Absolutely true. Because of all the noise, searching for erotic content is nowhere near as easy as it used to be.
I've often wondered if there would be a market for a "real" sex-themed search engine. The only erotic search engines I've ever seen were gimmicky, and returned links to the same sites on radically different searches (probably the sites they get money from).
Also, seeing as the content providers are so aggressive in increasing their search rankings, the filtering would have to be very sophisticated. Definitely some potential for intellectual stimulation there.
This guy claims to be a libertarian, but then talks about how good his job is because his company hates IT outsourcing. "What are you doing about it?" he asks. Well, I assume the "it" in question is outsourcing. So really, he wants something done about outsourcing (in spite of his being a libertarian), and is complaining because everyone else in the US is too lazy to do anything except "bitching on Slashdot." Who is bitching here, exactly? He is. This guy makes libertarians look bad.
I'm afraid I might be responding to a troll, but I can't help myself. It's my nature, I guess.
You seriously need to read What Has Government Done To Our Money on the Ludwig von Mises institute web site. That post was so completely mixed up, I don't know where to begin to refute it.
If we go back to a classical gold standard, the price of gold in dollars will go sky-high. That doesn't matter unless you use gold for something. Yeah, jewelry will become expensive, but so what? It already is. The idea that the price of gold going up will ruin the economy is absurd.
The price of gold going sky-high won't lead to deflation. In 1973, as you mentioned, the price of gold went through the roof. It didn't cause deflation then.
Your assertion that gold is prone to inflation because 'a dollar today will buy you 1/4'th as much "consumer goods" now as it did in 1971, but a dollar today will only buy you one tenth of the gold it bought in 1971' is flawed. Under fractional gold backing, the price of gold was being artificially depressed. Once the price of gold was allowed to float, it rose because of market pressures that had been brewing for decades.
These gold mines in Australia and South Africa aren't producing anywhere near enough gold to cause significant amounts of inflation to a currency on a gold standard. To say that going on a gold standard would give the South Africans a say in how much you can spend at the grocery store is ridiculous. It's an appeal to xenophobia.
To me, the idea of a gold standard is not idealogically appealing, as the AC said it was to certain people. It's just that I've never heard anyone make a compelling argument against it. I found your post very unconvincing, and until I see a better argument, I will support the gold standard.
Slashdot Mirror
I've often wondered if there would be a market for a "real" sex-themed search engine. The only erotic search engines I've ever seen were gimmicky, and returned links to the same sites on radically different searches (probably the sites they get money from).
Also, seeing as the content providers are so aggressive in increasing their search rankings, the filtering would have to be very sophisticated. Definitely some potential for intellectual stimulation there.
This guy claims to be a libertarian, but then talks about how good his job is because his company hates IT outsourcing. "What are you doing about it?" he asks. Well, I assume the "it" in question is outsourcing. So really, he wants something done about outsourcing (in spite of his being a libertarian), and is complaining because everyone else in the US is too lazy to do anything except "bitching on Slashdot." Who is bitching here, exactly? He is. This guy makes libertarians look bad.
I'm afraid I might be responding to a troll, but I can't help myself. It's my nature, I guess.
You seriously need to read What Has Government Done To Our Money on the Ludwig von Mises institute web site. That post was so completely mixed up, I don't know where to begin to refute it.
If we go back to a classical gold standard, the price of gold in dollars will go sky-high. That doesn't matter unless you use gold for something. Yeah, jewelry will become expensive, but so what? It already is. The idea that the price of gold going up will ruin the economy is absurd.
The price of gold going sky-high won't lead to deflation. In 1973, as you mentioned, the price of gold went through the roof. It didn't cause deflation then.
Your assertion that gold is prone to inflation because 'a dollar today will buy you 1/4'th as much "consumer goods" now as it did in 1971, but a dollar today will only buy you one tenth of the gold it bought in 1971' is flawed. Under fractional gold backing, the price of gold was being artificially depressed. Once the price of gold was allowed to float, it rose because of market pressures that had been brewing for decades.
These gold mines in Australia and South Africa aren't producing anywhere near enough gold to cause significant amounts of inflation to a currency on a gold standard. To say that going on a gold standard would give the South Africans a say in how much you can spend at the grocery store is ridiculous. It's an appeal to xenophobia.
To me, the idea of a gold standard is not idealogically appealing, as the AC said it was to certain people. It's just that I've never heard anyone make a compelling argument against it. I found your post very unconvincing, and until I see a better argument, I will support the gold standard.