Roger's Matters Arising...
Forrest Gunter
fpgunter@hotmail.com
Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:49:35 -0500
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: Michael Eisenstadt <MICHAELE@ANDO.PAIR.COM>
<DIV></DIV>>To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: Roger's Matters Arising...
<DIV></DIV><mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=help><mailto:austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net><mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=subscribe><mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=unsubscribe>
<DIV></DIV>>Which of the 2 or 3 items are you asking me about? Not the Bush
<DIV></DIV>>administration's encouragement of Fed employees to help the
<DIV></DIV>>Republicans, I suppose. You are asking then about the
<DIV></DIV>>remarks forwarded from energyresources@yahoogroups.com
<DIV></DIV>>maillist plus Roger's unintelligible predictions.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>The remarks from the maillist claim that the dollar amount
<DIV></DIV>>of money is many times the dollar amount of goods and that
<DIV></DIV>>"when and if everyone calls in their chits, a huge tangle of
<DIV></DIV>>complex international financial transactions will be found
<DIV></DIV>>to depend on a comparatively tiny base of real assets."
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Sounds like crackpot economics to me. What would it mean
<DIV></DIV>>to "call in one's chits"? This amateur Cassandra refers to
<DIV></DIV>>the "tiny base of real assets." This is totality disconnected
<DIV></DIV>>from the reality of the enormity of real assets in the real
<DIV></DIV>>world, improved and unimproved real estate and movables. If
<DIV></DIV>>there were more money than assets then the assets would be
<DIV></DIV>>revalued and priced up to correspond with the supply of money.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>For Roger it is always chickie lickie the sky is falling so
<DIV></DIV>>it is no surprise that these remarks rattled his chain
<DIV></DIV>>especially as it seems to be somehow wrapped around the
<DIV></DIV>>Huppert's Peak hypothesis that there will be no more oil the
<DIV></DIV>>day after tomorrow.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>As Jim Baldauf, a subscriber to energyresourses@yahoogroups.com
<DIV></DIV>>pointed out, the less hysterical and more convincing contributors
<DIV></DIV>>to this maillist reject the Huppert's Peak hypothesis. If
<DIV></DIV>>interested you can always subscribe to energyresourses@yahoogroups.com
<DIV></DIV>>and judge for yourself the arguments for and against.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I have no idea what the numbers in Roger's statement relate to:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Our good economists, who tell me the "8/288 syndrome" is simply the
<DIV></DIV>> > workings of an "efficient market" are going to find it impossible
<DIV></DIV>> > to deal with a devaluation of currency at the 36X factor level
<DIV></DIV>> > implied by the "8/288 syndrome"
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Is Roger is too chicken shit to defend himself in this forum?
<DIV></DIV>>We'll see.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>best,
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Mike
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Connie Clark wrote:
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > Hi Mike,
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > ...Anyway, here is something Roger sent out this morning, of
<DIV></DIV>> > interest, I think. I am interested in your response, as you
<DIV></DIV>> > and I once compared impressions of the volatility of our
<DIV></DIV>> > nation's economy, and I am still pessimistic.-Connie
<DIV><FONT size=7>Some wag said, "Humbert Humbert meets Anubis on the Plains of Gilead," if one got that strait.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=7> Gypsum Ross Lee</FONT></DIV></mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=unsubscribe></mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=subscribe></mailto:austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net></mailto:austin-ghetto-list-request@pairlist.net?subject=help></div><br clear=all><hr>Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMDEN/2022">Click Here</a> </html>