# Manipulation has Screwed Everything Making Investing a Game



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Investing today has become a game of fast trading, moving averages, graphs and all that is TA controlled by big money. The core is of course extreme manipulation and massive money printing which leave very little to fundamentals in my opinion. We have conspiracy theories as to what might be but no direction because of excess manipulation in everything. It could be stocks or it could be precious metals that rule the day. Or gold could be knocked down as far as the Fed can get it like $800.00 or something and then be made illegal to own so it gets turned in so the Fed can reprice it at $10,000.

Bonds are of course manipulated to the extreme and it is unknown where they will end up and stocks could just be buried as the powers that be is done with playing them up. Really it all comes down to the end of the fiat currencies as we know them to be repriced at x at some point in the future. I simply do not know how these manipulations will play out except that every investment is in great danger as we move forward.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

I had exactly the same thoughts and talked to a few investors for their opinions. I have concluded:

1. Stock markets have always been volatile, with or without fast trading (HFT) or money printing. Black Monday / Tuesday in 1920's DJIA lost 25% in 2 days! There was no HFT. But, DJIA was around 250 at that time. What is it now? 15,000! So it's 6000% return in 90 years = 67% per year?!

2. Politicians and lawmakers have life savings too. They will not let these paper investments go to zero. I do not think these elite billionaires want to live like regular people. So they will do their very best to prop up the asset value. So why should we be worried as average investors? Those with super wealth and power have more to lose than us.

3. There is no "end of fiat".... you have read too much ZeroHedge or Kitco. The government may start with a new currency if the old one fails. Stock shares will be reissued to the new currency, like when Deutschmark was converted to Euro. Many countries have re-issued their currency, like Chinese / New Taiwanese Dollars after the communists wars, Russian ruble, they have changed it 7 times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_ruble#Seventh_ruble.2C_1_January_1998.E2.80.93 Are there still rich people in Russia? Of course, look at Putin.

So I will ignore the noises, turn off CNBC, and relax.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

MoreMiles said:


> So I will ignore the noises, turn off CNBC, and relax.


Ignore everything, except what Bernanke says. That is all that matters.


----------



## dotnet_nerd (Jul 1, 2009)

MoreMiles said:


> But, DJIA was around 250 at that time. What is it now? 15,000! So it's 6000% return in 90 years = 67% per year?!


No, the DOW doubled roughly 6 times since 250: 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, 16000

Six doublings in 90 years is once every 15 years

72/15 = 4.8% growth which is quite reasonable actually.

Besides, the DOW is a meaningless index to track for 90 years because the deck has been re-stacked frequently. A lot of former DOW companies don't even exist today.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

dotnet_nerd said:


> ... Besides, the DOW is a meaningless index to track for 90 years because the deck has been re-stacked frequently. A lot of former DOW companies don't even exist today.


Is the re-stacking more frequent and/or wide spread than other indexes?


Cheers


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

dotnet_nerd said:


> Six doublings in 90 years is once every 15 years
> 72/15 = 4.8% growth which is quite reasonable actually.


You are not including dividends, which are quite significant.
If you include that, the total return is even higher.
I am sure you can find that information easily through a few internet searches.


----------



## dotnet_nerd (Jul 1, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> Is the re-stacking more frequent and/or wide spread than other indexes?
> 
> 
> Cheers


Well sure, it's comprised of just 30 companies compared to a broader index like the S&P. The DOW was once nicknamed the "smokestack stock" index.

See for yourself, here's a DOW timeline

http://www.quasimodos.com/info/dowhistory.html


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

MoreMiles CNBC is a cheerleader of stocks if that is what you meant by them, but I disagree that you ignore what is happening because the real elite will be positioned for stocks to drop very hard if that is to be. There is also world power and domination to consider when discussing the elite, punctuated by war. There is also the extreme debt situation that is desperately being covered up through the extreme manipulation of gold and sugar coating of employment reports to make all look well for the dollar. Stocks are also far from safe as margin is very high and a devastating sell off after a topping period could easily take place.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

We no longer look at if the Fed will raise rates to cool the economy but instead if they will print more money. We see the trend is our friend or the moving averages are going our way, but not so much at fundamentals because they don't matter. Or we look at the past for comfort as we always do to justify why we should just hold on. We have spying going on in the extreme as shown by the NSA and conspiracy is now becoming fact. Everything is far from normal like in the past.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

dogcom said:


> Everything is far from normal like in the past.


The past was normal? ;o)


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

The past was normal in the sense that we relied on interest rates going up and down to ignite or cool off the economy. Or we looked at lowering excess inventories during times of recession to get back to the normal growing economy. We didn't allow prior to 2000 a wholesale debt binge to the scale we saw in US housing in the 2000's bringing down the banks and in Canada if we would have had a few more years we would have been doomed as well, if the US housing disaster didn't happen when it did. 

Conspiracy was left to the shadows and not brought to light at the scale we see today. There was some control to the system that is just not there today and instead it is more of a system of putting out the fires that keep popping up like in Europe as an example.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

As far as I'm concerned, the markets are entirely driven by the Federal Reserve.

If the Fed says they will print more money, everything goes up.
If they say they won't, then everything goes down. This includes stocks, bonds, commodities, everything.

The biggest manipulator of markets is the US Federal Reserve. Here's a chart from BMO, the S&P 500 versus the Federal Reserve balance sheet
http://www.greatponzi.com/charts/spx_vs_fed_QE.png

The Fed * is * the market. And if things stop going up at some point, then everything is going to come down simultaneously. That's very scary to me, but it's the consequence of a market entirely driven by one entity.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

As the Fed stops as it must, something is coming to take its place and I think the far east is planning for this and this is why they are sucking up all the gold they can to back the Yaun. Much interest of late has come from Toronto, London and elsewhere to deal in currencies other then the dollar and the Yaun is mentioned. The west of course will have no gold as it has been pretty much leased out and melted in Hong Kong and delivered to Beijing and other physical buyers.

I heard the reason Germany can't get its gold for 7 years if it will ever get it is because it has been leased out by the Fed to JP Morgan, sold into the market to cap and lower the price. In the deal the Fed can call the gold lent to JP Morgan whenever it wants to so it can add as a paper entry that it still owns the gold, but really it is gone. The gold JP Morgan sold was sent to Hong Kong to be refined tested for purity and then shipped to physical buyers and some of that gold had the German bank mark on it when it was melted down.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

dogcom said:


> As the Fed stops as it must, something is coming to take its place and I think the far east is planning for this and this is why they are sucking up all the gold they can to back the Yaun. Much interest of late has come from Toronto, London and elsewhere to deal in currencies other then the dollar and the Yaun is mentioned. The west of course will have no gold as it has been pretty much leased out and melted in Hong Kong and delivered to Beijing and other physical buyers.
> 
> I heard the reason Germany can't get its gold for 7 years if it will ever get it is because it has been leased out by the Fed to JP Morgan, sold into the market to cap and lower the price. In the deal the Fed can call the gold lent to JP Morgan whenever it wants to so it can add as a paper entry that it still owns the gold, but really it is gone. The gold JP Morgan sold was sent to Hong Kong to be refined tested for purity and then shipped to physical buyers and some of that gold had the German bank mark on it when it was melted down.


