Straight Up RV possibilities

[Dysan23]

In my opinion, a straight up RV is impossible and will not happen. The dinar is very likely going to redenominate and the value of your dinar will not change. If you bought more dinar recently, you were duped. But don't feel bad, most of us here were duped also. It's hard to do real research on the dinar because these sites are very biased towards the dinar. Fortunately, I know several people that trade currencies for a living. None of them consider the dinar a bona fide or legitimate investment. None of them own dinar. All of them have suggested an investment in dinar is the perfect storm of ignorance, anonymity, and financial desperation. Unfortunately, I didn't talk to any of them until AFTER I bought dinar. After all, the RV was imminet and there was no time to waste. Maybe they're wrong but I tend to give much more credibility to their opinion than to some keyboard junkie hiding anonymously behind an IP address.

In my opinon. If I were you and I felt the way you did, I would have sold my dinars and moved on to another investment oppotunity. You may want to consider a Ponzie scheme.. It's a good investment and you would have the opportunity for a quick return on the money you invest. That is if your orchistrator is smart and doesn't get caught before you get a return.

Or you can stop posting and keep your negativity to yourself... Not everyone here is 100% sold on the fact that this will be a get rich opportunity, but we are optomistic and hope that it has a little return for the money spent. If you get your money back plus a little spending money, it's a win win for anyone.

FYI, anything is possible... The florida marlins won two world series in one decade with a payroll of $5 dollars. Who would have thunk:-)

[Darin]

Thanks for "spoon feeding" me...

Okay, first off, what you posted is not the full article. The full article is very very lengthy. So, you likely do not have the full understanding of what all is consisted within the article.

Its a PDF file that consists of 18 pages found at this link:

http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2006/052606.pdf

Now, let's go over some of the importance of it first, for the general public to understand how this factors in:

This is quote from Juni, I think she is a legal assistant and was well-known at PD.

Whether they have met all the requirements or not at THIS time is speculative, but it is not likely that they would broadcast if they have, since it would likely signal an RV

Tradeable currency is linked to the IMF arrangement, whether Article XIV or VIII. Right now they are under Article XIV, the ‘transitional arrangement’. This is NOT to be permanent, but rather a temporary arrangement. When they move out of the temporary arrangement (which is what they have been under for at least the last 8 years or more), and then move to IMF Article VIII, then it is tradeable currency that you will see easily paired internationally on forex.

Okay, so we have an idea why it is important to understand, but how do we know that the CBI is looking to make this move... here is another quote.. I'd post the link, but I can't due to DV restrictions

Exerp

14. Progress has been made in moving toward accepting the obligations of Article VIII, ections 2(a), 3, and 4, of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement. We have worked with IMF staff to complete the review of exchange laws and regulations and are considering measures to remove the identified exchange restrictions on current international transactions. We remain committed to avoid imposing any restrictions on the making of payments and transfers for current international transactions or introducing any multiple currency practices.

Okay, now where the real spoon-feeding begins JMW, so open wide...

Enoch8, a well-respected researcher of the IQD posted this on another site... Breaking it down into better layman's terms:

Along with that portion under Financial on in section 14. go back a page to 38, and look at Section 12. iv.

(iv) after the balance sheets have been cleaned up, revalue

the remaining foreign currency denominated balance sheet items. The BRU will work

under the supervision of the Restructuring Oversight Committee (ROC), consisting of

the Minister of Finance, the Governor of the CBI, and the Chairman of the BSA.

Then look again at 14.

14. Progress has been made in moving toward accepting the obligations of Article VIII,

Sections 2(a), 3, and 4, of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement. We have worked with IMF staff

to complete the review of exchange laws and regulations and are considering measures to

remove the identified exchange restrictions on current international transactions.

Now take a look at the section on page 44 Section 7.

