subject everyone to three pages of eye bleed.

You cannot "do" anything to markets. They'll "do" it themselves.

Here, on topic, have a read of this

http://sovereignspeculator.com/2008/08/27/just-an-ordinary-crash-no-conspiracy-to-manipulate-the-silver-or-gold-markets/

P.s The Economist is a rag.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist#Criticism

You're going to make a strong assertion and refuse to back it up or subject it to scrutiny, but you'll reference Wikipedia in calling The Economist "a rag" because it is written by young people. Fair enough.

Mr. Incognito

Kindly contridict anything I've said in the post above.

want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them

This is not a legitimate question. This is baiting.

Gareth37

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

I came across these articles

http://seekingalpha.com/article/109210-the-manipulation-of-gold-prices?source=article_sb_popular

http://www.hardassetsinvestor.com/features-and-interviews/1307-gold-in-backwardation-not-so-fast-.html?start=1

and they aroused my suspicion, if the world's economy and stock markets are being manipulated. If the stock markets will crash from downward pressure? and be picked up for pennies on the dollar by the super-wealthy.

Such as here: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi/noframes/read/39506

Also, if the worlds economies fail, can a gold/part gold (world) currency be introduced? And if so, who currently is holding the gold?

This guy here http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/salinasprice/2007/0529.html quotes the IMF and claims that 81% is in private hands.

I am totally out of my depth on this, and would be interested if someone with more economic understanding could comment.

Man made, controlled by man. No doubt a false saviour will emerge from the rubble, creating great economies and great inventions.

Amos 8:5; making the measure small and the price great, and trading falsely with scales of deceit;

thecommander

Gareth37 wrote: »

Amos 8:5; making the measure small and the price great, and trading falsely with scales of deceit;

Ah, that explains it. No need for proof now.

Time Magazine

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Kindly contridict anything I've said in the post above.

I can't because you've been far too broad. You didn't specify exactly what you wanted to do. So I asked a question as to what you wanted to do...

This is not a legitimate question. This is baiting.

It's certainly not baiting, it's wanting you to be precise in what you're claiming. What "prices"? Would you tie Ireland's currency to the price of gold, completely eliminating floating exchange rates; or would you try peg our general price level to the price of gold, to eliminate inflation? How would you set the price of gold? What is the "fair" price of gold? You say that the price of gold is fairly steady, which isn't true at all btw, so what happens if demand for gold shoots up? What happens if we discover that gold is useful in producing the newest medical gadget, and by using half the world's gold supplies we could all live five years longer, would you change the price of gold accordingly? In short, why do you think the gold standard was dropped in the first place?

Of course there's no point in me going into what I perceive as the problems of your post because I could be talking about something else entirely to you. That's why I wanted to know what you'd tie to gold and how you'd do it.

But if you're not up for that, that's fair enough. Help spread around the dis-information by not being up-front about the potential problems of a gold standard and allow me to speculate precisely why you wouldn't be open to debate about these. This is the Conspiracy Theories forum, after all.

Mahatma coat

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

No,

You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold.

Gold is a rare commodity. As such it's price is relatively stable as there is only x amount of it in the world. When times are good there are higher investment yields elsewhere and most traders don't bother with commodities bar commodity traders.

When the economy goes to the toilets there is a run on gold las it is seen as a very safe investment leading to the aforementioned price spikes.

The stock market is people gambling all day long on the price of everything. one bloke thinks corn is going increase so he buys up corn and sells it on for a profit if he can. The market manipulated every day with rumours, innuendo, "hidden signals" etc. It's a fecking game.

However, lets take corn for example, there is only X amount of corn, trader one reckons it's going to be 100 a bushel, so he buys up to 99, trader two reckons 105 so buys up to 104 and so on. Eventually the price will come out and it'll be 103, one guy makes a profit- one guys gets burnt.

The problem that exists in the modern global economy is that everyone was speculating that all these financial instruments were worth more than they were, (US subprime mortgages that were given to people who simply could not afford the repayments) they were all sold on for a slice and in the end most of them were worthless so everyone gets burnt.

This makes banks nervous of other banks so they stop lending to each other. Central banks step in and inject capital to shore up the banks, governments step in to invoke consumer confidence by guaranteeing bank accounts. The problem is that everyone got caught with their hand in the fire so they've put down the gambling tongs for a while. Ordinary punters and investors are investing in much more stable investments and the over reaching and silly over-pricing of stocks is slowing down. Companies are making paper lossess from paper profits. Stock prices are falling and people who bought at the top are losing out. Eventually stuff will start to look cheap again and people will go back to the trough and artificially drive the prices up again.

