<< <i>ASE (or any silver coin) demand has nothing to do with the price of silver. At best coin demand may affect premiums. Even you should know that
So do we need to dig up all the posts you made about incredible silver demand and how that was good for prices and was going to push it even higher? >>
Sure, dig away. Humility is good for the soul. The major difference between you (and a few others here) and I is I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. >>
Our difference lies in that I know what i dont know.
<< <i>But youre not smart enough to know what you dont know. And thats where our difference lies. >>
Fortunately, we can't all be know-it-alls. I knew you were in the 1%.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
Do you want to qualify that? Are you talking about 2015 sales only?
These charts don't show a significant drop in sales for any bullion silver coins: Charts >>
Is your business measured in the number of houses you sell or by the dollar volume? Realtors get a piece of the sale dollar, not a piece of the house.
Or suppose Apple sold twice as many phones at 1/2 the price. What do you think would happen to the share price? It would collapse. Just as silver did. The price is not supported by how many trinkets are sold, but by how much money is spent.
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
The ASE's are a drop in the bucket of the world's paper silver markets....a total non-player at the present ($660 MILL vs. >$100 BILL min.). The physical market doesn't determine price....at least not the past 3 years. Above ground supplies can continue to supply buyers....there's enough to go around for those that want delivery now. Above ground physical silver is in the BILLIONs of ounces. An extra $50 BILL in otc silver derivatives in 2015 so far is a big deal since it dwarfs even the annual world mining output of $12.75 BILL. The current $76 BILL US market total is getting near the massive position that JPM held in July 2008. Silver and gold mining output have probably peaked in 2014 or 2015 after a 15 year production up-cycle. It took 3-6 years for mining production to peak after the 1980 pm's crash. We're about there now.
<< <i>I don't expect you to agree. Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you. >>
Creative economics is alive and well.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
Price is down with silver this year. Volume is up.
Funny how fear factors in. Supply and demand is being re-proved here. Most recently: A man took delivery of silver (500 ounce monster box). Of course, silver dropped a dollar within a week of my purchase, then another customer said : "I need a monster box". …, but a monster box price jumped $400. Go figure "supply and demand".
Why ? I never went to college and was always sitting at the back of class. Charts and scales, figures and speculating just confused me all the more. When I buy I lose. When I sell , I lose. I'm a loser. Thank God the tax code was changed. After all, if we think about how government rules, let's keep in mind: THERE IS A small minus sign (-) in front of our vast wealth of 18 Trillion $s.
So, my suggestion is a little more QE for the United States of Europe, while we are at it.
Gold , on the other hand (left) doesn't look so good, either. I did the marriage thing twice. I could have bought 5 monster boxes of sliver, but the lawyers go that money.
Humans are easily distracted. If they have more money in their pocket and are led to believe everything is getting better, they will spend more on feel good stuff instead of hard times assets. A booming stock market will do that. But what happens when it tanks?
Let the good times roll, and don't buy metals when they are on sale.
In discussions with some of my more radical friends, the preppers and the hard money guys are getting market weary with nothing happing. I had one friend that cashed in his substantial 401K five years ago at 61. He paid the penalties and spent it all on Gold and silver.
I clearly didn't understand Google's ability to buy up things in 2005. Then again, I did understand that commodities and PMs were a good place to be. What's this comment by Cohodk? GOOG is near its top. It will not break this top for another 20 years. Just like CSCO, AMAT, INTC, YHOO....the list goes on and on. .
But with Goog's huge rally today to 700+ today, this is an interesting subject again. There are 2 Googles with a share price of $670-700 each....effectively $1370/share in old shares.
I heard the funniest comment from a GOOG analyst today. He said GOOG is "on the verge of creating its own ecosystem." I havent heard anything like that since late 1999. ...Jan 2006
<< <i>Humans are easily distracted. If they have more money in their pocket and are led to believe everything is getting better, they will spend more on feel good stuff instead of hard times assets. A booming stock market will do that. But what happens when it tanks?
Let the good times roll, and don't buy metals when they are on sale. >>
Finally correct, buy profitable businesses and cutting edge technology instead...
<< <i>..... Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you. >>
Actually, most economists don't understand economics. It's not really a physical science. It's more in line with what a witch doctor does. This is where you "learn" crazy stuff like fractional money multipliers, the FED, Keynes, BLS, NERB, and other such nebulous areas, where like religion, you just have to take a leap of faith and say "I believe." Understand economics? If you do, it's probably not economics....maybe an offshoot of mathematics, statistics, accounting, or some other discipline. At least from what I've seen and read, the majority of economists think inside little boxes....and generalize economies into those same boxes. If you venture outside of that box and rock the boat, your govt grants can go poof. Economics to me seems closer to sociology or psychology than it is to the hard sciences (ie a study of behavior). Pavlov, Ponzi, and even Fonzi could have been economists as they understood behaviors. No offense meant to all economists as there are those that do get it.
