wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,955
- Reactions
- 13,248
markrmau said:It is morally bankrupt to sit amongst the wealth (assetwise and healthwise) that the western nations have built up (primarily through consumption of the earth's natural resources) and then to deny other people the opportunity to lift themselves out of poverty.
So IF it is true that further consumption will cause long term damage to the earth, we have two possible 'moral' solutions:
1. Drastically reduce all consumption, and for the rich nations to share thier wealth with poor nations. Because of the population imbalance, this would probably dilute everyones wealth to about 10% of thier current holdings.
2. Do nothing and sort out the problems of earth as they occur.
I think the 2nd option would result in the most efficient allocation of capital and resources.
chops_a_must said:LOL!
He's not using philosophy though, he's just a sophist. There's a difference.
A bit earlier in this thread you posted a quote of mine lifted from the gold thread, and used it as a basis for not replying to me.
You took an opportunity to not reply to chops because you reckoned he had quoted out of context, while you have used other tactics in order to not reply respectfully to others (typically the tactic of belittling the person).
Originally Posted by rederob
Not asking you to buy gold as I am happy to do that.
But would you like to do another of your detailed analysis so that we can see what range prices for gold we can look forward to over the next year or so?
Or would you prefer a brief history lesson: Recall my challenge to you -
And one of your multitude of sweeping conclusions:
In the light of the fact that gold has breached your preferred upper range of $720 I think it only fair to give you another opportunity to prove yourself. On the other hand, I will concede utter defeat if gold’s “parabola” collapses and by year’s end POG is trading under $800 (which I believe is generous in that my expectation was for gold to be near that level by year’s end, rather than be as “support”).
For the moment, I am hoping for another $50 or greater retrace in gold near term, but will not hold my breath: Corrections in the metals complex as a whole are running to about 3 days instead of 3 weeks or more.
Wayne
I will put you into ducati’s camp. Do you recall an earlier post where you mooted a $500 correction and I replied:
My concluding remark for now is that playing the markets means taking a forward view, and that view can be based on your decision to trade a safe “yield” equity, or a highly speculative futures contract. You enter the trade with a “view”, never a “knowledge”. Posting that “view” can mean a loss or gain of “reputation”, but in the case of ducati, he has my respect for at least trying to work out gold: A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
while you have used other tactics in order to not reply respectfully to others (typically the tactic of belittling the person).
If you wish to defer to logic and higher authorities you must be consistent and well intentioned. My view is that you put these aspects aside to pursue more selfish personal agendas.
While you, ducati, may wish to dismiss the idea of replying considerately to me and others, at least you will not be able to diminish my track record (which I will never claim to be perfect) which is open for others to see.
I guess there are some things that you will never see, ducati.ducati916 said:Really.
Where?
jog on
d998
Dr Doom said:Another issue to contend with in the context of a possible global slowdown is the reason all of this is happening in the first place ie excess global liquidity. Just as a 'developed' nation as the USA is supposedly in debt up to the eyeballs, so too has China's financial foundations been built on dubious financing infrastructure, with little room for error or reduction in demand for their goods. All the while Japan continues to be the lender of last resort able and willing to supply essentially free money to whoever wants it. The problem being that this money isn't going into productive areas, rather it is fueling bubbles globally, the biggest of which (the US housing market, is about pop spectacularly.
This quarters US GDP figures will be watched closely for a continuation of the dramatic falls so far in the last three quarters. Soft landing, I don't think so.
I'm starting to think hard landing here too. I think a reduction in interest rates could even be on the cards soon, but this of course will create other problems. Perhaps they'll have the housing crash they have to have, just as part of the 'normal' economic cycle.Dr Doom said:The problem being that this money isn't going into productive areas, rather it is fueling bubbles globally, the biggest of which (the US housing market, is about pop spectacularly.
This quarters US GDP figures will be watched closely for a continuation of the dramatic falls so far in the last three quarters. Soft landing, I don't think so.
kennas said:I'm starting to think hard landing here too. I think a reduction in interest rates could even be on the cards soon, but this of course will create other problems. Perhaps they'll have the housing crash they have to have, just as part of the 'normal' economic cycle.
House price crashes (real or nominal) historically lead to recession. I can't see why this time would be different so a general slowdown could well be on the way.kennas said:I'm starting to think hard landing here too. I think a reduction in interest rates could even be on the cards soon, but this of course will create other problems. Perhaps they'll have the housing crash they have to have, just as part of the 'normal' economic cycle.
rederob said:I guess there are some things that you will never see, ducati.
I have no interest in responding to your side tracks and irrelevances in this thread as it diminishes its value.
If you wish to simply and clearly state your position on the theme, please do so.
I am sure other readers are clear where I stand, and how I apply my knowledge of the markets to my trading decisions.
RichKid
If you have evidence to the contrary I would welcome a debate.
The fact is that every time anyone posts a forward view it is likely to be wrong.
The more into the future that view, the more likely it will be wrong.
2 months ago gold was about $500 and today it is almost $70 higher. Extrapolating this rate of increase gives us gold at about $900 by the end of 2006. But that is ramping!
4 months ago gold was about $100 less than today, so that only gives us gold at around $850 by year's end.
6 months ago gold was about $130 less than today, giving us a gold price over $800 by year's end.
The questions all investors need to ask is if the past 6 months represent the prevailing trend, the past 4, the past 2, or none of the above.
