Options
Uh Ohh
derryb
Posts: 36,212 ✭✭✭✭✭
FED finally admits it is concerned about the monster it has created
"There is also concern about the possibility of a breakout of inflation, although current inflation risk is not considered unmanageable, and of an unsustainable bubble in equity and fixed-income markets given current prices."
"Uncertainty exists about how markets will reestablish normal valuations when the Fed withdraws from the market. It will likely be difficult to unwind policy accommodation, and the end of monetary easing may be painful for consumers and businesses. Given the Fed’s balance sheet increase of approximately $2.5 trillion since 2008, the Fed may now be perceived as integral to the housing finance system."
Let's recap just these three sentences from the FED minutes - inflation on the horizon, unsustainable equity bubbles, FED controlled market valuations (market manipulation), future pain for consumers and businesses, and a housing finance system that has become dependent on the central bank. Hmmm, looks like all those idiot bloggers might have been right afterall.
"There is also concern about the possibility of a breakout of inflation, although current inflation risk is not considered unmanageable, and of an unsustainable bubble in equity and fixed-income markets given current prices."
"Uncertainty exists about how markets will reestablish normal valuations when the Fed withdraws from the market. It will likely be difficult to unwind policy accommodation, and the end of monetary easing may be painful for consumers and businesses. Given the Fed’s balance sheet increase of approximately $2.5 trillion since 2008, the Fed may now be perceived as integral to the housing finance system."
Let's recap just these three sentences from the FED minutes - inflation on the horizon, unsustainable equity bubbles, FED controlled market valuations (market manipulation), future pain for consumers and businesses, and a housing finance system that has become dependent on the central bank. Hmmm, looks like all those idiot bloggers might have been right afterall.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
0
Comments
<< <i>FED finally admits it is concerned about the monster it has created
"There is also concern about the possibility of a breakout of inflation, although current inflation risk is not considered unmanageable, and of an unsustainable bubble in equity and fixed-income markets given current prices."
"Uncertainty exists about how markets will reestablish normal valuations when the Fed withdraws from the market. It will likely be difficult to unwind policy accommodation, and the end of monetary easing may be painful for consumers and businesses. Given the Fed’s balance sheet increase of approximately $2.5 trillion since 2008, the Fed may now be perceived as integral to the housing finance system."
Let's recap just these three sentences from the FED minutes - inflation on the horizon, unsustainable equity bubbles, FED controlled market valuations (market manipulation), future pain for consumers and businesses, and a housing finance system that has become dependent on the central bank. Hmmm, looks like all those idiot bloggers might have been right afterall. >>
Well, that 'splains friday's swoon. I 'felt' it was getting frothy with numerous forecasts of 16,000 by years' end and 26,000(?) in a couple 2 or 3 years, blah, blah, blah... Mid-week I went from 75% stocks to around 33% stocks. It's been a great run since November...a little off the top was in order imho. Now what?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Let us share the gleefull rejoice at the prospect of rampant inflation, a stock market crash, a bond market crash, and a housing crash that does not also crash metals prices. >>
How would you suggest that we prepare for this not impossible scenario? Certainly, holding PM's would be better than holding paper assets. Right? I don't think people who hold PM's will "joyfully rejoice" but will be scared like everyone that didn't prepare for this scenario.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't think people who hold PM's will "joyfully rejoice" but will be scared like everyone that didn't prepare for this scenario. >>
Yes, but at least we'd be a step up on the competition.
<< <i>Mid-week I went from 75% stocks to around 33% stocks. >>
Where did you go?
I don't have time to gleefully rejoice. I'm too busy in my cellar, down in the Counting Room with my shiny little metal coins. And besides, bright light makes me squint.
