More Gold in the NYT

[Thailandnotes]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/bu...gewanted=print

"So far this year, both gold and stocks are up. That combination is unlikely to last out the current decade.

Betting that $1,400 gold will soon be $1,800 gold or $2,500 gold is basically a bet that the West really is in permanent decline this time, with countries facing the prospect of bankruptcy or sharp reductions in spending on everything from schools to pensions. Or perhaps all of the above.

Let’s hope the bet is wrong."


I forget..is the current decade just starting or is it almost over?

[coolhand]

Re: More Gold in the NYT

Thanks for posting - a key read for me about when to sell gold is when I start to see members of the blogging community other than EJ & Chris Martenson, let alone members of the mainstream media, understand the relationship b/t peak cheap oil & economic growth, & the relationship that gold has to the economic growth limitations posed by peak cheap oil.

The fact that EJ & Chris Martenson are the only two who get this tells me that gold still has a very, very long way to run.

[tacito]

Re: More Gold in the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/bu...gewanted=print
"That combination is unlikely to last out the current decade."

I forget..is the current decade just starting or is it almost over?

It's almost over. There were no zero year, so decades go from 1 to 10, centuries from 1 to 100 and, yes, everybody celebrated the new millenium one year before it started. In the middle ages they know how to count better.

[GRG55]

Re: More Gold in the NYT

It's almost over. There were no zero year, so decades go from 1 to 10, centuries from 1 to 100 and, yes, everybody celebrated the new millenium one year before it started. In the middle ages they know how to count better.

Maybe in the Middle Ages they understood the concept of delayed gratification better than we seem to now...