The real prices is somewhere in the middle but that's what happens with the markets. Alwasys has, always will. You cannot control it, as it's based on greed and human nature.

Ibid wrote:

Really? I want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them, please.

want to explain what you mean with that question, I cant see its relevance to the post.

I dont think the Poster was being 'far too broad' I think you latched onto one tiny detail of his post and blew it out of proportion, no discusion about the price of corn, or the rest of the financial markets, just the decision to focus on one bit about Gold

Économiste Monétaire

The original post is about gold being used to back currency; ergo, how is asking a poster to expand on an assertion about the ability to manipulate prices with gold not relevant? :rolleyes: I don't see how a discussion on the price of corn is more relevant...

As an aside central banks don't "inject capital;" so that part of Mr. Incognito's post is wrong. The assertion that you cannot manipulate (damage) markets with contracting the money supply is also wrong.

Time Magazine

Mahatma coat wrote: »

want to explain what you mean with that question, I cant see its relevance to the post.

He stated "You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold." This, tbh, is wrong. I have already answered your question as to what I meant with that question, but again: I wanted to give him a fair chance to explain exactly what he means, and his theory on this, before I took aim. Otherwise it'd be very presumptuous and I'd probably end up talking about some other element of gold markets.

With regard his assertion that corn markets are zero-sum, I was then going to argue that not tying a currency down is greater than zero-sum.

Mahatma coat

OK that makes far more sense as an explanation and a qustion

thanks

Flamed Diving

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

No,

You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold.

Gold is a rare commodity. As such it's price is relatively stable as there is only x amount of it in the world. When times are good there are higher investment yields elsewhere and most traders don't bother with commodities bar commodity traders.

When the economy goes to the toilets there is a run on gold las it is seen as a very safe investment leading to the aforementioned price spikes.

The stock market is people gambling all day long on the price of everything. one bloke thinks corn is going increase so he buys up corn and sells it on for a profit if he can. The market manipulated every day with rumours, innuendo, "hidden signals" etc. It's a fecking game.

However, lets take corn for example, there is only X amount of corn, trader one reckons it's going to be 100 a bushel, so he buys up to 99, trader two reckons 105 so buys up to 104 and so on. Eventually the price will come out and it'll be 103, one guy makes a profit- one guys gets burnt.

The problem that exists in the modern global economy is that everyone was speculating that all these financial instruments were worth more than they were, (US subprime mortgages that were given to people who simply could not afford the repayments) they were all sold on for a slice and in the end most of them were worthless so everyone gets burnt.

This makes banks nervous of other banks so they stop lending to each other. Central banks step in and inject capital to shore up the banks, governments step in to invoke consumer confidence by guaranteeing bank accounts. The problem is that everyone got caught with their hand in the fire so they've put down the gambling tongs for a while. Ordinary punters and investors are investing in much more stable investments and the over reaching and silly over-pricing of stocks is slowing down. Companies are making paper lossess from paper profits. Stock prices are falling and people who bought at the top are losing out. Eventually stuff will start to look cheap again and people will go back to the trough and artificially drive the prices up again.

The real prices is somewhere in the middle but that's what happens with the markets. Alwasys has, always will. You cannot control it, as it's based on greed and human nature.

Stable? It has doubled in price over the past decade, if I'm not mistaken.

Mahatma coat

ah but hasnt inflation been runnin bat**** too over the same time.

consider a pearl of wisdom told to me by someone who worked in the financial sector for a long time.

compare the price of an ounce of gold with the the price of a decent suit, do this across diferent points in history, theres a fairly close corolation

Flamed Diving

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah but hasnt inflation been runnin bat**** too over the same time.

consider a pearl of wisdom told to me by someone who worked in the financial sector for a long time.

compare the price of an ounce of gold with the the price of a decent suit, do this across diferent points in history, theres a fairly close corolation

So whats the point in having a gold standard, according to that advice?

MCMLXXXIII

If you aren't at work and have the time, you might want to check out this video. It's the first of five, watch them all and together they are about a half hour.

Anyway, the video was released on 25/6/2008, and it makes predictions about the US Federal Reserve. I don't know if they knew they were so near the disaster they are describing, and it was made of total speculation based on events that have happened in the past - but so far it's pretty accurate.