There is a spectrum of science, from cosmology (the origin and evolution of galaxies and stellar systems) and geology and then on down to particle physics, back up through chemistry, organic chemistry, biology (microbiology through physiology) then on to evolutionary and population ecology, there is psychology and sociology (very interesting to students of this forum ) on through economics and political science, back and forth through time such as archeology and paleobiology, And on and on..
there is even room for belief systems such as astrology, religious studies, witch doctors, shamans, etc etc.. To call any of these areas "black" or "white" as to whether they are "real science" is a stretch.
as I said, there is a spectrum of belief systems and of scientific inquiry. And a spectrum of scientific rigor or lack thereof, the plausibility of mechanistic explanations of phenomena or lack thereof, the ability to make accurate predictions..
To add to this, there are economic "schools" that are mutually exclusive but that are "in favor" or "out of favor"...they can't be right or wrong because thousands of people would have to turn in their PhDs and go home. I think this is part of what's wrong with our government, a lot of the wrong ones currently work for the government and there is absolutely no way they'll ever admit their theories are BS, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
I don't expect you to agree. Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you.
Like I said, you're mixing accounting with economics and expecting nobody to catch on. It's your box, not mine.
There's no set equation to predict what's been going on, especially when only a few people know the Fed's next move in advance. Besides that, the markets react to dynamics that we don't always know about. What's the variable for "corruption" in the Black Scholes Asset Pricing Model? I've never seen it quantified. What's the variable for complexity overload? Maybe Nassim Taleb knows that one, but I admit I don't.
If you think you have it figured out, you're oversimplifying. The major decisions are always made behind closed doors, and it's only smart to respect the fact that nobody knows all of the factors influencing the markets.
What's obvious is that the old relationships between interest rates and the economy are still being messed with, and the debt problem isn't going away just because some Harvard or Columbia "economist" thinks it's irrelevant. We've heard this "new paradigm" crap before. In the end, 2 + 2 = 4. (I think that's what they said in Poland, in 1982 or so.)
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars.
I can't believe there are so many smart people on this board who got the PM market so wrong over the last 1/2 decade. Oh wait a minute, they were only wrong because they were manipulated and conspired against. They tout knowledge of inflation and fundamentals but have no idea what any of it means.
TextI said, you're mixing accounting with economics and expecting nobody to catch on. It's your box, not mine.
You will never get and thats why you will always revert back to "the laws of fundamentals have changed", while never realizing you understanding was incomplete to begin with.
Like derryb commented in another thread about avoiding all snakes because you don't know which are poisonous. How about learning which are poisonous? Knowledge is power and one can either avoid or attain. It's all a personal decision.
I agree there is no way one can call economics a science when there is so much emotion in the market, even the computers follow the mobs reaction to events.
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
Like derryb commented in another thread about avoiding all snakes because you don't know which are poisonous. How about learning which are poisonous? Knowledge is power and one can either avoid or attain. It's all a personal decision.
LOL, as I read your comment I started thinking of the movie, "The Sting". I don't know why.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
And it's under performed every invest class since. And I'm being called out. Lol.
You'll never get it and will always be exploited. >>
You've been wrong on gold for more years than you've been right. Let's at least wait until you're back to 50-50 before crowing.
Considering there's numerous old threads with me recommending gold at $325, $400, $500, $600, $700, $1100, and $1200 back in the pre-2011 days, which "bad" calls are you referring to that negates all those earlier calls? Sure you're being called out....because you continue to "revise" the historical record around here....in particular your own. You cried wolf on gold from the $1100's on up (fall 2009).....2-4 years early (gold was as high at $1790's into Sept 2012). Which meant you were also probably way early in calling the tops on commodities. Top calls on Goog and Amazon not so good either. Last I knew, both sides of the chart (up and/or down) are just as important as the other side. Or are you now saying as a trader that getting the upside is not important? Seems to be me you short on either side of the hill depending on the circumstances. None of us here have no idea if you shorted gold and silver from Oct 2009-August 2011.
Thanks and kudos to PC for refreshing that Cohodk Oct 2009 hypocritical thread (and he's still wrong >5 yrs later!). There is a lot of our Forum history out there being "rewritten" by current fiat bugs. Anyone following that call since then made no money on the way up, and no money on the downside. Just great! Isn't it important to catch an 83% up move (gold) and even 140% (silver)? Isn't the same person stating this also been the one hammering gold bugs on not being in the 100-200% gains from the stock market since 2009? More hypocrisy. Hey, but at least my opinions to stay out of the DOW/SPY the past few years hasn't lost anyone around here any money.....LOL.
Yes, gold had 9 consecutive years higher which is most unusual - and signs of an impending top per Cohodk...yes it was unusual.....but....it still went to 12 consecutive years. Frankly, your Oct 2009 gold top call occurred at gold $1040-$1060...just as it was just getting started on the big break out. With that reference, your call is STILL wrong....and 5.8 years later we're all still waiting for $1050 to be taken out so you can take credit for being "right"....5-6 years later. Gold hung above $1550 into early April 2013. That's a long time from the Oct 2009 $1050 call. Rather than revising history....it's simpler just to restate it. Thanks for doing so. I had a friend of mine who wanted to invest in gold in July/August 2011. I told him to wait for a much better entry and a deeper correction. Gold was $1750 at that time. He didn't listen and bought any ways. I also followed up with him in Sept 2012 prior to the Long Beach show.... to drive up there and sell out while gold was in the $1730's. It peaked during Long Beach at $1795+. There were numerous chances to get out at high levels for shorter term speculators. Fwiw, if you followed my posts on Kitco in Jan/Feb 2013 you would have noticed that I commented very bearishly on the monthly macd crossing downward....and that bottom could fall out (it did in April).
