Metals and Political Events
CRHer700
Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭✭✭
Though this might sound political in nature, I just have one question: how far do you think silver and gold will drop to price in the recent U.S. election. I can see that they have already taken quite the hit. Any opinions on how far before bottom?
(Don't kill me for this. It is an honest question.)
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
0
Comments
hope is driving metals lower. reality will once again drive them higher.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
It is a fair question. I’m wondering myself, with my finger hovering tentatively over that “sell” trigger…
At least silver. Gold is a bit toppy
Gold went up from $2000 in March to $2800 the beginning of Nov. It is/was due for a 10% correction just to regroup. I retired one of my gold sets and sold quite a bit the past 3 weeks to take some profits in the mid 2700's, as I thought it had gone up too fast.
It also now has a head and shoulder top with the head at $2800. I think $2615 or around there is some first good support at the Oct low. Around $2,525 is major support (10% down at Sept. low) and I would expect it to start back up from there. End of year variables also in play now. Good luck.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
hopefully enough to get more silver, jmo
The 10-year Treasury yield is going up on expectations that both nominal GDP growth and inflation will be heading higher.
We've had a major upward move in the 10-year yield in the last 24 hours.....week....and last few months.
I suspect gold will catch a bid shortly. Watch the 10-year yield...unless it drops big-time gold should rebound.
Nothing fundamentally significant to gold or silver has changed.
I knew it would happen.
We did not automatically become fiscally responsible. “Stackin Jacks “ is my motto. And drops (in price) afford opportunities ( in markets).
That's right. I shall use it as a buying opportunity.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Just the price
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
Not sure that is accurate. If deficit spending continues than you are kind of correct. The election absolutely changed the fundamentals at the moment.
Record gold-buying by central banks and record debt in every Western country are pretty fundamental to gold and record silver purchases by India & China with a somewhat limited supply in a small market like silver are also pretty fundamental to pricing. None of that has changed.
Deficit spending is unavoidable, and even if it weren't, the economic pain involved in raising interest rates high enough to stop inflation will keep legislators from doing the right thing. Any question on cutting back government spending is likely to be sabotaged because of the incestuous relationship between government and special interests. Same as always.
The idea that cutting regulations and increasing energy outputs will result in a big turnaround for business and better economic conditions can be easily overwhelmed by the debt spiral that's already been out of control for decades. It's too late to control the outcome, in my opinion.
A good starting point would be to scrap the idea of debt being the basis for money. Putting a select few bureaucrats (the Fed and Treasury) in charge of money creation, instead of a market-based system gives unelected bureaucrats too much power and is 100% guaranteed to fail - it's only a matter of time. No system will ever be perfect, but many of the Founders were educated students of governance, and they had it right in terms of what should constitute money.
The election may have changed some fundamentals such as border control, tariffs, tax policy, foreign policy, and criminal justice but even those things remain only as talking points and implementation isn't the same thing as a stated political platform that is designed to get one elected.
I knew it would happen.
Gold will continue to react to effectiveness of monetary policy. With a Congress that spends like a drunkin sailor and their own personal central bank with an unlimited supply of paper and ink to fund them, gold will not suffer. Effectiveness of monetary policy takes years to turn around. Gold will continue higher.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
If you read this article by AEP in the UKT, it shows that many of the factors that used to indicate falling gold prices are now coincident with a RISING gold price.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/05/golds-mystery-rally-forewarning-fiscal-ruin-global-dystopia/
Since wed am, Locally , i have had a lot of sellers cashing in taking profits.
One major firm I deal with , told me same thing
"History confirms, without exception, that all debt-soaked nations (and power-hungry leaders) inevitably face a moment of reckoning when the only way to “solve” its self-created debt crisis (usually by excessive spending and grotesque military over-reach) is via the frog-boil debasement of the currency by which its citizens otherwise measure their wealth." - Matthew Piepenburg
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
Inflation is only good for a debtor.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Or an entity that "prints" money at zero cost and for their own benefit.