:hopelessness: Another gold bug... like one of the many ones on Kitco.

If fiat money is paper with printing, gold is simply a shiny metal. Humans have decided to pay a value in exchange for it. If one day, humans decide to pick another object, it will be useless. Is that day here yet? I don't know but it sure looked like it these days with its value dropping so fast. Do you know seashells used to be considered as a store of value too, like gold? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money Their argument would be very similar to "shell bugs"... they are "real" and "touchable"... you cannot print sea shells (ie, they didn't have 3D printer back then). So shells are real money... right? Nobody wants them now.

Yes, you will always have your physical gold. But one day, no one will want to change their house or anything with you... so is gold really money?


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

dogcom said:


> ...I think the far east is planning for this and this is why they are sucking up all the gold they can to back the Yaun.


I don't think so. Even it is so, so what? Do you know how USA backs their currency? Authority! Empire power!

Look at Mr. Snowden's case, USA says jump, every country in the world says Yes sir, how high sir? No one dares to disobey them. Well... so they can keep printing as they wish. They don't need anything to back them up.

That may change one day... but not in our generation. Maybe a few more hundred years.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I am no gold bug it is just what everyone uses in the world when fiat currencies are in trouble. This is why the Fed has such a thing for manipulating it. If it wasn't concerned about it then why would it be so interested in manipulating it in a big way.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

dogcom said:


> I am no gold bug it is just what everyone uses in the world when fiat currencies are in trouble. This is why the Fed has such a thing for manipulating it. If it wasn't concerned about it then why would it be so interested in manipulating it in a big way.


Really? Why won't we go back to sea shells then? Should I be accumulating sea shells too?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

In the 30's they made gold illegal and made people turn it in for $20 an ounce only to reprice it later at $35.

In the 70's they had a problem holding it at $35 and had to decouple it.

In India they are trying to stop people from buying it by taxing it higher and higher.

Today they see a need to unload many tons of gold at the thinnest time for trading to get the price down. Who in their right mind would want to do that.

Again why can't they produce the gold Germany asked for?

You can go on and on on examples of the Fed caring so much for gold.


----------



## sylyconvalley (Apr 22, 2013)

dogcom.

this changed everything.
I assume you are a fairly young fellow.
worth to read.
what exactly changed after?
you can answer it yourself right?

http://www.24hgold.com/english/contributor.aspx?article=803452874G10020&contributor=History+of+Gold


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Thanks sylyconvalley that is where the decouple comes from. 

Getting away from gold we saw Bernanke back down from his taper BS as we knew he would because without manipulation it all comes apart as mentioned by james4beach.

I should also mention that you should pay all your attention to TA because that is the new fundamental of today thanks to manipulation.


----------



## sylyconvalley (Apr 22, 2013)

np dogcom.
remember that everyone in this board is entitled for an opinion.
i noticed that there is a very opinionated member here in this thread.
do i agree with his opinion?
no.
Do i know where gold is going next?
i could say that i do but I assure you that we had a good rally .... till here.
for the right reasons ?
yes.
the reasons that the media propagates?
no.
I do pay attn to TA but TA is not everything.
If you took advantage in this rally take profits.
as for seashells....... I enjoy collecting them.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

Looking at past charts, gold probably had been bid up to bubble territory. It now may have also gone a little too far in the other direction but that is also typical in these types of situations. 

Generally, I find if you follow an asset allocation plan, without significantly over-weighting any sector, appropriate for one's age and risk tolerance, the results continue to be quite satisfactory.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Keynes called gold a "barbarous relic" and he was right. No one would care about gold except as jewellery or in electronics components if we had honest currencies, honest governments and honest banks. As soon as the world's governments and central banks stop chiselling and manipulating everything will be fine. In the meantime, gold and silver may be more trustworthy than paper assets.

Or to put it another way, 100 years ago 1 ounce of gold was worth $20 in paper money. For one ounce of gold you could buy a man's suit. 40 ounces would buy you a new car. 300 ounces, a small farm or a house in the city.

Today, an ounce of gold is $1200. One ounce will still buy a suit. 40 ounces will still buy a car. 300 ounces will still buy a small farm or a house in most cities.

$20 in paper money might get you a pair of socks. $800 a brake job. $6000 pay the taxes on the house.

So, if your great grandfather had stashed away $1000 in a safety deposit box in 1913 would you rather it was gold or paper money? And the first fifty years in this country were a period of stability and generally low inflation. Only in the last 50 has permanent annual inflation become public policy.

I won't even mention that in that hundred year period many countries have seen their currency go to zero, some of them more than once. The value of gold has never gone to zero, and when it dropped in value it always recovered.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

To give the opposite side of the argument. Peasants around the world keep their savings in silver and gold, as they have for centuries. And they remain peasants.

There should be better investments than precious metals if you are smart enough to recognize them.

I don't see gold and silver as an investment so much as a safe haven. In other words I am not looking for a return on capital, I am looking for a return of capital. PMs have no dividends and no interest rate. Unless you are a speculator who specializes in PMs, there are better places to invest. If you can find them.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Bravo rusty you get a plus 1 for for explaining why we need to own gold. Your right if governments didn't manipulate we wouldn't need gold for money.

There is other precious metals to buy Rusty other then gold and yes silver is one because of its industrial uses. Palladium and Platinum are excellent choices and have uses and are not used as money generally.

Spidey the parabolic move in gold has now been answered in my opinion by the huge physical buying we see around the world. Gold went parabolic in the 70's from $35 to $200 and then back to $100 in a gut wrenching decline much like today but then we saw over $800 after that a few years later.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty, how much would $20 in common stock (say Dow Jones) bought then buy now?

Comparing gold to cash in a mattress isn't really that useful. Both are idle hoards, and don't yield anything. People should generally not keep large idle hoards, and most people don't. So most people are not harmed by the decline in value of currency. They are holding other assets that get real returns.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf, as you often remind us, it's total return that matters ... not yield. The fact that gold yields nothing is OK with me. Total return is my concern

1990-today ... stocks outperform
1995-today ... stocks outperform
2000-today ... gold dramatically outperforms
2005-today ... gold dramatically outperforms
2010-today ... stocks outperform


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

andrewf said:


> Rusty, how much would $20 in common stock (say Dow Jones) bought then buy now?