Now Cohodk gets to pick the exact time frame for comparing different asset classes. October 2009 is now the "official reset" date. Just forget what occurred from 2000-2009. Hypocrisy? There appears to be plenty if you know where to look.
<< <i>Yup, not buying gold was much more detrimental to ones investment portfolio than not buying equities in 2009. Lol
Keep up with the conspiracy thought guys. >>
Anyone seen the word "conspiracy" in my threads the past week? Nope. We're just discussing truth and fiction. So now you're back to "not buying" something that went up is mistake (ie equities). But, in gold it was higher for 3-4 years from 2009-2013...and that wasn't a mistake. Hard to keep track of this politicking. We're talking 3-5 years of trading time here...not a few weeks or months of fast speculative trades. I thought smart traders were supposed to take advantage of long term movements that lasted years? Should equities return to their October 2009 pricing someday, will you then say that owning them for that period was stupid? Or as I suspect, you will say that owning them during the ride up was smart....and getting out of them on the way down (or shorting them) was smart. We all await that "revision."
Fwiw both gold and silver have monthly Macd's that have crossed slightly upwards again. Who knows what that means at this point.....probably a sign to buy more equities and hop on the ride to Dow 20,000. I did find it interesting that the daily RSI (14) for GDX reached the 2nd lowest point ever recorded since its inception 9 years ago (19.98). Only on April 17th 2013, was RSI any lower (19+). April 17th marked the end of the April 2013 gold crash...though there was still another steeper dip still to come 2 months later in June 2013.
<< <i>Good to see you haven't spoken about conspiracy in the last week. They say the first week is the hardest to get through. I'm rooting for you. >>
I usually don't use that word anymore unless responding directly to a fiat bug who has used it first in the usual mocking manner. Conspiracy these days in business is nothing more than doing what makes money and avoids jail time. Lack of jail time and minimal fines justifies all behaviors. I probably haven't used that C-word for months (years?) as these days I prefer the term "managing." That seems to be more soothing to the fiateers. The TBTF banks along with the FED and PPT "manage" the markets. The $4 TRILL in commodity derivatives that JPM added last quarter was a "management" tool. They essentially cornered positions in that market and have been managing prices ever since. It's probably a paid FED study for the "good of the economy." Is it a conspiracy? Of course not! Owning 93% of a major derivative's market is not a conspiracy.....that doesn't occur until 99%....lol. The OCC better wise up and plop the commodity derivatives into another subset like they just did for gold. Maybe lump Forex, gold, and commods together for maximum opacity.
Thanks for your concern though. And by the way, how are the RA meetings coming? (revisionists anonymous).
My only point is that we've all made incorrect calls. And no one will be correct every time. To call out RR and the many "smart people on this board" who got PMs wrong (the extent of which varies and is debatable) is inappropriate, especially in light of one of the biggest wrong calls there's been. You need to get off of your high horse.
And if you want to talk about economists, the Federal Reserve gets it wrong more than anyone. Greenspan and co. couldn't see the housing bubble or the burst coming. The current Fed board has been threatening a rate hike for years. The brain trust at the fed is either stupid or lying (manipulating), there is no other explanation.
The world economy is extremely fragile right now (and has been since 2008 or so), and the smart ones here see that. When there are several sources of events and possibilities (from natural disasters to terrorism to war, all with unknown or hard-to-predict timing) that would severely disrupt world economy only a fool wouldn't own any wealth insurance (i.e. hard assets).
There are several possible events coming up in September/October that are likely to be promising for gold which will fracture the world economy. I alluded to these earlier this year. Some of it is conspiracy or based on cycles so one must take it with a grain of salt, but the historic correlation to past events cannot be ignored: 1. The Blood moon prophecy, the final bm scheduled for Sept 28, 2015. 2. A conspiracy about the elite (Bilderburg-types) planning to blow up the derivatives markets in Sept. (some argue that the current weakness is intentional so they can load up prior to the big event) 3. 7 year economic cycles (2008-2015) 4. Armstrong predicts an economic peak in Oct 2015 5. Fractal market 86 year cycle... what happened in 86 years ago in 1929?
And to add fuel to the fire we have an overvalued stock market and an unsustainable uptrend. Dive into paper if you dare...
The FED's QE programs also delayed the bottoming of the 60 and 120 yr economic cycles that were due in the 2012-2014 period. In any case, lots of things lining up for fall of 2015 into 2016 once the FED runs out of bullets. There couldn't be a better time to own some insurance named "not the stock or bond markets."
I've ridden two massive bubbles up for nice gains in my life, and this time around I decided to wait until the next wave. I don't feel the need for taking undue risks with a stock market or bonds that are only supported by money creation.
