Petrodollar further analysis

[juan]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 19:22:45 -0600
Troy Benjegerdes <hozer at hozed.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 08:45:47PM -0300, juan wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 17:32:00 -0600
> > Troy Benjegerdes <hozer at hozed.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > If you are betting on gold someone out there will be happy to 
> > > relieve you of your value.
> > 
> > 	Sure. Look at how gold keeps going down. The price of gold
> > has gone all the way DOWN from $20 in 1934 to $1200 at the moment.
> > 	With even LOWER peaks.
> > 
> > 	Gold is going down when measured in your americunt dollars
> > eh Troy? Troy - sounds a bit like an ironic name in this 'context'.
> 
> Yer funny, buying high priced tulips during the mania.

	Too bad your comparison doesn't work. Gold has been used as a
	medium of exchange for thousands of years, all over the planet.
	Comparing the price of gold to the price of tulips in one city
	in 1637 is economic nonsense.

	
	Gold was priced at ~$1800 per ounce 5 years ago. Now it's at
	$1200. Was it overpriced 5 years ago? Technically, you can 
	argue so. Does it mean that in five years we will be using gold
	to "build public lavatories in the streets of some of the
	largest cities of the world" ? 


> 
> If you bought a farm in 1910 for $45 an acre it'd have
> been $10,000 a couple of years ago

	Again, that's not a price that can be directly compared to the
	price of gold. But if anything it's more evidence to support my
	position. The dollar has been greatly 'inflated'(devalued) by
	the inflationist quacks. 


> 
> The petrodollar has come, and the petrodollar will go,
> and y'all are going to eventually want to eat. If we're
> lucky food can be bought with crypto. If not I suppose
> we better all learn chinese.


	I don't mind learning chinese. Better than the language of the
	anglo-american empire. Regardless, your economic analysis is
	flawed.