Not sure about the DOW but for each $1 in the S&P500 from 100 years ago you got $11,718.74 now (1912-2012).


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

cainvest said:


> Not sure about the DOW but for each $1 in the S&P500 from 100 years ago you got $11,718.74 now (1912-2012).


And those may be reasonable forward expectations too, if you think America & the west is still growing in the same way it grew in the 20th century.

Personally I think America & the west is totally stagnant now, barely going to come along with zero real growth, and that's why I think gold is a very sensible store of value.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

When I saw people are buying $5 coffee from Starbucks and $90 / day of Disney admission ticket... I see a different view. Can you imagine paying $150 /mo for cell phone + internet + cable TV in 1990's... no right? Now it's quite accepted. Can you imagine paying $500 /mo.... in 2020? You get the idea.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

dogcom said:


> Investing today has become a game of fast trading, moving averages, graphs and all that is TA controlled by big money.


No. That's trading, not investing.

All the big money fancy schemes people have come up with have never caused me to pay more than my limit price, or get paid less than my limit price for a security.

The worst that can be said is when a company is bought out, I've never had sufficient stock to say no.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> And those may be reasonable forward expectations too, if you think America & the west is still growing in the same way it grew in the 20th century.
> 
> Personally I think America & the west is totally stagnant now, barely going to come along with zero real growth, and that's why I think gold is a very sensible store of value.


This has been well studied. Equity returns and real GDP growth are uncorrelated. Hence great returns for the S&P 500 in recent years with low growth, and catastrophic returns in China with stupendous growth.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> No. That's trading, not investing.
> 
> All the big money fancy schemes people have come up with have never caused me to pay more than my limit price, or get paid less than my limit price for a security.
> 
> The worst that can be said is when a company is bought out, I've never had sufficient stock to say no.



MrMatt the point is there is no investing today just trading. Investing comes at the peril of enormous manipulation. The Fed QE is holding up what many call investing because without it everything comes crashing down.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

dogcom said:


> The Fed QE is holding up what many call investing because without it everything comes crashing down.


Well that's yet to be seen ... while some sort of a correction is likely its difficult to say how far, and how fast, it will go down.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

I was also initially against the quantitative easing. But it does seem to have been working. The US economy seems to be slowly but surely getting back on track and dragging the rest of the world with it. I suspect we could be in for a pretty good next 5 years as long as we can stomach significant volatility. I guess the question would be, What would have been the alternative and how would it have worked better?.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Cainvest I am not the expert here like james4beach or others but interest rates would spike and the bond bubble would blow big time. The US would default on its debts, derivatives would come apart, companies wouldn't be able to borrow and the stock market would come down like in the depression. The positive side of this is not the stock market because the pain would be huge there but instead we would be over with this big mess in a hurry or a few years or so and can reset and start over again.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

dogcom said:


> Cainvest I am not the expert here like james4beach or others but interest rates would spike and the bond bubble would blow big time. The US would default on its debts, derivatives would come apart, companies wouldn't be able to borrow and the stock market would come down like in the depression. The positive side of this is not the stock market because the pain would be huge there but instead we would be over with this big mess in a hurry or a few years or so and can reset and start over again.


Yes... this has been mentioned again and again in Zero Hedge since 2009. Dogcom you sound exactly like their writers. If you had believed in it, you would have lost over 100% in stock rebound. Right now, companies are in better shape. They have hoards of cash, like billions of dollars in Apple. They won't "need to borrow" to stay open (they can if they want to, for tax reasons like Apple).

Also, why would USA be default on its debt? They can pay it back with the world currency... ie. US Dollars. Can you guess where they get the US dollars? They simply print more. They are the ONLY country right now that can get away of doing that. Until there is a new World currency, it will not change. Do you know where the super-elites from China and Europe invest? US-based investments! Do you think these people will want to see USD going bankrupt? Where do you think "Made in China" items are sold? So if USA goes down, China and everyone else do. There is no choice. All the other countries will support American policies.

Interests rate spiked in 1980's... but less than 20 years later, stock markets boomed. So if your investment time-frame is over 20 years, just stay invested and ignore Zero Hedge.

One more question from me... where else would you suggest investing your money? Gold? It went up $400 to $1600, 400% in 10 years between 2003 and 2013, gold bugs were still screaming buy buy buy. There was nothing wrong to see it quadruple in dollar value. If the same argument is applied for stock market, what is wrong with a 200% change in the last few years? It's not even in the gold bubble territory yet, right?


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

MoreMiles, you are wasting your time. Gold bugs are dogmatic as hell. There is nothing you can say to change their mind.

*12 Rules of Goldbuggery*

The best alternative to arguing with gold bugs:

*Watch sleepy animals*

Now THAT was time well spent!


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Embarrassed and a complete lack of respect, is how I would feel if I made the comments you just made for the entire forum to see, GoldStone. To gain back some credibility I would probably apologize or something.

MoreMiles I wasn't clear in my comments above and should have mentioned I was talking about what would happen if the Fed had ended QE. This would mean an end to printing money and the US would have to pay the deficits by selling treasuries and of course interest rates would spike in order to get the bids and then the deficit would skyrocket because of higher rates.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

dogcom said:


> I am no gold bug it is just what everyone uses in the world when fiat currencies are in trouble. This is why the Fed has such a thing for manipulating it. If it wasn't concerned about it then why would it be so interested in manipulating it in a big way.


er

I beg to differ...real estate, real businesses, commodities, baseball cards,fine art....there are many things that have real value in the eyes of many people just like gold. I think I prefer to follow Warren Buffet style rather than broke gold bug style.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

As MoreMiles pointed out gold had a great run from 2001 to 2011. Stocks went nowhere during that period but over the last two years gold has been horrible. When it went to $1,900 I had zero invested in gold because I thought it had got way ahead of itself and needed a correction but it went far farther then I thought this year and like a man I stepped up and have admitted that months ago. It is my opinion that gold can't be printed so at a time of money printing and the price being lower the the cost to mine it I figure it should find a bottom.

Price pays but I do like to talk about the manipulation that goes on and such but at the end of the day you still want to make money. 

I can't really understand the need to attack someone for investing some money in gold. If the stock market did tank and gold did well which may or may not happen but if it did does that mean I get the right to tell everyone that they were nuts for owning stocks because I happen to be sitting pretty.