I never got the answer to my question in the other thread. Here, I'll pose the question a 3rd time:
do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
It's funny that such a simple question is avoided like the plague. It's a very fair and legitmate question that opens the door to several other fair and legitimate questions that the fiat boys never deign to address.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
It's funny that such a simple question is avoided like the plague. It's a very fair and legitmate question that opens the door to several other fair and legitimate questions that the fiat boys never deign to address. >>
What other option is there besides austerity? Our politicians do not have the guts to implement austerity when there is a printing press available, something the Greek gov't does not have. IIRC, Cohodk thinks a change in demographics will save the day.
Well Amazon hit an all time high this morning nearly $500? Has this company ever made a profit? How the He!! are investors supposed to make any rational decisions when this is going on in the market. Yes I wish I would have bought it at $20 rather than more gold. If all the rules are out the window, then as many have said here, this is not investment 101 this is Vegas!
do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
California is going to fix CalPers just by taxing the holy hell out of us. If it doesn't start a revolution the other 49 will just follow suit.
Remember transparentcalifornia.com? They fixed it. Now look at the pensions. How long can San Diego keep up that payout with a low IRR?
Thank you for the response. This is what I'm talking about. California will be a good test case. I never heard of transparentcalifornia.com. What happened?
How many households will go under when they jack up the taxes? California can't print money like the Fed, so will they become the tbtf state that gets a federal bailout?
Somehow, I think the other states might resist that. It comes down to this - Will the Fed be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due? The question remains unanswered.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
California is going to fix CalPers just by taxing the holy hell out of us. If it doesn't start a revolution the other 49 will just follow suit.
Remember transparentcalifornia.com? They fixed it. Now look at the pensions. How long can San Diego keep up that payout with a low IRR?
Thank you for the response. This is what I'm talking about. California will be a good test case. I never heard of transparentcalifornia.com. What happened?
How many households will go under when they jack up the taxes? California can't print money like the Fed, so will they become the tbtf state that gets a federal bailout?
Somehow, I think the other states might resist that. It comes down to this - Will the Fed be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due? The question remains unanswered. >>
It's not going to be unlike Greece. Greece got a bailout but that only kicks the can down the road. Does anyone believe Greece will become economically viable and able to service its debts? Eventually Greece and its creditors will have to come to some kind of bankruptcy agreement consisting of some amount of debt forgiveness and/or forfeiture of assets and more austerity. I don't see how it would be much different for US cities or states. But they can probably keep kicking the proverbial can down the road for quite a while, as long as there is some creditor (the Fed?) willing to come to the rescue.
<< <i>Greeces creditors simply paid themselves so it looked like they were performing loans. Their balance sheets would explode otherwise. >>
While Puerto Rico appears to be putting its citizens ahead of its creditors.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
The Ruble is getting crushed again. Russia's completely undiversified commodity based economy is pretty much a one trick pony with primarily oil dictating growth or recession.
Ruble down 3.3% just today back at 61.7 Rubes to the dollar. Living with the Bear isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Shanghai gold exchange delivering 73 tonnes of gold into China in the past reporting week, their 3rd largest ever. That's 6.7X the total amount of gold the Comex has in inventory for potential deliveries (10.94 tonnes).
<< <i>Shanghai gold exchange delivering 73 tonnes of gold into China in the past reporting week, their 3rd largest ever. That's 6.7X the total amount of gold the Comex has in inventory for potential deliveries (10.94 tonnes).
<< <i>Shanghai gold exchange delivering 73 tonnes of gold into China in the past reporting week, their 3rd largest ever. That's 6.7X the total amount of gold the Comex has in inventory for potential deliveries (10.94 tonnes).
You need to ask yourself, how reliable is your source and why does gold continue to drop? >>
I'll take Jesse's Cafe as one of the more/most reliable overall sources out there. If you distrust the numbers then check out the Shanghai exchange and/or Chinese gold imports. If this is not a reliable source....then you are probably of the same opinion that the BLS, BIS, OCC, BEA, USTreasury, IMF, and WGC are not reliable data sources either....and I would probably agree with that.
Why does gold continue to drop? It's sort of irrelevant to my original statement. We have 1 real gold exchange and 1 paper one. Pretty simple. I suspect the Chinese will be happy to continue to buy gold at these lower levels while taking advantage of the link between the Yuan and USDollar. What happens when they eventually "unlink?" The price of gold (like most things) can be pushed far beyond anything dictated by just supply and demand or fundamentals. It will go as low as the hedge fund specs can push it. Momentum is on their side for now. I suspect from here....it can go as low as the stock market can go high. Both are at extremes not seen for many year, if not decades. A rubber band snaps back hard when pulled too far and you lose your grip on it.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>ASE (or any silver coin) demand has nothing to do with the price of silver. At best coin demand may affect premiums. Even you should know that
So do we need to dig up all the posts you made about incredible silver demand and how that was good for prices and was going to push it even higher? >>
Sure, dig away. Humility is good for the soul. The major difference between you (and a few others here) and I is I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. >>
Our difference lies in that I know what i dont know.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>But youre not smart enough to know what you dont know. And thats where our difference lies. >>
Fortunately, we can't all be know-it-alls. I knew you were in the 1%.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
<< <i>
<< <i>But youre not smart enough to know what you dont know. And thats where our difference lies. >>
Fortunately, we can't all be know-it-alls. I knew you were in the 1%. >>
Actually, according to some tests I took as kid I am in the 0.5%.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
Do you want to qualify that? Are you talking about 2015 sales only?
