Opinions on cashing out some silver

On Feb 15, 7:32*pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 4:07 pm, Peter wrote:





On Feb 15, 12:25 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:

As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow
the
rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship
remained
much the same over the past fifty years?- Hide quoted text -

Would you consider the issues seem the same to people on a fixed
income (typically retired folks)?
Wouldn't a progressive income tax still have adverse consequences for
working folks?
You're beating your head against the wall with that fellow... really.
He has no idea what real money is, nor the three functions that it
must fulfill.

I suspect I've had as much and probably more experience with real money than
you have. *Your insulting comment is typical of an acedemic who can't accept
any opinion that is not covered by a theorum in his textbook, so he is left
with stuff like "you're beating your head..." . * Obviously all your
education hasn't helped you to make a convincing point or to argue against
mine. *Yes, I do have opinions as well as questions, however unscholarly
they may seem to you, and they are based on my lifetime experience which
you're not qualified to correct. * Yours opinions often seem unusual and
curious to me as well. * Because I don't understand them isn't necessarily
my fault, eh?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You can't see the forest for the trees. You drag in peripheral ****
because you don't understand the basics.

Pray tell, where would you have had experience with "real" money???
None has existed in America for over 75 years.

oly

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow
the rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or
are things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship
remained much the same over the past fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power than
it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to take it further.

"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 7:32 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 4:07 pm, Peter wrote:





On Feb 15, 12:25 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:

As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
an
average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see
that
our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages
follow
the
rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship
remained
much the same over the past fifty years?- Hide quoted text -

Would you consider the issues seem the same to people on a fixed
income (typically retired folks)?
Wouldn't a progressive income tax still have adverse consequences for
working folks?
You're beating your head against the wall with that fellow... really.
He has no idea what real money is, nor the three functions that it
must fulfill.

I suspect I've had as much and probably more experience with real money
than
you have. Your insulting comment is typical of an acedemic who can't
accept
any opinion that is not covered by a theorum in his textbook, so he is
left
with stuff like "you're beating your head..." . Obviously all your
education hasn't helped you to make a convincing point or to argue against
mine. Yes, I do have opinions as well as questions, however unscholarly
they may seem to you, and they are based on my lifetime experience which
you're not qualified to correct. Yours opinions often seem unusual and
curious to me as well. Because I don't understand them isn't necessarily
my fault, eh?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You can't see the forest for the trees. You drag in peripheral ****
because you don't understand the basics.

Then why not treat me as a "pupil" and use your education to show me where
my observations are not valid, rather than quoting authors or giving
textbook links. I'd be glad to accept an good explanation as to how my
views are wrong.

Pray tell, where would you have had experience with "real" money???
None has existed in America for over 75 years.

C'mon, you're just spouting that Rush Limbaugh-type bull**** again. Don't
you ever have anything to contribute from experience rather than that
classic tired rhetoric?

I though of you when I read George Will's Op Ed column in this Sunday's Wash
Post. The tone of the article contrasted the past and current Doomsday
claims and predictions of acedemic economic and climatic types. GW's views
usually don't mirror mine or even interest me, but I though this particular
article made some interesting points.








oly

"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 7:16 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"Peter" wrote in message

...
On Feb 15, 12:25 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:

As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of an
average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see that
our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages follow
the
rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its value or are
things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price relationship
remained
much the same over the past fifty years?- Hide quoted text -
Would you consider the issues seem the same to people on a fixed
income (typically retired folks)?

Sure. The same today as 50 years ago. Both groups would feel the hurt, as
would the unemployed, if prices rose but their annual take didn't. But the
comment I meant to make involves prices of goods as compared to wages
earned
over the years.

Wouldn't a progressive income tax still have adverse consequences for
working folks?

I'd leave that to the experts. ALL income taxes seem to have adverse
effects on working folks.

Aristotle:

http://www.economictheories.org/2008...-on-money.html

Medium of exchange, unit of measurement/comparison, and store of
value.
________________

Oly, you just lost another opportunity to dissect and correct any
errors in something I said. Instead, you post another of your economic
theory links, this time to Aristotle, someone most familiar with today's
issues. No wonder you have a problem understanding where I'm coming from in
some of my posts. If you had the time to reply here, you had the time to
offer comments in your own words. I'm thankful I never had someone like you
as a teacher. But then you'd probably have been frustrated to have had me
as a student.

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage
of an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I
don't see that our currency losing its buying power as long as
increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the
dollar losing its value or are things becoming more expensive? Or
has the wage-price relationship remained much the same over the past
fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or
on fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years
while everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost
about the same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago.
No shame. Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to
take it further.

I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage
of an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I
don't see that our currency losing its buying power as long as
increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the
dollar losing its value or are things becoming more expensive? Or
has the wage-price relationship remained much the same over the past
fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or
on fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years
while everything else stays put.