7. Net international reserves (NIR) are defined as gross usable reserves minus reserverelated

liabilities of the CBI. Gross usable reserves of the CBI are claims of the CBI on nonresidents

that are controlled by the CBI, denominated in foreign convertible currencies, and

are immediately and unconditionally available to the CBI for meeting balance of payments

needs or for intervention in foreign exchange markets, and are not earmarked by the CBI for

meeting specific payments. They include CBI holdings of monetary gold, SDRs, Iraq’s

reserve position in the IMF, foreign currency cash, and deposits abroad, except for the

resources of the DFI but including the CBI DFI sub-account. Excluded from reserve assets are

any assets that are pledged, collateralized, or otherwise encumbered; claims on residents;

precious metals other than monetary gold; assets in non-convertible currencies; illiquid assets;

and claims on foreign exchange arising from derivatives in foreign currencies vis-à-vis

domestic currency (such as futures, forwards, swaps, and options). Reserve-related liabilities

shall be defined as foreign currency denominated liabilities of the CBI to non-residents with

original maturity of one year or less, and all liabilities to the Fund, but excluding the liabilities

represented by SDR allocations. They include: foreign currency reserves of commercial banks

held at the CBI; commitments to sell foreign currency arising from derivatives (such as

futures, forwards, swaps, and options); and all arrears on principal or interest payments to

commercial banks, suppliers, or official export credit agencies. As of December 31, 2009,

(net) international reserves amounted to US$44.34 billion, all comprising of reserve assets.

The program floors on the net international reserves of the CBI are reported in Table 1.

Notice, that the projections tables, do not include these 'Exclusions'.

Gee....... I wonder what happens with these 'Exclusions' once CBI is out of Article XIV agreements and goes to Article VIII 2a, 3, and 4 with those assets?

I wonder just how much those assets are worth, once they are allowed to be monetized and used as Reserves, which support the value of the M2 ?

This is what we were talking about on Moto's Conference Monday Night.

This Monday, you should all ask questions about this. I am guessing that several of us have some really great conversation on this 'Gold Mine' full of nuggets!

This is exactly what we have been talking about, since the Sept. 18th SBA, referring to the Exclusions, under the Definitions section, Addendum II, which is enough value, under Article VIII, to increase the potential amounts of Foreign Assets and Reserves, and the Basis of Value to the Currency Issued, exponentially. cheers

If you noticed the M2 charts and projections, you will notice, they have NOT.... I repeat Have NOT, been removing currency from circulation, as has been suggested at some other sites. In fact they are increasing it from 27 Trillion to 31 Trillion.

The good news here, is that if you understand how much those reserves are, once those 'Exclusions' are allowed to be 'Monetized' after Article VIII IMF conditions are met, CBI does NOT NEED TO remove the currency, except by attrition, from circulation, over time, AFTER the RV.

Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see.

Just sayin'.

I recall reading two other really good explanations by people regarding the entire document, but one was located on a site that no longer exists because it moved & I couldn't find the other one.

And another quote from Enoch8 that may help you find what you need to understand the document better..

This is a much bigger deal, than what we can see, at first glance.

The Parts i and ii addendums to the SBA from last year.... give definitions of what non liquid assets cannot be currently used in foreign reserves, which supports the value of the IQD.

Now... as approved by the IMF, once Iraq moves in Article IV reviews, to Article VIII, there are Hundreds of Billions that can be added back to those reserves. Do you see what this means?

It is huge!

Therefore, when I say what was once "excluded" can than be "included" upon the move from Article XIV to VIII will than add the previous exclusions into their foreign cash reserves which should create an increase in value.

And if need be, this isn't suffice for you, I'll add even more material to back this claim.

Hopefully I didn't spill too much on your bib....

[20MillionDinar]

yes...pretty much economics 101...supply and demand

Where do you think the rate would go to if they dropped the fixed exchange rate system today and let supply & demand dictate their value? Just curious JMW.

[20MillionDinar]

Darin, thanks for the break down regarding Article VIII. Makes sense to me...

[Darin]

Darin, thanks for the break down regarding Article VIII. Makes sense to me...

Thanks, I am still digging even further to basically prove the advantages of the move, and why it is important to us....

It is a prime example of.... Why understanding particular documents can have benefits..