These charts don't show a significant drop in sales for any bullion silver coins:
Charts
My mind is already made up. Don't confuse me with the facts.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
Do you want to qualify that? Are you talking about 2015 sales only?
These charts don't show a significant drop in sales for any bullion silver coins:
Charts >>
Is your business measured in the number of houses you sell or by the dollar volume? Realtors get a piece of the sale dollar, not a piece of the house.
Or suppose Apple sold twice as many phones at 1/2 the price. What do you think would happen to the share price? It would collapse. Just as silver did. The price is not supported by how many trinkets are sold, but by how much money is spent.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
The ASE's are a drop in the bucket of the world's paper silver markets....a total non-player at the present ($660 MILL vs. >$100 BILL min.). The physical market doesn't determine price....at least not the past 3 years. Above ground supplies can continue to supply buyers....there's enough to go around for those that want delivery now. Above ground physical silver is in the BILLIONs of ounces. An extra $50 BILL in otc silver derivatives in 2015 so far is a big deal since it dwarfs even the annual world mining output of $12.75 BILL. The current $76 BILL US market total is getting near the massive position that JPM held in July 2008. Silver and gold mining output have probably peaked in 2014 or 2015 after a 15 year production up-cycle. It took 3-6 years for mining production to peak after the 1980 pm's crash. We're about there now.
<< <i>Yeah, lets blame the banksters for driving silver price lower when in fact demand for ASE is down 40% since 2011. >>
Demand is not down 40%.
Net might be down 40%, but your demand statement is flat wrong.
Net might be down 40%, but your demand statement is flat wrong
Agree. The way he's spinning it, lower price stimulates lower demand. Funny economics lesson. Maybe the textbooks will have to be re-written.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Demand is not down 40%.
Net might be down 40%, but your demand statement is flat wrong
Agree. The way he's spinning it, lower price stimulates lower demand. Funny economics lesson. Maybe the textbooks will have to be re-written. >>
I don't expect you to agree. Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Gross may be down 40%, not net.
<< <i>I don't expect you to agree. Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you. >>
Creative economics is alive and well.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
Funny how fear factors in. Supply and demand is being re-proved here. Most recently: A man took delivery of silver (500 ounce monster box). Of course, silver dropped a dollar within a week of my purchase, then another customer said : "I need a monster box". …, but a monster box price jumped $400. Go figure "supply and demand".
Why ? I never went to college and was always sitting at the back of class. Charts and scales, figures and speculating just confused me all the more. When I buy I lose. When I sell , I lose. I'm a loser. Thank God the tax code was changed.
After all, if we think about how government rules, let's keep in mind: THERE IS A small minus sign (-) in front of our vast wealth of 18 Trillion $s.
So, my suggestion is a little more QE for the United States of Europe, while we are at it.
Gold , on the other hand (left) doesn't look so good, either. I did the marriage thing twice. I could have bought 5 monster boxes of sliver, but the lawyers go that money.
Let the good times roll, and don't buy metals when they are on sale.
When was it we discussed Gold or Google??????
<< <i>...When was it we discussed Gold or Google?????? >>
2004/2005 were the first threads with that in the title. This next thread in Nov 2005 included a poll. $500 gold or $500 Google?
Gold or Google?
I clearly didn't understand Google's ability to buy up things in 2005. Then again, I did understand that commodities and PMs were a good place to be. What's this comment by Cohodk? GOOG is near its top. It will not break this top for another 20 years. Just like CSCO, AMAT, INTC, YHOO....the list goes on and on. .
But with Goog's huge rally today to 700+ today, this is an interesting subject again. There are 2 Googles with a share price of $670-700 each....effectively $1370/share in old shares.
Google or Gold
I heard the funniest comment from a GOOG analyst today. He said GOOG is "on the verge of creating its own ecosystem." I havent heard anything like that since late 1999. ...Jan 2006
I guess it's not 1999 any more.
<< <i>Humans are easily distracted. If they have more money in their pocket and are led to believe everything is getting better, they will spend more on feel good stuff instead of hard times assets. A booming stock market will do that. But what happens when it tanks?
Let the good times roll, and don't buy metals when they are on sale.
Finally correct, buy profitable businesses and cutting edge technology instead...
<< <i>..... Most people don't understand economics. Economies don't think within a box...neither should you. >>
Actually, most economists don't understand economics. It's not really a physical science. It's more in line with what a witch doctor does. This is where you "learn" crazy stuff like fractional money multipliers, the FED, Keynes, BLS, NERB, and other such nebulous areas, where like religion, you just have to take a leap of faith and say "I believe." Understand economics? If you do, it's probably not economics....maybe an offshoot of mathematics, statistics, accounting, or some other discipline. At least from what I've seen and read, the majority of economists think inside little boxes....and generalize economies into those same boxes. If you venture outside of that box and rock the boat, your govt grants can go poof. Economics to me seems closer to sociology or psychology than it is to the hard sciences (ie a study of behavior). Pavlov, Ponzi, and even Fonzi could have been economists as they understood behaviors. No offense meant to all economists as there are those that do get it.
there is even room for belief systems such as astrology, religious studies, witch doctors, shamans, etc etc.. To call any of these areas "black" or "white" as to whether they are "real science" is a stretch.
as I said, there is a spectrum of belief systems and of scientific inquiry. And a spectrum of scientific rigor or lack thereof, the plausibility of mechanistic explanations of phenomena or lack thereof, the ability to make accurate predictions..
or lack therof..
