Forum Archive Index - January 2004

[robin benson <rob@hammerheadmedia.co.uk>]

BAA - assume you know all about e-gold.com ?

I was speaking to one of the founders of e-gold a while back and, 
apparently, New Zealanders are (proportionally) over-represented in 
terms of e-gold activity,

Regards

Robin

On 28 Jan 2004, at 10:28, Baa Baa wrote:

> Chris,
>
> Although I like the presmise behind e-transations underpinned in gold, 
> I'd have to say that 1. I don't use it, and 2. I suspect few do 
> either. It's so -contradictory- imo. Electronic transfer of an 'entry' 
> in an 'electronic database' which is -supposedly- linked to a physical 
> -gold- deposit is, imo, strange bedfellows, at this point in time. 
> Firstly, gold is a physical thing, tangible, real, intrinsic, basic. 
> But, e-transactions are a -mechanism- to make some funds transfer, 
> reliant on the e-regime, and e-availabiliy (of computer/network 
> systems) to effect the transfer. The two don't gel imo, yet. I only 
> own gold (and sludge) as insurance, even although my % exceeds common 
> guidelines, so, I can't reconcile the notion as yet why I would move 
> to underpin my e-transactions in a metal when the -mechanism- itself 
> is inherently risky BUT the underlying asset is not. Frankly, there's 
> no need to. We can prepare ourselves through separatist investment in 
> intrinsic value while maintaiing participation in daily transactions 
> which leverage advanced technologies. Personally, I don't see a 
> compelling need yet to blend the two. It may come, but until my 
> employers pay me in metals, I'll be happy to daily use e-banking, 
> Paypal, e-Bill, Billpay, ... or whatever, before I present my metal as 
> liquidity for a day-to-day transaction.
>
> Did any of this make sense?
> BAA


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/