MoreMiles pointing out that zero hedge was wrong and I believe that is because he underestimated the Fed and what they were willing to do. Back in the 30's they didn't do enough in Fed thinking. The problem today is we don't know how far they will go when it comes to inflation so cash is hard to hold and we don't know if they will be forced at some point to stop QE let the bond market fall apart and stocks with it. In the case of a bad deflation scenario stocks will get killed and gold will drop as well but will still hold value in most of the world but maybe not so much in US dollar terms.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

dogcom said:


> The problem today is we don't know how far they will go when it comes to inflation so cash is hard to hold and we don't know if they will be forced at some point to stop QE let the bond market fall apart and stocks with it.


I'm not sure why you think everything will "fall apart" once QE ends. So stocks prices fall, just like they've done in the past and they will recover once again, no big deal.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Cainvest first of all thanks for making a response without making accusations.

I am afraid it will be a very big deal when QE ends at this time or the next year because the US will fall apart. Of course as I mentioned the good will come with the renewal that would bring as debt and derivatives disappear in the chaos.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

Some BNN commentators have been making the comment that QE being eased out is a very positive sign as it means the economy is being seen as strengthening to the point where such help is not needed. However, many are taking the opposite approach and selling. I tend to agree with the commentators and believe that the recent price drop has presented buying opportunities.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Back in June, there was one day in particular where the markets dropped after the QE announcement and the headlines were "Markets drop on news of improving economy".

The very next day, markets went up. The news headlines were "Markets increase on news of improving economy."

Sheesh. It's better to ignore these guys. The "smart money" is not on the nightly news or writing the headlines; reporters trying to get a sound bite are.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

@Spidey,

"I tend to agree with the commentators and believe that the recent price drop has presented buying opportunities."

Definitely.

The more bad market news, the better.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

We are in a situation where there is an unlimited upside potential while the downside potential is limited by Fed's intervention.

Where else are you going to find a casino bet with this kind of odds? So do you still want to bet against the trend?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

When the Fed continues QE*, it means that the US Treasury Bonds have insufficient demand in the marketplace. If they stopped QE, rates would have to increase to attract buyers for the bonds. Then all the rates would rise and we would be back to better interest rates and tough times for borrowers.

The equity markets might stop rising with higher interest rates.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

kcowan said:


> When the Fed continues QE*, it means that the US Treasury Bonds have insufficient demand in the marketplace. If they stopped QE, rates would have to increase to attract buyers for the bonds. Then all the rates would rise and we would be back to better interest rates and tough times for borrowers.
> 
> The equity markets might stop rising with higher interest rates.


Then we will simply go back to invest in GIC, when the rate is like 6% per year for GIC. There is no need to take risk in stocks.

People will need to save more first, before buying things on credit. 

There will be no "collapse of civilization" with fiat out of circulation, with people bartering live animals or gold nuggets in the streets.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MoreMiles said:


> Then we will simply go back to invest in GIC, when the rate is like 6% per year for GIC. There is no need to take risk in stocks.


Forgetting about inflation aren't we?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

MoreMiles said:


> We are in a situation where there is an unlimited upside potential while the downside potential is limited by Fed's intervention.
> 
> Where else are you going to find a casino bet with this kind of odds? So do you still want to bet against the trend?



This does look like the easy bet at this time for sure. At the same time anything this easy does have me worried.

I think the way to look at potential problems is through inflation and the bond market. If inflation becomes a problem and rates go up the Fed will be in a real pickle. It really doesn't take interest rates going up very far to cause some very serious problems.


----------



## sylyconvalley (Apr 22, 2013)

dogcom


U said something very important above.
If it seems like an easy bet then ...... ?
FWIW 
I saw a junior gold miner drop 50% today.
It sure looks like an easy bet. 
For Institutional money to make the little guy pick up the trash.
I also saw the 2nd largest gold producer fall further.
on a relative high volume considering this mkts are so thin.
think 10 times before u do make a bet.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I was trying to find the gold thread but couldn't so I put the link here. 

After listening to this easy to listen to piece you have to wonder how people can defend the Fed and their ponzi schemes. Do the forum buddies really believe all is well and normal and just keep on investing as if nothing is going to change.

http://www.silverdoctors.com/glenn-...ecation-story-mainstream-german-gold-is-gone/


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Investing advice from Glen Beck? What could possibly go wrong?

You know he's the guy who was selling his dumb, gullible, senile audience to purveyors of overpriced gold coins, right?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I said easy to listen to. 

However why wouldn't the Fed give back Germany its gold or why can't anyone see the gold unless something is up. We all know we are in Ponzi city it is just a matter of time before it blows up.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

Dogcom you have been reading too much Zeroheadge and Fox News. Those media are well known to be very biased and critical of the current governments. 

The fact is, people will spend more if their stocks do well. Just go look at the high end stores and car dealerships.. so you can choose to hide in a cave with your gold bullion or you can live a happy life. It's like Matrix, do you take the red or blue pills. Most people will choose the illusion everyday. That is what life is. It's short and should be enjoyable. Go out and have some fancy dining to support that restaurant owner since your stocks did so well and made you tons of money.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

dog, goldline is one of his major advertisers
all shows and even magazines are notorious for running stories that make major advertisers products look good
i do hope you hold at least _some_ equities dog


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

You all could be right and the Fed just doesn't feel like moving the gold to Germany because it just doesn't like Germany.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

You only see that news on kitco and zerohedge right? How about BBC or CNN? It's not even real. They have agreements such as cash settlement etc. It's similar to those people claiming COMEX cannot deliver its gold futures contract and will default etc. That type of news has been around forever. It never materialized because people don't want to have trucks bringing gold pallets into their unarmoured warehouse. People just want to trade for money. Same thing with GLD etf and how Paulson and all the hedge funders trying to play. Nobody wants the real gold, only its paper value. 

Your SHTF $10,000 per ounce scenario will not happen. If it does, your little coins or bars will do jack. Our society will be a government-less place where you have to hire armed guards and grow your own food. If there is no government, there is no deed registration. Anyone can come I your house with a machine gun and claim your property. What are you going to do? Call police? They don't exist. See, your logic is flawed. It's either we have our current system or we don't. If we don't, your assets mean jack except a welcom target for pirates and robbers.


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

Gold is to modern finance as the English monarchy is to modern British government (or Canadian government for that matter).


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Your right I wouldn't keep any precious metals at home. If things really got crazy then I would think guns, food, toilet paper and so on would the most useful items to have around. Keeping precious metals at home makes you a target 24/7 even without a crisis. I was hearing of mining companies having their executives kidnapped and having their gold stolen at gun point as they truck it out for delivery in Mexico. 