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Like I said, you're mixing accounting with economics and expecting nobody to catch on. It's your box, not mine.
There's no set equation to predict what's been going on, especially when only a few people know the Fed's next move in advance. Besides that, the markets react to dynamics that we don't always know about. What's the variable for "corruption" in the Black Scholes Asset Pricing Model? I've never seen it quantified. What's the variable for complexity overload? Maybe Nassim Taleb knows that one, but I admit I don't.
If you think you have it figured out, you're oversimplifying. The major decisions are always made behind closed doors, and it's only smart to respect the fact that nobody knows all of the factors influencing the markets.
What's obvious is that the old relationships between interest rates and the economy are still being messed with, and the debt problem isn't going away just because some Harvard or Columbia "economist" thinks it's irrelevant. We've heard this "new paradigm" crap before. In the end, 2 + 2 = 4. (I think that's what they said in Poland, in 1982 or so.)
I knew it would happen.
I can't believe there are so many smart people on this board who got the PM market so wrong over the last 1/2 decade. Oh wait a minute, they were only wrong because they were manipulated and conspired against. They tout knowledge of inflation and fundamentals but have no idea what any of it means.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
You will never get and thats why you will always revert back to "the laws of fundamentals have changed", while never realizing you understanding was incomplete to begin with.
Like derryb commented in another thread about avoiding all snakes because you don't know which are poisonous. How about learning which are poisonous? Knowledge is power and one can either avoid or attain. It's all a personal decision.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
I agree there is no way one can call economics a science when there is so much emotion in the market, even the computers follow the mobs reaction to events.
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
Pot, meet kettle:
I believe gold has reached it highs for some time
<< <i>
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
Pot, meet kettle:
I believe gold has reached it highs for some time >>
And it's under performed every invest class since. And I'm being called out. Lol.
You'll never get it and will always be exploited.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
LOL, as I read your comment I started thinking of the movie, "The Sting". I don't know why.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
Pot, meet kettle:
I believe gold has reached it highs for some time >>
And it's under performed every invest class since. And I'm being called out. Lol.
You'll never get it and will always be exploited. >>
And you can't see your own hypocrisy.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>That's right roadrunner. Following my comment resulted in the loss of zero dollars. Following your advise on buying gold resulted in the loss of substantial dollars. >>
Pot, meet kettle:
I believe gold has reached it highs for some time >>
And it's under performed every invest class since. And I'm being called out. Lol.
You'll never get it and will always be exploited. >>
You've been wrong on gold for more years than you've been right. Let's at least wait until you're back to 50-50 before crowing.
Considering there's numerous old threads with me recommending gold at $325, $400, $500, $600, $700, $1100, and $1200 back in the pre-2011 days, which "bad" calls are you referring to that negates all those earlier calls? Sure you're being called out....because you continue to "revise" the historical record around here....in particular your own. You cried wolf on gold from the $1100's on up (fall 2009).....2-4 years early (gold was as high at $1790's into Sept 2012). Which meant you were also probably way early in calling the tops on commodities. Top calls on Goog and Amazon not so good either. Last I knew, both sides of the chart (up and/or down) are just as important as the other side. Or are you now saying as a trader that getting the upside is not important? Seems to be me you short on either side of the hill depending on the circumstances. None of us here have no idea if you shorted gold and silver from Oct 2009-August 2011.
Thanks and kudos to PC for refreshing that Cohodk Oct 2009 hypocritical thread (and he's still wrong >5 yrs later!). There is a lot of our Forum history out there being "rewritten" by current fiat bugs. Anyone following that call since then made no money on the way up, and no money on the downside. Just great! Isn't it important to catch an 83% up move (gold) and even 140% (silver)? Isn't the same person stating this also been the one hammering gold bugs on not being in the 100-200% gains from the stock market since 2009? More hypocrisy. Hey, but at least my opinions to stay out of the DOW/SPY the past few years hasn't lost anyone around here any money.....LOL.
Yes, gold had 9 consecutive years higher which is most unusual - and signs of an impending top per Cohodk...yes it was unusual.....but....it still went to 12 consecutive years. Frankly, your Oct 2009 gold top call occurred at gold $1040-$1060...just as it was just getting started on the big break out. With that reference, your call is STILL wrong....and 5.8 years later we're all still waiting for $1050 to be taken out so you can take credit for being "right"....5-6 years later. Gold hung above $1550 into early April 2013. That's a long time from the Oct 2009 $1050 call. Rather than revising history....it's simpler just to restate it. Thanks for doing so. I had a friend of mine who wanted to invest in gold in July/August 2011. I told him to wait for a much better entry and a deeper correction. Gold was $1750 at that time. He didn't listen and bought any ways. I also followed up with him in Sept 2012 prior to the Long Beach show.... to drive up there and sell out while gold was in the $1730's. It peaked during Long Beach at $1795+. There were numerous chances to get out at high levels for shorter term speculators. Fwiw, if you followed my posts on Kitco in Jan/Feb 2013 you would have noticed that I commented very bearishly on the monthly macd crossing downward....and that bottom could fall out (it did in April).