That is NOT what you said. You said "So I don't see that our currency
losing its buying power..." then conflated that with "as long as
increasing wages follow the rising cost of essential goods"
Even a jackass would (or should) know that a dollar today doesn't buy
what it did 20 years ago.

"RWF" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't see
that our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages
follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its
value or are things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price
relationship remained much the same over the past fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to take it
further.

I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.

He can't seem to find the stuff to show me where or how. How about you.
What have I said that is wrong? Your insult shows me nothing. If you
have a different opinion why not share it. Otherwise you simply sound like
one more blindered politician who is convinced that all his constituents are
ignorant and only he knows what's best for them.

On Feb 15, 9:41*pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"RWF" wrote in message

...







"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. *So I don't see
that our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages
follow the rising cost of essential goods. *Is the dollar losing its
value or are things becoming more expensive? *Or has the wage-price
relationship remained much the same over the past fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
fixed incomes. *I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
everything else stays put. *And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. *No big deal. *Unless you should choose to take it
further.

I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.

He can't seem to find the stuff to show me where or how. * How about you.
What have I said that is wrong? * *Your insult shows me nothing. *If you
have a different opinion why not share it. *Otherwise you simply sound like
one more blindered politician who is convinced that all his constituents are
ignorant and only he knows what's best for them.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, you're way smarter than Aristotle, Brucie.

You've drank the hemlock but you're (marginally) still alive. The
hemlock just affected your brain.

And if I were a politician, I'd be a populist like Wright Patman, not
an elitist follower of Edmund Burke.

oly

On Feb 15, 9:55*pm, oly wrote:
On Feb 15, 9:41*pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:





"RWF" wrote in message

...

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. *So I don't see
that our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages
follow the rising cost of essential goods. *Is the dollar losing its
value or are things becoming more expensive? *Or has the wage-price
relationship remained much the same over the past fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or on
fixed incomes. *I simply said that prices don't rise over the years while
everything else stays put. *And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. *No big deal. *Unless you should choose to take it
further.

I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.

He can't seem to find the stuff to show me where or how. * How about you.
What have I said that is wrong? * *Your insult shows me nothing. *If you
have a different opinion why not share it. *Otherwise you simply sound like
one more blindered politician who is convinced that all his constituents are
ignorant and only he knows what's best for them.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, you're way smarter than Aristotle, Brucie.

You've drank the hemlock but you're (marginally) still alive. *The
hemlock just affected your brain.

And if I were a politician, I'd be a populist like Wright Patman, not
an elitist follower of Edmund Burke.

oly- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry to Socrates. Wrong Greek. Still, both Socrates and Aristotle
had it over Bruce. So did Wright Patman. So did Edmund Burke.

I think I would have preferred to have been Charles James Fox. Got to
stir a lot of ****, drank boatloads with the Prince of Wales. Simply
died too young.

oly

"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 15, 9:41 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"RWF" wrote in message

...







"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"RWF" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As for the dollar, a loaf of bread costs about the same percentage of
an average hourly wage today as it did fifty years ago. So I don't
see
that our currency losing its buying power as long as increasing wages
follow the rising cost of essential goods. Is the dollar losing its
value or are things becoming more expensive? Or has the wage-price
relationship remained much the same over the past fifty years?

That's a very inane comment.
Those on fixed incomes are finding it harder to make ends meet.
Even a half-wit like Sarge realizes the dollar has less buying power
than it once had.
For shame!

My point had nothing to do with the plight of the those unemployed or
on
fixed incomes. I simply said that prices don't rise over the years
while
everything else stays put. And today's loaf of bread DOES cost about
the
same % of the average hourly wage as it did 50 years ago. No shame.
Nothing inane. No big deal. Unless you should choose to take it
further.

I think Oly is spot on about you.
You are willfully ignorant.

He can't seem to find the stuff to show me where or how. How about you.
What have I said that is wrong? Your insult shows me nothing. If you
have a different opinion why not share it. Otherwise you simply sound like
one more blindered politician who is convinced that all his constituents
are
ignorant and only he knows what's best for them.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, you're way smarter than Aristotle, Brucie.

You've drank the hemlock but you're (marginally) still alive. The
hemlock just affected your brain.

And if I were a politician, I'd be a populist like Wright Patman, not
an elitist follower of Edmund Burke.
___________

When I saw your reply header, I hoped for something informative. What a
fool I was. Aristotle is dead. Apparently you cling to him as your
relevant savior. He's not mine. He never bought load of groceries or gas
for a car. He never had a bank account or a retirement plan. That you
continue to avoid correcting any of my supposedly misinformed points
suggests to me that you don't really have anything of substance to offer,
except to claim how ignorant I am or to point out what Aristotle said.
Great political skills. I'm willing to be taught or corrected, but it's
becoming more apparent that you lack the ammunition and the skills.