To pay off debts.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Because an economy that goes through massive boom and busts cycles benefits everyone...Okey dokey.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
Boom and bust cycles are created by banks (mostly for their benefit), via credit expansion and credit contraction.
There was a massive credit expansion during the "Roaring Twenties". This was brought about via massive cheating on the gold standard by banks and corporations. Then there was the huge credit contraction starting in 1929 (the Great Depression).
The Federal Reserve's track record is abysmal. Central planning of interest rates to foster a "boom" and avert a "bust" only compounds the problems and puts them off for a while, leading to a worse outcome later. It would be better to simply set the short-term interest rate to be equal to the prevailing rate of population growth and leave it at that.
Now we have almost constant credit expansion via inflation.
.
Seems like you are saying that for the last 100 years or so things have been pretty good, but you would rather the extreme boom and bust cycle economy pre-1913.
Okey dokey.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
I'm saying that banks make boom & bust cycles worse.
And we didn't need a central bank to have significant and sustainable economic growth and advancement, such as the period from about 1878 to 1913.
.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depression_of_1882–1885
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1893
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1896
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907
But to your point, yes, all you needed was a railroad system that opened an entire country. Easy peasy.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
We didn't need a central bank or a lot of debt servitude to build a railroad system.
All of those "panics" were caused entirely by over-speculation by the banks.
Nothing really changed in any of those events other than a banking "crisis".
There were no wars, major environmental challenges, fammine, or civil unrest.
So what you are claiming that is that a central bank (the Federal Reserve) is needed to stave off panics by the banks.
If the banks hadn't engaged in malpractice, the banks and the economy would not need rescuing in the first place.
.
banks should be confined to one each state only. Actual money and debt will cross state lines.
Banks have become too big and their control over OUR money too far reaching. Ultimately, my dollars are worth what FED decisions/policy says they are worth. It would great if I could count on my dollar being worth a dollar into the future.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
Where they get the money ro build the railroads? And why most of them go bankrupt?
No businesses or individuals involved? Who did banks lend the money to? Just because you have access to a shovel doesn't mean you have to dig a hole. Again, failure of personal responsibility and individual greed.
I thought you fancied yourself a bit of a historian?
Yeah...no famines or climate issues. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines
And certainly no wars....
https://www.britannica.com/topic/list-of-wars-2031197
And no civil unrest (USA only)..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Which state?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
He means any one state.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
.
Remember the time frame and the place: 1878-1913, in the United States.
Everything on those lists, in the time frame and place, is relatively minor.
The biggest event was the Spanish-American War. But we already had what we needed to win (ships) before it even started. In fact, that is WHY it started. Another impactful event was the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The effects of that were overcome rapidly and without the need for a central bank.
You seem to think that a massive funding effort was needed to build a national railroad system. But that is wrong.
Railroads were built one line at a time, by numerous companies. Profits from existing lines financed new lines to be built. As always, banks, companies, and individuals sold worthless and dubious railroad securities to unsuspecting "investors".
.
Each state. corrected
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
Aside from railroading the Federal Reserve upon us in 1913. Any banking event/crisis prior to 2008 is irrelevant. The Great Financial Crisis showed us a new paradigm. Apparently the only real lesson learned was an ability to kick the can down the road. How soon we hit a cul-de-sac remains to be seen. Unfortunately most Americans are confined to the FED's financial red pill matrix.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
So each state would have a "state owned" bank? But deposits and loans could be made cross borders? Who would regulate those banks, the state that owns them?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Like mental, virtual or affairs?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Each state would have state regulated banks that could not have branches in other states. (Insurance companies are currently regulated by each state.) All banks nationwide would fall under additional federal regulation to ensure fairness and equal account holder treatment across the country. Depositors and borrowers would be authorized to have credit/debit card accounts, including nationally recognized cards (visa, M/C etc.) issued only through their state located bank. Nationally recognized credit/debit cards (Visa, M/C, etc.) would have to be issued through a bank in the card holder's state.