I could honestly tell you, I could read that several times and never come to that conclusion.

Takes some smart ppl to break it down for us.

[uncirculd]

Where do you think the rate would go to if they dropped the fixed exchange rate system today and let supply & demand dictate their value? Just curious JMW.

Don't know but they complain we are causing the value to go down, So everyone go and buy as much as you can afford and watch the economy really get rough and push em into the RV.

[MrFnHappy]

Maliki can say whatever he wants, but the notion of having the most powerful currency in the world when your country's GDP is around the 50th or 60th highest in the world (in 2010 they were 62nd) isn't very realistic. Maybe 20 or 30 years from now they'll be able to break into the top 20 or so, if they pump a whole lotta oil and develop some other industries that contribute meaningfully to their GDP.

Pretty sure Hillarious never said that, also. I've heard the speech that I'm pretty sure is the one people talk about and what was said is that Iraq would surpass China in GROWTH in two years. Which isn't really a surprise, Iraqs GDP is/was in the toilet and just getting oil back to reasonable production levels will/has result(ed) in huge growth. So no surprise that they'd experience extremely rapid growth compared to a country like China which has a GDP of around 6 trillion. They're not going to be the richest country on the planet. To even beat 2nd place China, since Iraqs economy is almost entirely oil based, they'd have to pump about 60 billion barrels a year even at 100 USD a barrel. At that rate (which is impossible anyway, given current reserves and technology) they'd blow through their current oil reserves in less than 3 years.

Here's the speech:

http://articlesofinterest-kelley.blogspot.com/2011/06/video-Hillarious-clinton-promoting.html

I think the reasons you're citing are popular pumper propaganda with little or no basis in actual fact.

Dude, you need to stop with all the logic, you're killing me.....

[MrFnHappy]

7. Net international reserves (NIR) are defined as gross usable reserves minus reserverelated

liabilities of the CBI. Gross usable reserves of the CBI are claims of the CBI on nonresidents

that are controlled by the CBI, denominated in foreign convertible currencies, and

are immediately and unconditionally available to the CBI for meeting balance of payments

needs or for intervention in foreign exchange markets, and are not earmarked by the CBI for

meeting specific payments. They include CBI holdings of monetary gold, SDRs, Iraq’s

reserve position in the IMF, foreign currency cash, and deposits abroad, except for the

resources of the DFI but including the CBI DFI sub-account. Excluded from reserve assets are

any assets that are pledged, collateralized, or otherwise encumbered; claims on residents;

precious metals other than monetary gold; assets in non-convertible currencies; illiquid assets;

and claims on foreign exchange arising from derivatives in foreign currencies vis-à-vis

domestic currency (such as futures, forwards, swaps, and options). Reserve-related liabilities

shall be defined as foreign currency denominated liabilities of the CBI to non-residents with

original maturity of one year or less, and all liabilities to the Fund, but excluding the liabilities

represented by SDR allocations. They include: foreign currency reserves of commercial banks

held at the CBI; commitments to sell foreign currency arising from derivatives (such as

futures, forwards, swaps, and options); and all arrears on principal or interest payments to

commercial banks, suppliers, or official export credit agencies. As of December 31, 2009,

(net) international reserves amounted to US$44.34 billion, all comprising of reserve assets.

The program floors on the net international reserves of the CBI are reported in Table 1.

Here's a key statement for me...

7. Net international reserves (NIR) are defined as gross usable reserves minus reserverelated

liabilities of the CBI.

"gross usable reserves minus reserve related liabilities"

Surely, dinar in circulation (among other things) must be considered "reserve related liabilities".

NIR will likely be a number to watch, as far as how much the exchange rate could improve. Remember, they will likely still divide this number by the M2 to derive the exchange rate, just as they do now.