I knew it would happen.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
<< <i>Let us gleefully rejoice that not all of us considered the advance warnings hogwash. >>
<< <i>Let us gleefully rejoice that not all of us considered the advance warnings hogwash. >>
People have already lost 1/2 their money listening to this hogwash. That's been my point. Eventually pm's will shine again, but that doesn't really help those who bight silver in the 40s and might have to wait 5 or more years just to get even.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>
<< <i>Let us gleefully rejoice that not all of us considered the advance warnings hogwash. >>
People have already lost 1/2 their money listening to this hogwash. That's been my point. Eventually pm's will shine again, but that doesn't really help those who bight silver in the 40s and might have to wait 5 or more years just to get even. >>
Putting aside buying in at 40 being extremely optimistic in the context you've put it , i think this is where most or a lot of people miss the point of stacking,it's not primarily to break even or make a profit although i realize i'm in the minority.
Stacking is a different mentality than jumping in and out of the market trying to make a profit. Stacking is the power of accumulation, kind of the PM equivalent of compound interest. Those stackers that bought at 40 likely bought at 16 as well...life is good.
"What'll it be, Sir?"
Edited to add: "The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest." Albert Einstein
<< <i>"Putting aside buying in at 40 being extremely optimistic in the context you've put it , i think this is where most or a lot of people miss the point of stacking,it's not primarily to break even or make a profit although i realize i'm in the minority."
Stacking is a different mentality than jumping in and out of the market trying to make a profit. Stacking is the power of accumulation, kind of the PM equivalent of compound interest. Those stackers that bought at 40 likely bought at 16 as well...life is good.
"What'll it be, Sir?" >>
Or bought in at 7,16,28,40,36,32,25,22 etc etc. I hope Cohodk is right and PMs kept getting beaten up. I want silver back at 8 and gold sub 650, it will allow me to buy more
Like the analogy of compound interest, brings a different perspective to stacking
BST Transactions (as the seller): Collectall, GRANDAM, epcjimi1, wondercoin, jmski52, wheathoarder, jay1187, jdsueu, grote15, airplanenut, bigole
GMO wheat concerns
Just like people who bought and continue to buy equities. So why are equities belittled so?
ANd in the meantime, you have just lost 10-20% of your investing lifetime. Time is always "lost".
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i> why are equities belittled so?
>>
mostly because of perceived "counterparty risk".
But if one avoids all counterparty risk, they also avoid all potential counterparty reward in which people at the company work really hard to offer successful products that are profitably sold, which increases earnings and makes the stock go up
One must still consider that whatever happens, there's always the risk that no one will want to buy my pretty silver and gold coins for more than I paid for them, such as was the case with my stacks of them held from 1982-2002. It ended up being a very good thing that they only represented a few percent of my assets and the majority didn't miss the giant stock bull market. The "counterparty risk" of metals is that there might be no willing counterparty to buy them from you for what you want to sell them for, at the time that you want (or need) to sell them.
I've been prepared for SHTF for 36 years, and despite repeated cries of Wolf, the world stubbornly refuses to end. 1987, 2001, 2008, maybe add 2013, 2014, or 2015 to that list.... they markets for ALL things will cycle. The stock market is due for a correction, just like metals were due for one two years ago.
I'll leave it to the wiser sages to Know the future, and continue to play the odds
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Let us share the gleefull rejoice at the prospect of rampant inflation, a stock market crash, a bond market crash, and a housing crash that does not also crash metals prices. >>
I agree.
then to quote jmski52's tag line "I knew it would happen."
anyway some very recent MA
Gold is a ting, tiny, fraction of the world economy. The capital flows are in trillions of dollars
<< <i> why are equities belittled so? >>
because their valuation in the last five years has been ficticious and bubbly.
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Debt
<< <i>
<< <i>Let us gleefully rejoice that not all of us considered the advance warnings hogwash. >>
People have already lost 1/2 their money listening to this hogwash. That's been my point. Eventually pm's will shine again, but that doesn't really help those who bight silver in the 40s and might have to wait 5 or more years just to get even. >>
What people?