As far as the mainstream media is concerned they have long ago been bought out and they are controlled on what they can or can't report. Here is a sample of the mainstream media in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM8L7bdwVaA

You don't need to buy gold but you can sure see the examples of manipulation that is rampant everywhere.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

Yes. The media is controlled yada yada. There is NSA, etc. But that is our society. Your life is not better if choose not to play the game. You really sound like a Freeman. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

I hope your view is not shared by most people. My opinion is that we have a good but not perfect system.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

MoreMiles said:


> You only see that news on kitco and zerohedge right? How about BBC or CNN? It's not even real. They have agreements such as cash settlement etc. It's similar to those people claiming COMEX cannot deliver its gold futures contract and will default etc. That type of news has been around forever. It never materialized because people don't want to have trucks bringing gold pallets into their unarmoured warehouse. People just want to trade for money. Same thing with GLD etf and how Paulson and all the hedge funders trying to play. Nobody wants the real gold, only its paper value.
> 
> Your SHTF $10,000 per ounce scenario will not happen. If it does, your little coins or bars will do jack. Our society will be a government-less place where you have to hire armed guards and grow your own food. If there is no government, there is no deed registration. Anyone can come I your house with a machine gun and claim your property. What are you going to do? Call police? They don't exist. See, your logic is flawed. It's either we have our current system or we don't. If we don't, your assets mean jack except a welcom target for pirates and robbers.


Not quite. They are obliged to deliver if you insist. A big enough customer can demand more than they have on hand, and demand any price he likes to settle. In effect, cornering the market.

Warren Buffet did this in 1997- 98 in silver and stuck them for a bundle. He was not the first or the last. The trick is, first, to have the dough to back yourself up. Have a brokerage you can trust to put the deal through and not rat you out. And picking a time when you can corner them and leave them no way out.

Is it possible this could happen without collusion? Yes, if enough people demand delivery at the same time. The lower their stocks get the more likely this is to happen. When it does you can bet they will yell copper and shut down the exchange, claiming collusion or racketeering or some damn thing until they can weasel out.

Warren Buffett's silver corner http://seekingalpha.com/article/376...t-manipulated-the-silver-market-in-late-1990s


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

MoreMiles said:


> Yes. The media is controlled yada yada. There is NSA, etc. But that is our society. Your life is not better if choose not to play the game. You really sound like a Freeman. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land
> 
> I hope your view is not shared by most people. My opinion is that we have a good but not perfect system.


It is only good because it doesn't effect you at the moment. Not having free markets, NSA watching and recording everything, wars conducted all over the world, bankers able to ruin or rig anything they want without going to jail, sidestepping or stepping on the constitution when you feel like it and so on cannot be a good thing. The more they get away with it the worse the greedy or power hungry will get until it effects everyone in a very big way. Look at the housing bubble and how that has led to 50 million Americans on food stamps and massive unemployment around the world once it really fell apart in 2008.

On the gold front I am hearing exchanges opening up in the far east that will go 1 to 1 paper to gold. If they take off and are transparent then why would anyone put money into the COMEX buying a piece of paper saying what an ounce of gold is worth backed by nothing when they can buy the real thing knowing they could take the cash or the gold if they wanted to.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Isn't GLD 100% backed by physical gold? Unless you don't believe the bars they claim to have exist.

Also wondering why the idea of trying to corner the market on a commodity is not being described as horrible market manipulation.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

dogcom said:


> why would anyone put money into the COMEX buying a piece of paper saying what an ounce of gold is worth backed by nothing when they can buy the real thing knowing they could take the cash or the gold if they wanted to.


you can already do this by buying MNT


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

That's if you trust the Royal Canadian Mint. They are in on the One World Government conspiracy, dontchano?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I believe you are right on GLD andrewf and if it were to take off again where would they find the gold to keep it that way. Higher prices should free up gold as people sell for profit but a lot of the gold has been shipped into very strong hands that may not part with it very easily.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Somebody did a study on gold ETF holdings..........and there isn't enough gold in the entire world to cover the outstanding shares.

The answer was that everyone won't redeem at the same time.............so there is no need to actually own the gold.

I think people sold off the gold "paper" because they saw a scam situation developing and wanted to get out.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Haven't checked lately but I don't believe GLD claims to hold all their gold as bullion. A lot of it is paper claims that are as good as the counter parties that owe them, which means they are as good as gold as long as no one asks for delivery.

The only fund I know that holds all their gold in the form of bullion in a vault is Sprott Physical Gold.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> Somebody did a study on gold ETF holdings..........and there isn't enough gold in the entire world to cover the outstanding shares.
> 
> The answer was that everyone won't redeem at the same time.............so there is no need to actually own the gold.
> 
> I think people sold off the gold "paper" because they saw a scam situation developing and wanted to get out.


Wait a second. Foreign exchange reserves of gold are greater than 20,000 tonnes, worth more than $700 billion. This is fair greater than the cumulative market cap of the gold ETFs, therefore the claim is incorrect. 'Somebody' should not blindly accept things they read on the internet.


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

sags said:


> Somebody did a study on gold ETF holdings..........and there isn't enough gold in the entire world to cover the outstanding shares.


C'mon sags. A quick Google search will debunk this "study". GLD total holdings is 800 tonnes. Add other gold etfs and you are looking at much less than total *annual* production.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I get the impression that gold conspiracy nuts are often weak in the math/numeracy department.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I get the impression that gold conspiracy nuts are often weak in the math/numeracy department.


it's a religion ... faith conquers all


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Click to enlarge

Latest figures show Comex has promised 100 ounces of gold for every ounce they have, a new all time high. In other words if 2% of their customers refuse cash settlement and demand delivery the jig is up.

Is it possible someone has confused GLD and Comex?


----------



## emperor (Jul 24, 2011)

Manipulation hasn't screwed up everything just 99% of things. It's why houses are so much, oil is so much, diamonds are so much etc. It's all manipulation so the people in power stay in power. We really have no idea the true price of most things in this world because it's manipulated and controlled. I actually kind of wish I never started looking into financial stuff. I should have just gotten a financial adviser and did what they said instead I read all the articles. I always knew it was all a big game but I didn't know it was rigged. This system was made for the rich or the lucky. There is still some things not manipulated, collectables are one that I can think of, it's all supply and demand. I imagine when corporations get large enough some might try to buy up collectables so they can manipulate that market also.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

*"I didn't know it was rigged. This system was made for the rich or the lucky"* 
That is your opinion, but you are wrong. Buying collectables on eBay is a better definition of rigged and lucky.
Trying to get rich quick does not work. Patience, time and keeping it simple do. Consider BCE, the so-called "widows & orphans" stock. If you'd bought $20,000 5 years ago and drip'd it you'd have $45,000 now. Not millions, not sexy and not worth bragging about, but realistic, reasonable growth. Give it another 5yrs and you may have $100,000. Put it in a TSFA and its all tax free.
Maybe go back to some of those articles you read.