[GMartin]

In my opinion, a straight up RV is impossible and will not happen. The dinar is very likely going to redenominate and the value of your dinar will not change. If you bought more dinar recently, you were duped. But don't feel bad, most of us here were duped also. It's hard to do real research on the dinar because these sites are very biased towards the dinar. Fortunately, I know several people that trade currencies for a living. None of them consider the dinar a bona fide or legitimate investment. None of them own dinar. All of them have suggested an investment in dinar is the perfect storm of ignorance, anonymity, and financial desperation. Unfortunately, I didn't talk to any of them until AFTER I bought dinar. After all, the RV was imminet and there was no time to waste. Maybe they're wrong but I tend to give much more credibility to their opinion than to some keyboard junkie hiding anonymously behind an IP address.

I love these comments. It's like looking at a news article and having someone agree and disagree. The best bet anyone can do is buy some dinar, lock it away, and breeze through this forum once a month. TOO many people are going nuts over this LOP, RD, RV Crap. Relax people - think of it like you bought something stupid and it's done and over with. One day that "stupid" thing could be worth something. We have all wasted money on crap, so hopefully this CRAP is worth something one day. If not it was a chance ALL OF US took. Good Luck everyone.

[estewart]

In my opinon. If I were you and I felt the way you did, I would have sold my dinars and moved on to another investment oppotunity. You may want to consider a Ponzie scheme.. It's a good investment and you would have the opportunity for a quick return on the money you invest. That is if your orchistrator is smart and doesn't get caught before you get a return.

Or you can stop posting and keep your negativity to yourself... Not everyone here is 100% sold on the fact that this will be a get rich opportunity, but we are optomistic and hope that it has a little return for the money spent. If you get your money back plus a little spending money, it's a win win for anyone.

FYI, anything is possible... The florida marlins won two world series in one decade with a payroll of $5 dollars. Who would have thunk:-)

My Dear. Could you elaborate (i.e., explain) just exactly WHY you are feeling so "optimistic?" I think we could all use a good technical understanding about that.

Could it be that you are simply feeling pumped up entirely due to a good bit of pumping by a potent pumper rendering you a perfectly pumped pumpie puppy? Hmm? Or is there some other not so all that apparent or obvious not-based-on-rationality reason? What say you?

I love these comments. It's like looking at a news article and having someone agree and disagree. The best bet anyone can do is buy some dinar, lock it away, and breeze through this forum once a month. TOO many people are going nuts over this LOP, RD, RV Crap. Relax people - think of it like you bought something stupid and it's done and over with. One day that "stupid" thing could be worth something. We have all wasted money on crap, so hopefully this CRAP is worth something one day. If not it was a chance ALL OF US took. Good Luck everyone.

EXCELLENT POST.

[Danan]

Gosh, this is not on subject, but I have looked everywhere. How do I verify my dinars? Please don't hit me too hard.

[HopefulTxn]

Gosh, this is not on subject, but I have looked everywhere. How do I verify my dinars? Please don't hit me too hard.

Check this link out:

http://www.iraqi-dinar.com/security-features.php

[jmw]

Okay…so much for pointing out where it allows them to use non-liquid assets to back their currency…

First…what I posted before IS the entire Article VIII…the link you posted is not…it is an analysis of recent trends….the title is:

Article VIII Acceptance by IMF Members: Recent Trends and Implications for the

Fund

I’m curious if you actually read any of these or do you only take others opinions of what the articles say as fact?

I have read both your link as well as the actual Article VIII requirements and nowhere does it allow to use non-liquid assets as part of their net international reserves.

Below is the opinion of Enoch8 that you copied and pasted…he refers to page 44 Section 7 but I’m not sure what document….it isn’t Article VIII

Nothing in it points to where once they accept Article VIII that they will be able to include excludable items..ie liquid assets.

It also makes an assumption that there is a huge amount of these assets…but I’m not sure where he is getting that.

Along with that portion under Financial on in section 14. go back a page to 38, and look at Section 12. iv.

(iv) after the balance sheets have been cleaned up, revalue

the remaining foreign currency denominated balance sheet items. The BRU will work

under the supervision of the Restructuring Oversight Committee (ROC), consisting of

the Minister of Finance, the Governor of the CBI, and the Chairman of the BSA.