Does anyone here know someone who bought silver over $40 for the first time as they got sucked into the euphoria. I know I don't know anyone. Here's a close call. A collector car friend of mine I've known since 1995 was bugged by his wife and kids to get into gold and silver in 2010. Seemed like a better place than a CD. From 2004-2010 I had been giving him occasional updates on the coin, PM, and collector car markets. He procrastinated until May 2011 when he asked me about it. I told him to wait until the next big dip probably June-August (didn't come until October). In May gold was around $1500-$1550 and too high imo. His wife and kids were bugging him to "get 'er done" before PM prices went to the moon. I had done everything I could to tell him to wait. This was college fund money too, required in about 2-3 years. In July he couldn't wait any longer because all he saw was the price rising and rising each day. He got in at gold $1750 and silver around $38. I at least softened the blow by hooking him up with a wholesale price entry. Over the next couple of weeks it looked like not such a bad move. But when the floor caved in a few weeks after that he was stuck. When gold bounced back to $1738 at the Sept 2012 Long Beach show I told him to dump anything he might need the money for in the next couple of years. He still didn't sell. Gold crept up to $1790+ within 1-2 weeks of that and I told him to sell now or don't ever ask me again if he should. That was the last chance to exit near $1800. I don't know if he sold but he hasn't brought the subject up again. In any case he would have been tied up in gold and silver for a year and been able to get out around break even. I'm still looking for people that have lost "1/2 their money." They're out there somewhere....along with the people that bought gold for $800 in January 1980 and then sold it for $255 in 2001.
In April/May 2011 silver spent a mere total of 19 trading days above $40 before it crashed back under $39 again. In only 19 trading days I don't know how that many people could have jumped into $40+ silver after it had doubled in around 6 months. How many people just had to jump into the stock market for the first time in years after it doubled up? That would be like those that sold out at Dow 6600 in March 2009 getting back in at Dow 13,200 in 2013. The entire silver bull market was from 2001-2011 (2500 trading days). And somehow life savings were lost in the last 19 days of that run. Has anyone cautioned those getting into stocks in 1999 (or 2013) about the potential downside in front of them? I know you can find a lot of people who lost 1/2 their money after the Dow/Naz peak in 2000 (ie probably a significant % of those holding a 401K or IRA).
Why do we weep more for silver investors who lost 1/2 their money vs. stockholders from 2000-2003 or 2007-2009? Why are PM losses so much "dirtier." I guess it just comes with the territory. Typical silver investors must be dumber than J6P stock investor. Still, if anyone finds a silver investor who bought at >$40 for the first time and has held on since then suffering a 50% or greater loss, please present them to us. The irony will probably be that if such a person does exist, and they hang on until 2015-2018, they will probably triple up on silver in a 4-7 year period outperforming almost anything that the general stock market could offer. I wish I could guarantee myself a triple every 7 years. I could move to Baleyville.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Let us gleefully rejoice that not all of us considered the advance warnings hogwash. >>
People have already lost 1/2 their money listening to this hogwash. That's been my point. Eventually pm's will shine again, but that doesn't really help those who bight silver in the 40s and might have to wait 5 or more years just to get even. >>
What people though? Does anyone here know someone who bought silver over $40 for the first time as they got sucked into the euphoria. I know I don't know anyone. A collector car friend of mine I've known since 1995 was bugged by his wife and kids to get into gold and silver in 2010. Seemed like a better place than a CD. He procrastinated until May 2011 when he asked me about it. I told him to wait until the next big dip probably June-August (didn't come until October). And his wife and kids were bugging him to "get 'er done" before PM prices went to the moon. I had done everything I could to tell him to wait. This was college fund money too. In July he couldn't wait any longer because all he saw was the price rising and rising each day. He got in at gold $1750 and silver around $38. Over the next couple of weeks it looked like not such a bad move. But when the floor caved in a few weeks after that he was stuck. When gold bounced back to $1738 at the Sept 2012 Long Beach show I told him to dump anything he might need the money for in the next couple of years. He still didn't sell. Gold crept up to $1790+ within 1-2 weeks of that and I told him to sell now or don't ever ask me again if he should. That was the last chance to exit near $1800. I don't know if he sold but he hasn't brought the subject up again. In any case he would have been tied up in gold and silver for a year and been able to get out around break even. I'm still looking for people that have lost "1/2 their money." They're out there somewhere....along with the people that bought gold for $800 in January 1980 and then sold it for $255 in 2001.