----------



## jcgd (Oct 30, 2011)

This stuff sounds te same to me as all the other conspiracy theories. Apparently if you believe one you usually believe more. Anyone one think the moon landing was faked? 911 was an I side job? Aliens have landed on earth?


----------



## emperor (Jul 24, 2011)

I'm confused, so you think that to big to fail isn't manipulation? CMHC and low interest rates? Inflation? QE? OPEC? 
Collectables are not rigged at all, you buy a comic for example you get what someone is willing to pay for it. But if the government started putting special rules in place like you need to register to sell comics, or the government says only so many comics can be sold a month or only so may registered companies can sell comics or a corporation buys all the comics then jacks up the price, then it's manipulated.

PS I'm not saying you don't make money off the stock market or you do make money off collectables. All I'm saying is almost everything is manipulated.


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

emperor said:


> There is still some things not manipulated, collectables are one that I can think of, it's all supply and demand. I imagine when corporations get large enough some might try to buy up collectables so they can manipulate that market also.


Collectibles are all supply. The demand is manufactured. Check it out: https://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1317080.

I don't imagine large corporations will start buying up collectibles when it's much easier to just make more of the same cheap crap themselves (oops, not the same... they'll print a different image on the "one of a kind collectible decorative plate" so you know it's really special). Plus that gives them the freedom to invent even more ridiculous stories and inflate the price.



emperor said:


> I'm confused, so you think that to big to fail isn't manipulation? CMHC and low interest rates? Inflation? QE? OPEC?
> Collectables are not rigged at all, you buy a comic for example you get what someone is willing to pay for it. But if the government started putting special rules in place like you need to register to sell comics, or the government says only so many comics can be sold a month or only so may registered companies can sell comics or a corporation buys all the comics then jacks up the price, then it's manipulated.


It is certainly restricted. In the same way you could say that the market for people who do surgery on you is manipulated and people aren't always allowed to do what they truly want. The reason comics and collectibles have less restrictions is that very few people take them seriously as an investment so fraud, deception, and yes market manipulation aren't likely to have a significant impact outside of a few people. If you think the price of something is too high you can always buy less of it or join the other side and take advantage of the high price.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Central banks are so well entrenched in the economic system that it's easy to forget that their job is to manipulate the economy & market.

Specifically, they set interest rates on money rather then letting the free market determine money rates based on supply/demand. And they expanded their scope to set all kinds of bond prices too (both treasuries and mortgage bonds).

Yes the market is heavily manipulated


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Manipulation in the past was about managing rates to keep the economy from overheating and then to lower them to bring the economy back when it threatened to drop into recession.

The sort of manipulation we have today should be very frightening to investors as it is blatant and could be very destructive to stock and bond investors. This is the part that seems lost to most on the forum who for some reason think outright money printing is business as usual like it has been going on for decades and is normal.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> Central banks are so well entrenched in the economic system that it's easy to forget that their job is to manipulate the economy & market.
> 
> Specifically, they set interest rates on money rather then letting the free market determine money rates based on supply/demand. And they expanded their scope to set all kinds of bond prices too (both treasuries and mortgage bonds).
> 
> Yes the market is heavily manipulated


what the heck ? their (the feds )job has nothing to do with manipulating the market, their job is to regulate the money supply and keep both inflation and deflation under control ...


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

fatcat the "market" I'm talking about are the cash and bond markets, and the central banks most definitely manipulate them. They control the prices, that's market manipulation.

If the central bank wasn't involved, short term interest rates (money market rates) would be set by supply and demand of money. At times when money is tight, interbank interest rates on cash would go up, way up.

Instead the central bank manipulates, in fact *dominates*, the inter-bank money market by supplying cash as needed. The "market" is the money market, and the central bank manipulates that market. When the Federal Reserve or Bank of Canada says they are targeting a 1% overnight rate, or whatever, what they mean is that they will blast the market with as much money as needed to achieve a 1% interest rate in the money market.

Here's a web page that shows the Federal Reserve's daily activities in the cash market
http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/omo/dmm/fedfundsdata.cfm

See the current stats, the interbank money market loaned out cash at a minimum of 0.03% and maximum 0.3125% overnight, with an average of 0.07%. The central bank controls this inter-bank cash market... that's their main policy tool. It generally means the central bank will add supply to get rates low.

Of course starting in 2008 the Federal Reserve (and others) also started buying up bonds. The Federal Reserve is a huge player in the bond market, in fact has cornered the Treasuries market with huge ownership % of certain securities. They are the market. If that's not direct market manipulation, then, um, I would love to hear what "manipulation" looks like to you?

When one entity absolutely controls the cash, short term bonds, and long term bond market... I call that pretty clear manipulation


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

You gold bugs are pathetic. Absolutely. Pathetic.

You would much prefer to see Fed inaction. A total economic collapse. Human suffering. Just so you can profit off your useless gold bars.

You made a bad bet on gold. You lost. Deal with it. Don't blame the Fed for your poor investment decision.


----------



## Janus (Oct 23, 2013)

GoldStone said:


> You gold bugs are pathetic. Absolutely. Pathetic.
> 
> You would much prefer to see Fed inaction. A total economic collapse. Human suffering. Just so you can profit off your useless gold bars.
> 
> You made a bad bet on gold. You lost. Deal with it. Don't blame the Fed for your poor investment decision.


Agreed. Once Glenn Beck was brought into this thread I lost my patience.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Goldstone I fail to see where gold was mentioned in james4beach or my comments today. You seem to have the gold problem since you mention it when it wasn't mentioned. 

Stocks and bonds are extremely exposed to any kind of change in Fed policy and could drop very hard for so many reasons. Of course it is party land right now and if the Fed is able to get away with the manipulation then that party should continue. Of course the real economy and the unemployed will just have to continue to suffer in all of this.

Your right however in that if they stop everything goes down but that day is still coming whether we like it or not. 