Then look again at 14.

14. Progress has been made in moving toward accepting the obligations of Article VIII,

Sections 2(a), 3, and 4, of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement. We have worked with IMF staff

to complete the review of exchange laws and regulations and are considering measures to

remove the identified exchange restrictions on current international transactions.

Now take a look at the section on page 44 Section 7.

7. Net international reserves (NIR) are defined as gross usable reserves minus reserve related

liabilities of the CBI. Gross usable reserves of the CBI are claims of the CBI on nonresidents

that are controlled by the CBI, denominated in foreign convertible currencies, and

are immediately and unconditionally available to the CBI for meeting balance of payments

needs or for intervention in foreign exchange markets, and are not earmarked by the CBI for

meeting specific payments. They include CBI holdings of monetary gold, SDRs, Iraq’s

reserve position in the IMF, foreign currency cash, and deposits abroad, except for the

resources of the DFI but including the CBI DFI sub-account.

Excluded from reserve assets are any assets that are pledged, collateralized, or otherwise encumbered; claims on residents;

precious metals other than monetary gold; assets in non-convertible currencies; illiquid assets;

and claims on foreign exchange arising from derivatives in foreign currencies vis-à-vis

domestic currency (such as futures, forwards, swaps, and options). Reserve-related liabilities

shall be defined as foreign currency denominated liabilities of the CBI to non-residents with

original maturity of one year or less, and all liabilities to the Fund, but excluding the liabilities

represented by SDR allocations. They include: foreign currency reserves of commercial banks

held at the CBI; commitments to sell foreign currency arising from derivatives (such as

futures, forwards, swaps, and options); and all arrears on principal or interest payments to

commercial banks, suppliers, or official export credit agencies. As of December 31, 2009,

(net) international reserves amounted to US$44.34 billion, all comprising of reserve assets.

The program floors on the net international reserves of the CBI are reported in Table 1.

Read more: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/81061-straight-up-rv-possibilities/page__st__40#ixzz1W31gqHfO

Would you like to try it again because that wasn't much help.

Where do you think the rate would go to if they dropped the fixed exchange rate system today and let supply & demand dictate their value? Just curious JMW.

I think you are making a very big assumption that they would not have a fixed exchange to the dollar or a basket of currency...but if they didn't I think it could grow gradually as they improved their GDP and increase their reserves...but it is not significantly undervalued based on their current money supply....not enough to make a big jump.

if you look at our M2 which I think is around 9 trillion and our GDP of around 14 trillion...that would mean they could have a value of round 50 to 60 billion based on a GDP of around 100 billion...which is pretty much right where they are today....so to change the value they would need to increase GDP or reduce M2.

[Darin]

Okay…so much for pointing out where it allows them to use non-liquid assets to back their currency…

First…what I posted before IS the entire Article VIII…the link you posted is not…it is an analysis of recent trends….the title is:

Article VIII Acceptance by IMF Members: Recent Trends and Implications for the

Fund

I’m curious if you actually read any of these or do you only take others opinions of what the articles say as fact?

I have read both your link as well as the actual Article VIII requirements and nowhere does it allow to use non-liquid assets as part of their net international reserves.

Below is the opinion of Enoch8 that you copied and pasted…he refers to page 44 Section 7 but I’m not sure what document….it isn’t Article VIII

Nothing in it points to where once they accept Article VIII that they will be able to include excludable items..ie liquid assets.

It also makes an assumption that there is a huge amount of these assets…but I’m not sure where he is getting that.

Would you like to try it again because that wasn't much help.

Took you that long to respond?? I know you clearly read what I posted yesterday.

Like I said, it does not clearly "say" it in the article.

And it doesn't mean that all non-liquid assets are monetized.

What it means, is trade agreements may be setup to allow exchange of hard assets for the return of IQD.

Sorry, that I mention something is complex, and a little beyond my understanding as I have not read it several times. Maybe you should admit the same?

