Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-13 Thread Christian Gregory
Ditto. - Original Message - From: Michael Pollak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 9:20 PM Subject: [PEN-L:15076] Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Michael Perelman wrote: David, I am not sure that anybody but you and Jim

Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-13 Thread Michael Perelman
PM Subject: [PEN-L:15076] Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Michael Perelman wrote: David, I am not sure that anybody but you and Jim are following this discussion. Actually I'm enjoying Jim's responses a lot. Michael

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-12 Thread David Shemano
In reply to Jim Devine: Instead of engaging in a specific point-counter-point, let me make a series of comments and ask a couple of questions that are generally responsive to your statements. 1. What is the evidence that the gold standard had anything to do with the economic contraction in

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-12 Thread Michael Perelman
David, I am not sure that anybody but you and Jim are following this discussion. What you claim would be largely orrect in a world without any credit whatsoever. Anyway, if this is not of general interest, maybe it could continue with you an Jim offlist? On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 06:59:44PM

Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-12 Thread Joel Blau
Michael: I don't thnk it should be pushed off list, but if it is, I'd like to be included. Joel Blau Michael Perelman wrote: David, I am not sure that anybody but you and Jim are following this discussion. What you claim would be largely orrect in a world without any credit whatsoever.

Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-12 Thread Michael Pollak
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Michael Perelman wrote: David, I am not sure that anybody but you and Jim are following this discussion. Actually I'm enjoying Jim's responses a lot. Michael __ Michael PollakNew

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-10 Thread Jim Devine
I wrote: what is meant by neutral with respect to interest rates? David Shemano writes: I mean that the Fed would stop its search for the holy grail of the perfect interest rate at any given moment of time. The Fed would not focus on the bond market, unemployment, capacity utilization, or any

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-03 Thread Christian Gregory
Therefore, it is critical to my argument that, generally speaking, a change in the gold price is NOT a reflection of a change in the scarcity of gold, but a reflection of a change in the scarcity of the currency. Gotcha. There are a couple of assumptions that we don't share. The first is

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-02 Thread Christian Gregory
I am a believer in the price system as the best way to determine production and allocation of resources. In order for the price system to work most effectively, I want a change in prices to represent information other than a change in the quantity of the unit of account. Except what you

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-07-02 Thread David Shemano
Christian Gregory writes: --- I am a believer in the price system as the best way to determine production and allocation of resources. In order for the price system to work most effectively, I want a change in prices to represent information other than a

RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-06-30 Thread David Shemano
In reply to Jim Devine: what is meant by neutral with respect to interest rates? I mean that the Fed would stop its search for the holy grail of the perfect interest rate at any given moment of time. The Fed would not focus on the bond market, unemployment, capacity utilization, or any other

RE: Re: RE: Re: Gold

2001-06-30 Thread David Shemano
Christian Gregory wrote: -- More importantly, how could the gold standard be neutral with respect to the business cycle, unless you think that credit demand and the business cycle are completely unrelated? The whole point of a price-specie flow model is to balance the

RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Gold

2001-06-29 Thread David Shemano
Jim Devine writes: I think one problem is that you seem to assume that capitalism is merely a bunch of mutually-beneficial exchanges between individuals. This misses the class and expansionary nature of capitalism. Where did this come from and what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Gold

2001-06-29 Thread David Shemano
Jim Devine writes: (The previous email in response was sent prematurely). I think one problem is that you seem to assume that capitalism is merely a bunch of mutually-beneficial exchanges between individuals. This misses the class and expansionary nature of capitalism. Where did this come

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Gold

2001-06-29 Thread Jim Devine
I wrote: I think one problem is that you seem to assume that capitalism is merely a bunch of mutually-beneficial exchanges between individuals. This misses the class and expansionary nature of capitalism. David Shemano wrote: Where did this come from and what does this have to do with the topic

Re: RE: Re: Re: Gold

2001-06-28 Thread Jim Devine
At 05:50 PM 06/28/2001 -0700, you wrote: Jim Devine writes: The supply of money also fluctuates despite the efforts to anchor it to the gold reserve. - Where did I say, Wanniski say, or any other person who suggests that the Fed should operate on a gold standard suggest