On gold I did lose money manipulation or not but that is my problem and I will continue to hold that position and no that is not my only investment. I think however you and the others who continue to be blind to this will suffer far worse then I ever will as the system as you know it crashes down. And like I said this is not a normal way the Fed has acted in the past and what you are seeing is an experiment.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> fatcat the "market" I'm talking about are the cash and bond markets, and the central banks most definitely manipulate them. They control the prices, that's market manipulation.
> 
> If the central bank wasn't involved, short term interest rates (money market rates) would be set by supply and demand of money. At times when money is tight, interbank interest rates on cash would go up, way up.
> 
> ...


ok, james, if it makes you feel better to call it manipulation go ahead

but this the feds JOB

they've been doing for a long time, this is what they are supposed to

this is what we want them to do ... 

its otherwise known as preventing financial chaos

your tinfoil hat is on crooked


----------



## emperor (Jul 24, 2011)

Think we are all arguing the same thing. The markets are manipulated/regulated so they don't ever fail. It keeps the people in power to stay in power because if something is not working right it will be manipulated to work instead of failing and allowing the next person to give it a try. I guess that's the way it should be to keep a country strong.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

And if you are upset that US equities are expensive, there's a whole world of reasonably priced stock markets out there. EAFE and EM indexes are around their mean CAPE values.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

fatcat said:


> ok, james, if it makes you feel better to call it manipulation go ahead
> 
> but this the feds JOB


As far as I know, it has not traditionally been the Fed's job to intervene in the bond market like this. Cash/money market rates... yes. But the bond market games seem to be a new thing and is stepping outside their mandate.




> its otherwise known as preventing financial chaos


Hilarious. They did a great job of preventing that in 2007-2008 didn't they? They did a great job preventing it in 2000-2001 too?


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

james4beach said:


> As far as I know, it has not traditionally been the Fed's job to intervene in the bond market like this. Cash/money market rates... yes. But the bond market games seem to be a new thing and is stepping outside their mandate.


Have you heard of the Zero Bound Problem? The standard Fed tool is to reduce the cash rate to stimulate the economy. But they can't reduce the rate below zero. If zero rate is not enough to revive the economy, what do you do? Bond market intervention is a way to get around the zero bound problem.

P.S. If you want to be taken seriously, stop using derisive terms like "manipulation", "games", etc. Stick to the facts.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm familiar with the economic thinking behind what the Federal Reserve does. By the way, Zero Bound problem is something they got themselves into. Next you will be telling me that hey the Federal Reserve has to X because when quantitative easing fails, that's what you have to do.

I think it's accurate to call central bank/government involvement market manipulation (whether USA, Canada, or Europe). They are directly intervening in the marketplace for cash, cash-like securities and now bonds. They are directly influencing prices of those instruments... this isn't hidden or anything. In the US they also directly set the price of mortgages and other asset backed securities. In Canada we have CMHC that strongly influences the mortgage bond market.

During the crash, the CMHC also directly purchased mortgages from Canadian banks which directly set the price of Canadian mortgages. Hey why not, right? As soon as you don't like the market price for something, just set your own price!

If you don't like when I call it price manipulation, then let's call it price control or price decree. But it's certainly not free market pricing, let's be clear on that. *The market is not deciding these prices.*

I don't know how much of a capitalist you are, but personally I like free market pricing. When you have (as we now do) a market where important securities (government bonds, mortgages, and debts issues by banks) are priced by the central bank/govt, you have to really ask yourself whether we're operating under a capitalist system.

From what I can tell, it's not capitalism and it's not a free market. The more types of securities they control... and the list has been growing since 2000... the less it resembles a free market.

The problem with this is that it deteriorates over time. First you lose free market pricing of cash (which we lost long ago... fine). Then you lose free market pricing of your bonds (that started in 2008). Next you'll lose free market pricing of stocks, which some believe already is happening. Soon there is no free market pricing of anything. Do you really think that's a better investment environment for you?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

fatcat and GoldStone, I want to know something from you. The approach of governments and central banks has been, when they don't like the price the market gives to a security (declining price), they simply buy it up themselves.

Tell me, where does that practice end? Now that we allow it, and it's totally normal (and celebrated by folks like you) what securities would you permit this for and what securities would you not permit this for? Is there a limit to what assets the government should purchase, *or should they go ahead and control the price of everything?*

Here is a list of securities and status of whether it's currently government/central bank controlled.

Cash -- price controlled
Commercial paper -- partially controlled
T-bills -- price controlled
Govt bonds -- price controlled
Mortgage bonds -- price controlled
Packaged loans -- price controlled
Other ABS -- partially controlled
Structured notes
Corp bonds -- partially controlled
Preferred shares
Common stocks
Equity options
Index options
Index futures
Commodity futures
Real estate


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Oops I forgot "Junk bonds" in my list. Hey GoldStone and fatcat, please clarify --- is it part of the central bank's mandate to control the price of junk bonds too?

I'd like to learn where you draw the line of acceptability for what prices we should allow the central bank to set.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I'm familiar with the economic thinking behind what the Federal Reserve does. By the way, Zero Bound problem is something they got themselves into. Next you will be telling me that hey the Federal Reserve has to X because when quantitative easing fails, that's what you have to do.
> 
> I think it's accurate to call central bank/government involvement market manipulation (whether USA, Canada, or Europe). They are directly intervening in the marketplace for cash, cash-like securities and now bonds. They are directly influencing prices of those instruments... this isn't hidden or anything. In the US they also directly set the price of mortgages and other asset backed securities. In Canada we have CMHC that strongly influences the mortgage bond market.
> 
> ...


you live in a dream world james

there has NEVER been free market pricing
prices are rigged by hoarders, middle-men, lobbyists, crooked bankers and shysters of all kinds

the modern financial world is far to complex to be allowed to simply function without oversight (which is manipulation)

what do you think the millions of worldwide trade treaties that exist currently amount to ? ... market manipulation

every lobbyist in washington has been manipulating markets for 200 years
presidents manipulate markets when they choose cabinet members
farmers manipulate markets when they hold back their grain
bankers manipulate markets when they refuse to lend

back in the 1800's when we had "free markets" people lost millions when banks went under
capitalist like rockefeller and jp morgan used every dirty trick in the book to rig markets in their favor

there never has been a "free market" since columbus hit the new world and started to rip off the indians gold and tobacco by trading cheap trinkets

you and dog and the rest of the von-mises crowd live in a fantasy world of some "pure" market-force economy which has been proven time and again for centuries not to work

the point is to keep the manipulation both visible and minimal but we cannot have capitalism without it

i am beginning to believe that you have serious doubts about your investment choices, you argue too long, too much and to hard to try to justify your financial positions


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

GoldStone said:


> You gold bugs are pathetic. Absolutely. Pathetic.
> 
> You would much prefer to see Fed inaction. A total economic collapse. Human suffering. Just so you can profit off your useless gold bars.
> 
> You made a bad bet on gold. You lost. Deal with it. Don't blame the Fed for your poor investment decision.