And, I also have read the break down from others who do a good job of explaining. But...... I can't seem to find the posts.. One of them was on an IQD forum that doesn't not exist anymore. (Moved)

Ha - its not like they couldn't exchange hard assets for receiving their own currency back. You say it like it isn't possible..

And... It backs their currency, the ability to exchange hard assets for acquiring back their IQD. It won't have any effect on their foreign cash reserves.

[Darin]

I think it may be better "if" I re-phrase what I am arguing....

Article 8, alone, will not monetize non-liquid assets. In other words, it is not like they make the move & boom, they can monetize all hard-assets. The monetizing of assets would have to be agreed upon through contracts or sales, and they would have to be in Article 8 for this to be even possible.

Other countries like Jordan, Japan, and even Vietnam have made the jump to Art. 8, and they didn't receive a significant jump in value. What I am arguing is that they have the "ability" to monetize the hard assets through contracts, sales, etc. Because moving from 14 to 8, gives them the ability to exit the restrictions in place prior from allowing such trade agreements.

So, they'll now have the ability to do this... Will they? That is speculation, but they do hold a vast amount of resources. That is something most of us won't argue upon. But, as we read the articles, it does appear they sure like to sign contracts......

[Francie26]

HOLY CRAP...This is the most honest and ACCURATE post Ive read since coming to this site since this past Feb. !! Thank you !!

dont get me wrong I own a little dinar, but its... a LONG SHOT and LONG WAIT PEOPLE !!

It's all of that . . . and wrong.

[jmw]

Took you that long to respond?? I know you clearly read what I posted yesterday.

Like I said, it does not clearly "say" it in the article.

And it doesn't mean that all non-liquid assets are monetized.

What it means, is trade agreements may be setup to allow exchange of hard assets for the return of IQD.

Sorry, that I mention something is complex, and a little beyond my understanding as I have not read it several times. Maybe you should admit the same?

And, I also have read the break down from others who do a good job of explaining. But...... I can't seem to find the posts.. One of them was on an IQD forum that doesn't not exist anymore. (Moved)

Ha - its not like they couldn't exchange hard assets for receiving their own currency back. You say it like it isn't possible..

And... It backs their currency, the ability to exchange hard assets for acquiring back their IQD. It won't have any effect on their foreign cash reserves.

Darin your whole premise seems to be...if you make it sound really really complicated then that makes it feasible.

This is what is in the document you provided:

"Overall, the goals set out in the 1992 report have been met, and substantial

progress in this area has been made. 165 out of 184 members have now notified the Fund

that they have accepted Article VIII obligations and no longer avail themselves of the

transitional provisions of Article XIV; 95 of such acceptances were notified between 1992

and 2005. Notification of the acceptance of Article VIII obligations, often a byproduct of

underlying economic changes, reflects a Fund member’s efforts to liberalize its legal

framework and administrative practices in the area of foreign exchange regulation. Most

countries that have notified acceptance of Article VIII obligations have also significantly

simplified their exchange control regimes. Some countries have liberalized controls on

capital movements partly in view of their positive experience with removing restrictions on

current international payments and transfers."

It says 95 countries have moved to Article VIII between 1992 and 2005...

Now how many of these countries that have made this move are now about to use non-liquid assets as foreign currency reserves thereby giving them the ability to significantly adjust the value of their currency?

That would be ZERO...but your argument is that once Iraq does it they will have a windfall and revalue their currency...why them and no one else?

Also, you refer to their "Hard" assets and non-liquid assets...what specifically are you referring to and what value are you putting on these assets?

If these assets could be used their value would have to be around 30 trillion in order to have a $1 revalue...which frankly is impossible.

These gurus think that the more confusing they can make it the more people will believe what they are saying...but basically it is bs.

[Darin]

JMW, you just don't give-up do you?

Why would they not be allowed to trade their non-liquid assets for the return of IQD?

You make it appear that is impossible. We pay cash for goods all the time, why can't central banks use the same process?

Okay, your going to say it is because the assets being sold are used to back the value of the IQD, and that is not likely, possible, feasible or whatever.