Mr. Incognito

and they aroused my suspicion, if the world's economy and stock markets are being manipulated. If the stock markets will crash from downward pressure? and be picked up for pennies on the dollar by the super-wealthy.

Such as here: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin...mes/read/39506

Also, if the worlds economies fail, can a gold/part gold (world) currency be introduced? And if so, who currently is holding the gold?

This is the original post.

Global Economic Manipulation <- This is the title.

What "prices"? Would you tie Ireland's currency to the price of gold, completely eliminating floating exchange rates; or would you try peg our general price level to the price of gold, to eliminate inflation? How would you set the price of gold? What is the "fair" price of gold? You say that the price of gold is fairly steady, which isn't true at all btw, so what happens if demand for gold shoots up? What happens if we discover that gold is useful in producing the newest medical gadget, and by using half the world's gold supplies we could all live five years longer, would you change the price of gold accordingly? In short, why do you think the gold standard was dropped in the first place?

Of course there's no point in me going into what I perceive as the problems of your post because I could be talking about something else entirely to you. That's why I wanted to know what you'd tie to gold and how you'd do it.

The above is eye-bleed economic theory rubbish, which

1. Has nothing to do with the original posters question
2. Has nothing to do with my post.
3. I warned that you would instigate thus dragging the thread into economic masterbation which I have no interest in doing.

Firstly, lets discount the hypotheticals

What happens if we discover that gold is useful in producing the newest medical gadget, and by using half the world's gold supplies we could all live five years longer, would you change the price of gold accordingly? In short, why do you think the gold standard was dropped in the first place?

"You cannot manipulate the market prices with Gold." This, tbh, is wrong.

Now this is my point. You can manipulate the price of GOLD markets with Gold. You cannot manipulate the global economy with Gold as Gold, and is only one tiny tiny fraction of it. There are far more precious metals out there to affect global markets, copper and tin for example which the telecommunications market rely heavily on. Affect it in a small part, yes. Manipulate, which, at lets be clear here, means control. No.

This is the point you jumped on. If you want to produce evidence that you can affect the price of the global market with Gold, lets see it.

Stable? It has doubled in price over the past decade, if I'm not mistaken.

Stable in relation to other investment vehicles and currencies. Graph stock prices next to gold and you'll get the idea. I didn't meant the the price has always remained X, that's absurd, but it's not going to suffer a huge crash or huge gains in the main unless something drastic happens to either supply or demand. Currencies are lmore exposed to inflation than gold. You can print currency which leads to hyper-inflation. You cannot print more gold- you have to mine it, which is costly and slow.

Here's a good link http://debtprison.net/wordpress/89/the-economics-of-gold-investments/

As an aside central banks don't "inject capital;" so that part of Mr. Incognito's post is wrong. The assertion that you cannot manipulate (damage) markets with contracting the money supply is also wrong.

I saved you for last. Have you been living under a rock, on the moon?

European Central Bank:

http://www.scoopit.co.nz/story.php?title=ECB_injects_US170BILL_liquidity_to_Euro_banks-1

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ecb-injects-836498bn-but-markets-are-gripped-by-panic-460986.html

http://seekingalpha.com/article/57709-ecb-injects-500b-interbank-rate-plummets

Argentinan Central Bank.

http://capital.trendaz.com/index.shtml?show=news&newsid=1332830&catid=583&subcatid=540&lang=EN

Kuwaitii Central Bank

http://www.gulfnews.com/Business/Banking_and_Finance/10248677.html

And the Coup the Grace, my favourite. YOU!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=58224553#post58224553

It may have been a confusion between the concepts of when the central bank (the Bank of England) provides liquidity to a bank, and when a government (the tax payer) injects capital into a bank.

Économiste Monétaire

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I saved you for last. Have you been living under a rock, on the moon?