Are you old enough to remember when you're parent's bank was locally owned and all debt was approved by a local bank manager who was usually known by his first name? I remember that as a child I had a savings past book where I walked into the bank, gave them my $3 deposit from mowing a lawn, and handed them my passbook in which they entered the deposit before returning the passbook to me.
There is no doubt in my mind that the FED, since it's inception, has enabled and encouraged banking to become an anonymous, de-personalized corporate entity that preys on deposit and loan account holders. Breaking up "Ma Bell" into Baby Bells proved to be good for the consumer.
My issue with corporate America is that it has become focused on it's shareholders and not on its customers. My issue with Americans is that they have accepted this.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
So would each bank set interest rates for that state?
So you think it would be better to go from 4500 banks to 50? What would happen to those 4450 banks, their employees and shareholders? What about credit unions and S&Ls?
How would a bank in a small, poor state like New Mexico or Mississippi compete with a larger, stronger bank in Virginia or Florida?
If a bank did fail, would the residents of that state bail it out, or shared among all in the US? Would a bank from another state take it over?
And yes, I also had a passbook savings account, but I only got $2 for mowing the lawn---and that included pulling weeds. At least it was a riding mower. Ain't much money in the Appalachians.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
I don't think I would use insurance companies or the fact that they are regulated by individual states as an example of something that has worked well...
Philippians 4:4-7
.
North Dakota has a state-run bank that was implemented for the benefit of the people. It has been successful in that regard.
.
What does that have to do with insurance companies and how they are not a good example of state regulated success stories?
Philippians 4:4-7
.
I'm skipping the insurance company comparisons and going straight to the example of a successful and beneficial state-owned bank (North Dakota).
.
My comment (that you quoted) was directly related to insurance companies and how they are a bad example, but okay...
To your comment, while BND might be somewhat beneficial to the citizens of North Dakota, if you really peel back the onion, it is hardly a model that would work for the United States of America. That's why North Dakota has a lot more banks than just the BND.
Philippians 4:4-7
BND is not backed by FDIC but by the state.
It made $193 million last year and those profits are returned to the state.
On a side note, we also have a state-owned Mill.
who said one bank per state or state run banks? I said no national banks. A state could have as many different banks as competition would allow, but they would be limited to operations in one state only. I only mentioned insurance because it is regulated by each state. Insurance is another fine example of corporate American fleecing its customers because it is a coast to coast monster. Imagine your premiums without a state insurance commissioner's office.
Who knows, you might see banks giving out toasters once again to get your business.
Repetition of ignorance is ignorance raised to the power two.
.
The Bank of North Dakota certainly IS a model for others to follow. Returning $193 million to the state for the benefit of the people proves it.
.
It wouldn't work as a national model and you know it.
Philippians 4:4-7
.> @derryb said:
But you said money would cross borders. If the banks were limited to operations in their own state then how is that cross border business?
Bigger question, does each state set their own interest rates?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
You mean the state paid interest to itself?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
It certainly COULD work and I recommend exactly that. For-profit bankers wouldn't like it, but too bad.
We also have credit card companies that basically skim 3% off the top of the economy. That should have never become acceptable or the norm.
A 3% rake is not an efficient medium of exchange. One major responsibility of government is to implement and maintain an efficient medium of exchange. The ridiculously-complex and onerous income tax system could be replaced by a government-owned bank combined with US digital currency that is efficient and easy to use, and has a lower rake (perhaps 1 or 2 percent) compared to traditional credit cards. Credit card companies wouldn't like that either, but too bad.
.
Sounds like.you are promoting bigger government, private profit limits and increased regulation.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
No.
I am proposing nationalization of the central bank and everything else is totally free-market capitalism.
Congress has the responsibility of "regulating the value of money" and facilitating an efficient medium of exchange, and the US Government needs to get back to doing that.
.