Now Cohodk gets to pick the exact time frame for comparing different asset classes. October 2009 is now the "official reset" date. Just forget what occurred from 2000-2009. Hypocrisy? There appears to be plenty if you know where to look.
Keep up with the conspiracy thought guys. The board needs humor after the massive bear market you all called for. Lol
And PC, we never heard about that trip to Africa you were going to make with your gold trading profits. How was it?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Yup, not buying gold was much more detrimental to ones investment portfolio than not buying equities in 2009. Lol
Keep up with the conspiracy thought guys. >>
Anyone seen the word "conspiracy" in my threads the past week? Nope. We're just discussing truth and fiction. So now you're back to "not buying" something that went up is mistake (ie equities). But, in gold it was higher for 3-4 years from 2009-2013...and that wasn't a mistake. Hard to keep track of this politicking. We're talking 3-5 years of trading time here...not a few weeks or months of fast speculative trades. I thought smart traders were supposed to take advantage of long term movements that lasted years? Should equities return to their October 2009 pricing someday, will you then say that owning them for that period was stupid? Or as I suspect, you will say that owning them during the ride up was smart....and getting out of them on the way down (or shorting them) was smart. We all await that "revision."
Fwiw both gold and silver have monthly Macd's that have crossed slightly upwards again. Who knows what that means at this point.....probably a sign to buy more equities and hop on the ride to Dow 20,000. I did find it interesting that the daily RSI (14) for GDX reached the 2nd lowest point ever recorded since its inception 9 years ago (19.98). Only on April 17th 2013, was RSI any lower (19+). April 17th marked the end of the April 2013 gold crash...though there was still another steeper dip still to come 2 months later in June 2013.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Good to see you haven't spoken about conspiracy in the last week. They say the first week is the hardest to get through. I'm rooting for you. >>
I usually don't use that word anymore unless responding directly to a fiat bug who has used it first in the usual mocking manner. Conspiracy these days in business is nothing more than doing what makes money and avoids jail time. Lack of jail time and minimal fines justifies all behaviors. I probably haven't used that C-word for months (years?) as these days I prefer the term "managing." That seems to be more soothing to the fiateers. The TBTF banks along with the FED and PPT "manage" the markets. The $4 TRILL in commodity derivatives that JPM added last quarter was a "management" tool. They essentially cornered positions in that market and have been managing prices ever since. It's probably a paid FED study for the "good of the economy." Is it a conspiracy? Of course not! Owning 93% of a major derivative's market is not a conspiracy.....that doesn't occur until 99%....lol. The OCC better wise up and plop the commodity derivatives into another subset like they just did for gold. Maybe lump Forex, gold, and commods together for maximum opacity.
Thanks for your concern though. And by the way, how are the RA meetings coming? (revisionists anonymous).
SPY/Gold ratio - slope of hope? Break out or break down?
Final flush for gold in progress for this IC. $1087. Another $47 to go to fill the 2009 gap area....or maybe that gets filled in the fall.
And if you want to talk about economists, the Federal Reserve gets it wrong more than anyone. Greenspan and co. couldn't see the housing bubble or the burst coming. The current Fed board has been threatening a rate hike for years. The brain trust at the fed is either stupid or lying (manipulating), there is no other explanation.
The world economy is extremely fragile right now (and has been since 2008 or so), and the smart ones here see that. When there are several sources of events and possibilities (from natural disasters to terrorism to war, all with unknown or hard-to-predict timing) that would severely disrupt world economy only a fool wouldn't own any wealth insurance (i.e. hard assets).
There are several possible events coming up in September/October that are likely to be promising for gold which will fracture the world economy. I alluded to these earlier this year. Some of it is conspiracy or based on cycles so one must take it with a grain of salt, but the historic correlation to past events cannot be ignored:
1. The Blood moon prophecy, the final bm scheduled for Sept 28, 2015.
2. A conspiracy about the elite (Bilderburg-types) planning to blow up the derivatives markets in Sept. (some argue that the current weakness is intentional so they can load up prior to the big event)
3. 7 year economic cycles (2008-2015)
4. Armstrong predicts an economic peak in Oct 2015
5. Fractal market 86 year cycle... what happened in 86 years ago in 1929?
And to add fuel to the fire we have an overvalued stock market and an unsustainable uptrend. Dive into paper if you dare...
I never got the answer to my question in the other thread. Here, I'll pose the question a 3rd time:
do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
It's funny that such a simple question is avoided like the plague. It's a very fair and legitmate question that opens the door to several other fair and legitimate questions that the fiat boys never deign to address.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
It's funny that such a simple question is avoided like the plague. It's a very fair and legitmate question that opens the door to several other fair and legitimate questions that the fiat boys never deign to address. >>
What other option is there besides austerity? Our politicians do not have the guts to implement austerity when there is a printing press available, something the Greek gov't does not have.