The basis is the idea of trade agreements. And I never said it was the "route" they WOULD take, but only a possible avenue.

I guess we will find out in due time, won't we? And you make it seem that it doesn't matter how much non-liquid assets they have, it doens't benefit them whatsoever.

I'm running short on time, so I will argue this more thoroughly with backing evidence later.

[jmw]

JMW, you just don't give-up do you?

Why would they not be allowed to trade their non-liquid assets for the return of IQD?

You make it appear that is impossible. We pay cash for goods all the time, why can't central banks use the same process?

Okay, your going to say it is because the assets being sold are used to back the value of the IQD, and that is not likely, possible, feasible or whatever.

The basis is the idea of trade agreements. And I never said it was the "route" they WOULD take, but only a possible avenue.

I guess we will find out in due time, won't we? And you make it seem that it doesn't matter how much non-liquid assets they have, it doens't benefit them whatsoever.

I'm running short on time, so I will argue this more thoroughly with backing evidence later.

I was thinking the same about you Darin...if you one theory doesn't work you just throw another out there without any thought to if it is feasible...

Please answer this - what are the non-liquid assets you are referring to?

What are the "hard" assets you are referring to?

When you say "we pay cash for goods all the time" you are correct...but cash is a LIQUID asset...you are trying to argue that they have some magical stash of "non-liquid" assets that all of a sudden are going to changed to a liquid asset such as gold, SDR's or cash.

A. How much are you proposing they have...or how much is stated that they have would be a better answer

B. what is it that is going to be converted

Answer these and you might have a solid argument.

[Francie26]

HOLY CRAP...This is the most honest and ACCURATE post Ive read since coming to this site since this past Feb. !! Thank you !!

dont get me wrong I own a little dinar, but its... a LONG SHOT and LONG WAIT PEOPLE !!

It was interesting to see your strange delight over a miserable conclusion regarding the dinar. Nope!! Wrongo!! Not going to happen like that at all! It will RV for a worthwhile amount sometime in the middle of September, and I hope you remember this when you are sitting there with all that egg on your face. LOL Sheesh!! Some people keep a steady supply of cold water handy, don't they??

[Shick]

The last few weeks have been filled with smoke and mirrors, plus all the gurus are having a field day with some of the news twisting it back and forth to their liking,

now in my oplnion, it will be an straight up rv, I can't see anything else that would help Iraqs economy.

You've said well my friend, you've said well.

When something good happens we're all fall in line, when bad comes our way we seem to stray.

[Francie26]

"My Dear. Could you elaborate (i.e., explain) just exactly WHY you are feeling so "optimistic?" I think we could all use a good technical understanding about that.

Could it be that you are simply feeling pumped up entirely due to a good bit of pumping by a potent pumper rendering you a perfectly pumped pumpie puppy? Hmm? Or is there some other not so all that apparent or obvious not-based-on-rationality reason? What say you?"

I haven't been involved in all of this, and don't intend to go back and read all of it, but still, it seems to me that, even if you are right, you are wrong. It just doesn't advance your cause to be so disparaging and patronizing. Courtesy and respect move you forward a long way in a discussion such as this one.

[estewart]

"My Dear. Could you elaborate (i.e., explain) just exactly WHY you are feeling so "optimistic?" I think we could all use a good technical understanding about that.

Could it be that you are simply feeling pumped up entirely due to a good bit of pumping by a potent pumper rendering you a perfectly pumped pumpie puppy? Hmm? Or is there some other not so all that apparent or obvious not-based-on-rationality reason? What say you?"

I haven't been involved in all of this, and don't intend to go back and read all of it, but still, it seems to me that, even if you are right, you are wrong. It just doesn't advance your cause to be so disparaging and patronizing. Courtesy and respect move you forward a long way in a discussion such as this one.

My cause? Hmm? What the heck is my "cause?" Well, let's see? Oh, yeah! I am a "Professional" Belief Destroyer! That's what I am and do! I pop inflated sky high balloons. It's my job. This is otherwise known as being a Philosopher. I know that because it says so on my business card. I looked.