European Central Bank:

http://www.scoopit.co.nz/story.php?title=ECB_injects_US170BILL_liquidity_to_Euro_banks-1

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ecb-injects-836498bn-but-markets-are-gripped-by-panic-460986.html

http://seekingalpha.com/article/57709-ecb-injects-500b-interbank-rate-plummets

Argentinan Central Bank.

http://capital.trendaz.com/index.shtml?show=news&newsid=1332830&catid=583&subcatid=540&lang=EN

Kuwaitii Central Bank

http://www.gulfnews.com/Business/Banking_and_Finance/10248677.html

And the Coup the Grace, my favourite. YOU!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=58224553#post58224553

The absolute hilarity of the fact you cannot differentiate liquidity and capital, yet you attempt you assert your point so vehemently. You said "inject capital." Central Banks do not inject capital, they provide liquidity. Show me where the ECB has provided capital for a bank. They don't, the central bank does not take an equity stake in a bank when it provides money; they are short term loans based on a weekly bidding procedure. Go read about how central banks operate. Even the first link you provided, the title is "ECB_injects_US170BILL_liquidity_to_Euro_banks-1"

Capital ≠ liquidity

So again: You're wrong. The original post is about a gold standard, with a gold standard you can manipulate markets by hoarding gold--case in point the U.S. in the 1930s.

Mr. Incognito

The absolute hilarity of the fact you cannot differentiate liquidity and capital, yet you attempt you assert your point so vehemently. You said "inject capital." Central Banks do not inject capital, they provide liquidity. Show me where the ECB has provided capital for a bank. They don't, the central bank does not take an equity stake in a bank when it provides money; they are short term loans based on a weekly bidding procedure. Go read about how central banks operate. Even the first link you provided, the title is "ECB_injects_US170BILL_liquidity_to_Euro_banks-1"

Capital ≠ liquidity

So again: You're wrong. The original post is about a gold standard, with a gold standard you can manipulate markets by hoarding gold--case in point the U.S. in the 1930s.

You know what,

I am. This is the exact type of Economic cirle jerk I was expecting from you two. You do not address the point, instead you come along. OMG!!! You used the wrong word!! Ha ha, your point is invalid.

My point was about central banks shoring up banks, you do not refute this, you merely drag in eye bleed semantic arguments, hense our good chums attempt to lower this thread with his bait question earlier.

The original post is about manipulating the markets. I said this cannot be done with gold. Then you talk about a gold standard economy that does not exist at the present time.

I have been foolish to even bother entertaining this rubbish argument. Arguing over semantics, is just that. You're right. I'm wrong. No-one cares and as predicted, exactly three pages of eye bleed. I'm off.

Économiste Monétaire

I think the difference between liquidity and capital is actually relevant to a conspiracy theory. If central banks were to inject capital (which they don't ) one could say it's an attempt by the lizzzzards/NWO to take control of the financial markets by buying the banks on the cheap, and they were being directed by the BIS.

The original post is about the possibility of a world currency backed by gold. So, a discussion on a gold standard is relevant, in my opinion.

Just to be extra pedantic, central banks don't "shore" up banks, they help them meet their deposit liabilities. Governments are the ones who inject capital and shore banks up by helping them meet their capital requirements. Maybe there's another conspiracy theory in that...

You really need to relax the playing up as a victim of the evil economists. You're the one saying "economic circle jerk", "the economist is a rag", and that I was living on the moon I actually don't live on the moon, just to clarify. No real need for the jibing when you were asked a pretty basic question.

Mr. Incognito

Just to be extra pedantic

QED

Run_to_da_hills

Financial Times: Privacy will end by 2013.

According to a lead researcher on CSC's Digital Disruptions report unveils his predictions for the future How will IT change.

Information will become more transparent. I envision something like a software RFID like tag for securities that allows the world at large to track every detail of what is going on in the financial markets, in the same manner that Wal-Mart tracks products from initial order to production, sale and re-stock.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/acd2c66c-c0da-11dd-b0a8-000077b07658.html

Gareth37

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Financial Times: Privacy will end by 2013.

:rolleyes:

Privacy ended a long time ago and you and I both know it. Don't be reading this dribble. Sorry but you know its true

WhaLofShi

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/acd2c66c-c0da-11dd-b0a8-000077b07658.html

How will IT be used by individuals beyond 2013?
We will be able to print out toys, parts, furniture, designs and more from the net using three-dimensional printers. Today 3D printers cost $20,000 and can only print prototypes. But maybe beyond 2013 you'll actually be able to print a pair of sneakers in your size.

Is he talking Star Trek stuff here?

Computer: Nike Air. Blue Trim. Size 42.
And throw in a shell suit to go with them.
Oh, and givvus 20 John Player Blue and a loi'er.

Time Magazine

I wonder what's the difference between "an eye-bleeding of an economics circle-jerk, written by people young enough to write for a rag" and "correcting a poster who's making completely inaccurate claims about market mechanisms."