IIRC, Cohodk thinks a change in demographics will save the day.
How the He!! are investors supposed to make any rational decisions when this is going on in the market. Yes I wish I would have bought it at $20 rather than more gold.
If all the rules are out the window, then as many have said here, this is not investment 101 this is Vegas!
They have bills to pay and 400 million people who have never seen a doctor and uninhabited cities and decaying infrastructure much worse than our own.
The shortest line in the world is that of western businessmen willing to board a ten year old Chinese built airliner.
Their outflow of gold will be well camoflouged. It will depress the price worldwide for years.
Gold $900, silver $12.50. 90% probability within 24 months.
Edit: speiling.
California is going to fix CalPers just by taxing the holy hell out of us. If it doesn't start a revolution the other 49 will just follow suit.
Remember transparentcalifornia.com? They fixed it. Now look at the pensions. How long can San Diego keep up that payout with a low IRR?
California is going to fix CalPers just by taxing the holy hell out of us. If it doesn't start a revolution the other 49 will just follow suit.
Remember transparentcalifornia.com? They fixed it. Now look at the pensions. How long can San Diego keep up that payout with a low IRR?
Thank you for the response. This is what I'm talking about. California will be a good test case. I never heard of transparentcalifornia.com. What happened?
How many households will go under when they jack up the taxes? California can't print money like the Fed, so will they become the tbtf state that gets a federal bailout?
Somehow, I think the other states might resist that. It comes down to this - Will the Fed be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due? The question remains unanswered.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>do you think the Fed is going to be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due?
California is going to fix CalPers just by taxing the holy hell out of us. If it doesn't start a revolution the other 49 will just follow suit.
Remember transparentcalifornia.com? They fixed it. Now look at the pensions. How long can San Diego keep up that payout with a low IRR?
Thank you for the response. This is what I'm talking about. California will be a good test case. I never heard of transparentcalifornia.com. What happened?
How many households will go under when they jack up the taxes? California can't print money like the Fed, so will they become the tbtf state that gets a federal bailout?
Somehow, I think the other states might resist that. It comes down to this - Will the Fed be forced into more QE as the unfunded liabilities come due? The question remains unanswered. >>
It's not going to be unlike Greece. Greece got a bailout but that only kicks the can down the road. Does anyone believe Greece will become economically viable and able to service its debts? Eventually Greece and its creditors will have to come to some kind of bankruptcy agreement consisting of some amount of debt forgiveness and/or forfeiture of assets and more austerity. I don't see how it would be much different for US cities or states. But they can probably keep kicking the proverbial can down the road for quite a while, as long as there is some creditor (the Fed?) willing to come to the rescue.
Greeces creditors simply paid themselves so it looked like they were performing loans. Their balance sheets would explode otherwise.
And the only honest answer is: "I do not know" (because it is about the future)
We can discuss probabilities and outcomes, and say "probably" and "therefore..." and then speculate further.
IMO, a rational position is to be diversified, open minded, nimble, and patient.
(which is tricky, do not think that I am claiming to have those qualities fully developed, only that I aspire to them)
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Greeces creditors simply paid themselves so it looked like they were performing loans. Their balance sheets would explode otherwise. >>
While Puerto Rico appears to be putting its citizens ahead of its creditors.
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
Ruble down 3.3% just today back at 61.7 Rubes to the dollar. Living with the Bear isn't all it's cracked up to be.
A real gold exchange
<< <i>Shanghai gold exchange delivering 73 tonnes of gold into China in the past reporting week, their 3rd largest ever. That's 6.7X the total amount of gold the Comex has in inventory for potential deliveries (10.94 tonnes).
A real gold exchange >>
You need to ask yourself, how reliable is your source and why does gold continue to drop?
<< <i>
<< <i>Shanghai gold exchange delivering 73 tonnes of gold into China in the past reporting week, their 3rd largest ever. That's 6.7X the total amount of gold the Comex has in inventory for potential deliveries (10.94 tonnes).
A real gold exchange >>
You need to ask yourself, how reliable is your source and why does gold continue to drop? >>
I'll take Jesse's Cafe as one of the more/most reliable overall sources out there. If you distrust the numbers then check out the Shanghai exchange and/or Chinese gold imports. If this is not a reliable source....then you are probably of the same opinion that the BLS, BIS, OCC, BEA, USTreasury, IMF, and WGC are not reliable data sources either....and I would probably agree with that.
Why does gold continue to drop? It's sort of irrelevant to my original statement. We have 1 real gold exchange and 1 paper one. Pretty simple. I suspect the Chinese will be happy to continue to buy gold at these lower levels while taking advantage of the link between the Yuan and USDollar. What happens when they eventually "unlink?" The price of gold (like most things) can be pushed far beyond anything dictated by just supply and demand or fundamentals. It will go as low as the hedge fund specs can push it. Momentum is on their side for now. I suspect from here....it can go as low as the stock market can go high. Both are at extremes not seen for many year, if not decades. A rubber band snaps back hard when pulled too far and you lose your grip on it.