Sorry if the landing is so hard on yer butt. But being brought down to Earth from pie high in the sky self-delusions is really the best way to go. (Note, telling someone that they are being disparaging and patronizing is being disparaging and patronizing. Just thought I'd toss that in.) The worst way to go is to go about infecting others with false beliefs. I am not fooling. I realize that Truth Hurts. Said that many times. But that's not my fault. Prolly yer God's, just my guess.

I am ultra courteous and respectful when I see that such is due. Always! There are some people here I have a very high regard for. And there are those who I can see are blooming idiots. Does it count against me because I can recognize them all for what they are, good and bad alike? I think not. I do agree putting people down when it is warranted does not much make for making friends. But why would I want to be a friend with someone who likes to play in p**p? (One of their favorite words, censored.)

One of my latest projects is pointing out how the gurus ain't gurus. Calling themselves that is their first lie. And I ask you, why perpetrate the falsehood by calling them, "gurus?" They are not gurus.

I can tell you how to tell the difference between a true guru and a false one.

A GENUINE guru deals in things of a COSMIC nature.

A false guru deals in things of a COMIC nature. (As in, a joke, but not necessarily an intentionally funny one.)

See the difference?

Edited August 26, 2011 by estewart

[Francie26]

My cause? Hmm? What the heck is my "cause?" Well, let's see? Oh, yeah! I am a "Professional" Belief Destroyer! That's what I am and do! I pop inflated sky high balloons. It's my job. This is otherwise known as being a Philosopher. I know that because it says so on my business card. I looked.

Sorry if the landing is so hard on yer butt. But being brought down to Earth from pie high in the sky self-delusions is really the best way to go. (Note, telling someone that they are being disparaging and patronizing is being disparaging and patronizing. Just thought I'd toss that in.) The worst way to go is to go about infecting others with false beliefs. I am not fooling. I realize that Truth Hurts. Said that many times. But that's not my fault. Prolly yer God's, just my guess.

I am ultra courteous and respectful when I see that such is due. Always! There are some people here I have a very high regard for. And there are those who I can see are blooming idiots. Does it count against me because I can recognize them all for what they are, good and bad alike? I think not. I do agree putting people down when it is warranted does not much make for making friends. But why would I want to be a friend with someone who likes to play in p**p? (One of their favorite words, censored.)

One of my latest projects is pointing out how the gurus ain't gurus. Calling themselves that is their first lie. And I ask you, why perpetrate the falsehood by calling them, "gurus?" They are not gurus.

I can tell you how to tell the difference between a true guru and a false one.

A GENUINE guru deals in things of a COSMIC nature.

A false guru deals in things of a COMIC nature. (As in, a joke, but not necessarily an intentionally funny one.)

See the difference?

Philosophers are not usually so condecending except in a faculty break room. They generally know their specialty has limited uses, with being entertaining at the top of the list. Like you, many of them are the very thing they claim to destroy, something that is full of nothing but hot air. A "false guru" is merely a philosopher on the level of Okie or Blaino, among others. And speaking of self-delusions, I wouldn't dream of trying to compete against the Maestro, Yourself. Thanks for the laughs, . . . "My Dear." hahahaha P. S. You crack me up!!

[HopefulTxn]

I was thinking the same about you Darin...if you one theory doesn't work you just throw another out there without any thought to if it is feasible...

Please answer this - what are the non-liquid assets you are referring to?

What are the "hard" assets you are referring to?

When you say "we pay cash for goods all the time" you are correct...but cash is a LIQUID asset...you are trying to argue that they have some magical stash of "non-liquid" assets that all of a sudden are going to changed to a liquid asset such as gold, SDR's or cash.

A. How much are you proposing they have...or how much is stated that they have would be a better answer

B. what is it that is going to be converted

Answer these and you might have a solid argument.

Unfortunately you're probably not going to get an answer to that question. Not sure what Darin is referring to in regards to non-liquid assets either. I am just hoping it is not related to their petroleum related resources that are still in the ground.