In April/May 2011 silver spent a mere total of 19 trading days above $40 before it crashed back under $39 again. In only 19 trading days I don't know how that many people could have jumped into $40+ silver after it had doubled in around 6 months. How many people just had to jump into the stock market for the first time in years after it doubled up? That would be like those that sold out at Dow 6600 in March 2009 getting back in at Dow 13,200 in 2013. The entire silver bull market was from 2001-2011 (2500 trading days). And somehow life savings were lost in the last 19 days of that run. Has anyone cautioned those getting into stocks in 1999 (or 2013) about the potential downside in front of them? I know you can find a lot of people who lost 1/2 their money after the Dow/Naz peak in 2000 (ie probably a significant % of those holding a 401K or IRA).
Why do weep more for silver investors who lost 1/2 their money vs. stockholders from 2000-2003 or 2007-2009? Why are PM losses so much "dirtier." I guess it just comes with the territory. Still, if anyone finds a silver investor who bought at >$40 for the first time and has held on since then, please present them to us. >>
This is it in a nutshell. I bought some over $40 I'm sure . I try to buy once a week a roughly equal dollar amount. There were a few weeks were I probably bought above $40 but so what?
There were folks that bought apple near the top but the number of people that only bought only once at the very peak and are at the most negative level on either have to be few and far between.
People that buy physical tend to buy steadily in price ranges or for periods of time some will stop completely if they feel content with what they have. As a buyer of stocks in the past I never did that. I picked something and got in at a certain point and that was my position . if I wanted 100 shares of IBM I didn't buy 10 at at time or anything like that. It was just boom in and boom out . Whether it was long term or short term it was all done in a single trade. I don't know anyone that buys physical metal that way.
<< <i> Still, if anyone finds a silver investor who bought at >$40 for the first time and has held on since then suffering a 50% or greater loss, please present them to us. The irony will probably be that if such a person does exist, and they hang on until 2015-2018, they will probably triple up on silver in a 4-7 year period outperforming almost anything that the general stock market could offer. I wish I could guarantee myself a triple every 7 years. I could move to Baleyville. >>
Triple? there are no guarantees, but no metal investment has ever, nor will ever, do This
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>
<< <i> Still, if anyone finds a silver investor who bought at >$40 for the first time and has held on since then suffering a 50% or greater loss, please present them to us. The irony will probably be that if such a person does exist, and they hang on until 2015-2018, they will probably triple up on silver in a 4-7 year period outperforming almost anything that the general stock market could offer. I wish I could guarantee myself a triple every 7 years. I could move to Baleyville. >>
Triple? there are no guarantees, but no metal investment has ever, nor will ever, do This >>
You could have given us a "heads up" in 96
Your words, not mine. But when the stock market was on its ass, equities were, and I suppose still are, looked upon as quite dirty.
It matters not how many days something traded as a certain price, but the volume at that price. Perhaps my comment will resonate better when silver is at $18.
Im sure we can search through this thread and find people who purchased silver north of $40. And what difference does it make if it was a first time purchase or the 100th? If you bought at $45--a 10% discount from the peak, then you are still down 50%. Whether you also bought some at $10 makes no difference--except that this purchase has also lost 50% of its value.
But I know, its not a loss until you sell it. LMAO!!
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>You could have given us a "heads up" in 96
I didn't know you then. But If I had, would you have A. bought some, and B. held it all these years through thick and thin?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>
<< <i>You could have given us a "heads up" in 96
I didn't know you then. But If I had, would you have A. bought some, and B. held it all these years through thick and thin? >>
A) Don't know...perhaps (I'm a sucker for penny stocks with potentials )