Can we get a ruling on this, Mahatma? How wrong does someone have to be before we can correct them?

Mahatma coat

its about tone Ibid, no problem correcting someone, but, no need to be nasty either.

that goes for both sides BTW, calling it an Economic circlejerk is not going to promote a civil discussion.

no infractions handed out YET, but lads play nice.

oh and Capital/Liquidity, its not just the use of a wrong word, it chnges the meaning completley

Time Magazine

Tone? Surely everything's fair game once it's attack-the-post, not the poster?

Also I'm almost sure you can't infract me.

Mahatma coat

yeah if it was simply attackin the Post, but, ya know what nevermind, I suggest that the poster goes to Ibids forum and takes up the discussion there, then ye can argue semantics all ye want.

I had some questions I also wanted to ask our esteemed 'Economic Experts' about the Bailout/shoreup but I can see I wont get a civil or straight answer.

Mahatma coat

Also I'm almost sure you can't infract me.

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

Mahatma coat

:o:o:o:o:o:o:o:o:o

OOOPS

I have no Idea how to Unban someone

tis only a 24 hour ban, but still if someone wants to PM me how to undo it twould be apreciated

thecommander

Mahatma coat wrote: »

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

I see your at the power thing again.

Économiste Monétaire

To be honest Mahatma, if the inference you're making from this thread is that you won't receive a civil response from either The Economist or I then I'm baffled. The regular CT poster was the person whom deemed it necessary to get personal and petty. I tried to play and steer to the overall theme of conspiracy theories several times.

Also, that's an incredibly abusive use of moderator status to ban someone like that, and for that reason. Probably the worst modding of any forum I've seen.

conceited

Mod you should maybe mature a bit before taking on such a job....:rolleyes:

Mahatma coat

Right so, sorted out, and now I've learnt another bit about how to use the ModUtils

conceited

Thats lovely.
Come back when you 13 we will give you a job.:pac:

Time Magazine

Mahatma coat wrote: »

HA, just banned you, so I can

right so, point proven, now to unban you again

That's fucking disgraceful modding, MC.

1. I should not be banned so you can prove a point - a point which you have not proven because a ban is not the same thing as an infraction.

2. I should not have to PM you to show you how to unban me.

3. After I PM you within ten minutes of you asking for help, I should not have to wait another 30 minutes to be unbanned.

4. I shouldn't have to ask for an apology, not yet received.

Shocking.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

its about tone Ibid, no problem correcting someone, but, no need to be nasty either.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

yeah if it was simply attackin the Post, but, ya know what nevermind

Make your mind up, please.

calling it an Economic circlejerk is not going to promote a civil discussion.

...

I had some questions I also wanted to ask our esteemed 'Economic Experts' about the Bailout/shoreup but I can see I wont get a civil or straight answer.

Placing your description of us in scare quotes and claiming you will not get a civil or straight answer is not going to promote civil discussion either. That's extremely hypocritical of you. Économiste Monétaire very politely responded to three posts at the start of this thread. Before attacking a post, I gave Mr. Incognito an opportunity to clarify his position. I then told him what I was doing, and complied with your request to say it again. We may be ruthless when someone claims economic fallacy as fact, but we are both very civil.

And as for accusing us of not giving a straight answer? How about

The Economist wrote:

I want you to explicitly state what "prices" and what you'd "do" to them, please.

Mr. Incognito wrote:

No

There's only one person on this thread whose uncivil behaviour warranted moderation. I'll give you a hint. It's the person who repeatedly accused others of baiting while spouting beauts such as "P.s The Economist is a rag.", "[your post] is eye-bleed economic theory rubbish", "Have you been living under a rock, on the moon?", "This is the exact type of Economic cirle jerk I was expecting from you two" and "I have been foolish to even bother entertaining this rubbish" even though he accepted he had been wrong all along.

Learn how to moderate. A good place to start would be discovering meaning of the the adjectival sense of the word.

Mahatma coat

enough room in the back seat for all of ye?

I should have made it clearer that I didnt Expect Civil or Straight answers from diferent posters.

that comment was not aimed at the same people

as for you Ibid, you laid down a direct challenge, what did you expect me to do?

Mahatma coat

also I'd like you to edit that last post of yours to put your response in between my 2 posts, I think you'll find that it will make a lot more sense that.