The undeniable fact is that on "recent" trend there is absolutely nothing stopping gold being over $800 by the end of this year.
Accordingly, my suggestion/statement/forecast that gold would be $850 some time in 2007 is extremely conservative.
By the way, if you believe it unlikely that such a strong trend could eventuate for gold in 12 months, ask why copper rose well over 50 in price last year alone - in defiance of almost every specialist metals forecaster in the previous year.
If you want more "quality" I will return and dazzle with more correlations and extrapolations based on actual historical relationships between gold and a range of other commodities and indexes. Unfortunately some of these suggest gold will be well over $3000 but I am not so sure!
Wayne
Yes, as folk take to skinning cats I will hunt them down and report them to the RSPCA!
I am more worried about the "pussy footing around" that's happening.
Every time I look at the thread heading, I am giving my perspective and accept the consequences.
But in posting bullishly I am hoping to entice out a bear that will bring me back to earth.
There is no point holding a bullish perspective if there is bad or contrary news around. I do not want to be that blinkered racehorse that has crossed the finishing line so wide of the mark that “I can see I have won”, but in reality was beaten by every other thoroughbred on course.
I will be looking to buy more gold equities in late afternoon if gold holds during Asian trading, and have another crack at the markets tomorrow.
Usually only a few "sales" present themselves each year - this one is truly excellent.
hope you are right.
I have a low-priced bid on LHG shares as I regard them as the best valued gold equities in our markets at the moment.
ducati
You seem to have no understanding of intrinsic value from a market perspective or a theoretical perspective.
In the fullness of time you will choose to ignore me.
While that may be true for ducati it does not explain why my rather meagre portfolio is over $100k up in 6 months, and I have made the grand total of a dozen trades in that period (mostly buys) all based on what I regard as "fundamental trading".
If ducati wants to make an "on topic" contribution to the thread he will need to indicate where his view of the "speculative" outcome finally lies, or at least he needs to give a clear view of gold's price going forward in the medium to longer term.
ducati916 said:"Just admit you don't know everything and go with the flow."
jog on
d998
LOL!ducati916 said:A sophist, no not really.
More a Rational eudemonist that subscribes to Res cogitans.
jog on
d998
I referred to it. Doesn't mean I can be bothered getting my books out to give information to people that wont even read it properly anyway.ducati916 said:In respect to chops he referred to analysis via data and he then proceeded to batter me with unadulterated opinion
noirua said:My forecast is for the ASX 200 to continue on up for several more years yet and perhaps peak at around 8,000 by 2009. ...
All this is guaranteed to come to pass, UNLESS I'm wrong.
Joking aside, I remain very confident about the direction of Australia and its position in the expansion of Asia and the Far East.
I referred to it. Doesn't mean I can be bothered getting my books out to give information to people that wont even read it properly anyway.
I never stated a hard opinion, you just assigned me one. And then when I did point out commodities that were running contrary to your opinion, the goal posts shifted. That looks like Sophism if ever I've seen it.
I don't know dood. All the town planning stuff I've done seems to say otherwise. I am dead set against you here. Your opinions seem to fly in the face of all the data that I have.
On, or around October 17 2006, the US population hit 300 million.
This is an increase of 100 million from 1967
At this growth rate, the US population will hit 400 million circa 2047
How calculated?
Through fertility rates;
US = 2.1
Spain = 1.28
EU = 1.47
Hong Kong = 0.98
China = 1.7
Based on the replacement rate, the population of China will reduce by almost half [50%] over the next 42yrs.
Immigration, is an alternative to *growing* your population, so, what are the figures for immigration into China?
Unsurprisingly, they are so low as to be almost insignificant.
The US has a number of migration issues, and very long waiting lists for legal immigration.
Therefore, contrary to the general opinion, the numbers do not support currently the premise put forward by your dealer.
China
GDP - per capita (PPP):
$6,800 (2005 est.)
Net migration rate:
-0.39 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2006 est.)
US
Net migration rate:
3.18 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2006 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP):
$41,600 (2005 est.)
For example;
Over 5yrs to 2005, the correlation between oil and gold was 0.13 It now sits at 0.64
The herd psychology of markets [behavioural finance] explains in part the attraction of retail several years into a bullmarket.
A measure of this speculative excess is the spread between prices of listed commodities and unlisted commodities
It currently sits at an all time record of 60%+
Irrespective of GDP and overall demand, rapid industrialisation creates huge demand pressures on resources. An already industrialised nation like the US will have a relatively low impact on prices, because either way in demand, it is mostly steady in comparison to one that is becoming rapidly modernised.
Take testosterone levels in males. One can have a huge amount of testosterone, but if the levels are steady, then testosterone linked behaviours are limited. Compared to someone who has them swinging all over the place.
The point is, it is not about overall demand, it is about the rate of movement within the demand. Already industrialised nations have relatively low swings, developing nations do not.
And if you are that interested, you can find similar information to what I have very easily on the net. A recent interview with Paul Keating on China gives a very good overview of the sort of stuff that I have read.
chops_a_must said:Yes. A billion people involved in rapid industrialisation, modernisation and middle class expansion, the likes of which we have never seen in history, is just pure opinion. It has no basis on anything.
And for the record, the Chinese are reducing the numbers of people in their society that they deem as unproductive. Not in the sectors that they need for rapid expansion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?