I agree. If the Feds don't do anything, you would have half of America living in the streets and most cities ending up like Detroit by now. If the Feds don't do anything, our money will be like Bitcoin, up and down 50% in less than 24 hours. 

I don't know what you people are complaining about? Right now, people are spending and vacationing. They feel good about their retirement. It's a lot better than your visioned gold trade society. 

I can tell you, if you need to trade gold in a society, like Somali or Zimbabwe. It's the least of your concern.. you have to worry about the pirates and gangster running your village and no government to intervene. So gold is useless in that scenario either.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^
1. Using a charged term like 'manipulation' is casting the action in a moral light. It suggests you're arguing from a moral or emotional premise. It doesn't help the credibility of your argument.

2. Capitalism isn't where the government does not ever intervene in the economy. That is anarchy. You can't expect the monetary authority to implement a monetary policy without intervening in the economy. 

3. The government already influences the bond market by setting short term rates. 

4. Was absence of intervention really preferable in your mind? If you believe the Fed/US government should not have acted to stabilize the financial system, do you really think it would have been preferable for the panic to have caused all the major FIs to become illiquid and fail?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf, I recognize these arguments and yes maybe "manipulation" has a negative slant to it, I'll agree.

The central bank always set short term rates but that was not the same as direct control of the bond market. Direct purchases of bonds is new.

And I assure you that purchases of asset backed securities like mortgages and packaged loans is totally new. They're buying those up because if left to the market to decide, the prices crashed.

The question is, where does it end? What other assets and securities should the government control? You're saying it's part of sanctioned monetary authority and policy, ok fine, so what else should they buy? You saw my list... they already set prices for a hefty chunk of that list.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

fatcat said:


> there has NEVER been free market pricing
> the modern financial world is far to complex to be allowed to simply function without oversight (which is manipulation)


This is ridiculous. Loans and debt securities were very much being priced by the market pre 2008. When the buyers walked away, the prices crashed --- there were no buyers, and the price responded.

As soon as the government walked in, the prices shot up to something like 90 versus par. It's clear as day to anyone who was watching the price action on the securities.

Yes of course global trade involves all kinds of subtle price controls exerted by various entities. I'm walking about direct price control. This means a buyer with bottomless pockets who sits on the bid and keeps buying up a security. That's NEW and has only existed since 2008, and there was nothing like that before.

Debt and derivative traders who watched the screens in 2007 would laugh at you, fatcat. It's clear as night and day between when the market was setting these prices, until the government stepped in.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Oh I also forgot REITs in my list. What do you guys think... should the central bank buy up all REIT shares too? Currently they don't, maybe it's a big oversight on monetary policy!

fatcat you are of course correct that the markets aren't "free" and that many forces exert influence on pricing, taxes etc. Of course these all influence pricing and always have.

But it's a whole different thing when someone is sitting there at a trading desk, is given a limitless trading account, and buys the security upon any price decline! Price declines and the bid drops? You raise the bid and set a floor. That's what the Federal Reserve and ECB (and associated entities) do now.

It's unwholesome and it makes a joke of financial markets. You guys seem to think it's great, but one day that entity is no longer going to be bidding on all the securities you depend on. Then the floor is going to fall out of the market because there will be no organic bidders.


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

james4beach said:


> From what I can tell, it's not capitalism and it's not a free market. The more types of securities they control... and the list has been growing since 2000... the less it resembles a free market.
> 
> The problem with this is that it deteriorates over time. First you lose free market pricing of cash (which we lost long ago... fine). Then you lose free market pricing of your bonds (that started in 2008). Next you'll lose free market pricing of stocks, which some believe already is happening. Soon there is no free market pricing of anything. Do you really think that's a better investment environment for you?


It's not a one-way trip. Over the last 80 years regulation has varied from too tight to too loose. If there are too many instances of over-regulation don't expect it to last for long. It will go too far and then get reversed, the same way de-regulation does and has. A lot of regulation will involve things that have never been done before because the modern economy is something we have never had before.

Personally I would love to be able to buy broad stock indexes at a P/E of 5 because it would give me really great returns but I can see why that's not good for everyone. It's important to have the perspective to take advantage of those opportunities when they come up. But it's also important not to get too attached to that and hope that they come around every other year. If you want a big return in a short time there are other things you can do.

Markets were more free in the 1920s, if you mean that there was less direct government intervention. If you mean that it worked out well for small investors then it was not so great. Someone will always be trying to get an edge and some of that is ok but a market with no regulation is where you will see some really big games being played - stock prices (or Bitcoin) shooting up and down because of a forum post from a 13 year old. That might create opportunities to profit but I don't want to be involved in a market that I have to watch constantly because I can't count on anything I knew yesterday.

If you believe nothing can fail anymore, just buy a few penny stocks. Of course they aren't the only market where you can lose money but they will teach the lesson faster than anything else.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Andrewf is right regulation and law is important to allow everyone a field to play on and if the US market looks expensive go defensive or elsewhere as mentioned. 

In 2008 they should have protected depositors and let everything else fall and put the people in jail who needed to go there at the time. We always end up in trouble when banks are allowed to over leverage and lend to anyone with a pulse. The idea of lending like this is to make certain people rich and walk away when it goes pot with a boatload of money. I remember people arguing in the real estate section about the good of 40 year mortgages and such. Back when I bought a house interest rates were much higher, rules much tighter and prices were much cheaper. 

Today we have many people on this forum and elsewhere who think the stock market is nearly risk free with margin very high and insiders selling at a record pace. This is all on a foundation of printed money which will end in disaster when the plug is pulled.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james, you're still arguing from a moral perspective.

Governments setting short terms rights is good and moral and just. Government influencing long term rates with asset purchases is eeeeeeeevil. Give me a break.

You're using the slippery slope fallacy. Just because the government bought some assets doesn't mean they should or will buy all assets. So QE does not equal communism. There are practical reasons for the Fed not to buy controlling interests in private firms. But buying government debt and MBS is much simpler from an agency perspective. And the Fed is doing as much as it feels it needs to in order to achieve its mandate. Why doesn't the Fed buy up REITs? It doesn't need to, at least yet.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> That's NEW and has only existed since 2008, and there was nothing like that before.


great point james, there was something else that happened in 2008 which was unprecedented in my lifetime anyway, now what was that ? ... let me think ... oh, yeah that right, we were teetering on the edge of a worldwide financial meltdown ... i almost forgot about that


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

fatcat I fear you're using an "ends justify the means" sort of argument and prematurely so. We haven't seen the "ends" yet. Just 5 years into this now is way too early to tell the effects of current central bank policies.

I think you're overly enthusiastic and overly confident about methods that are experimental, and haven't yet been proved to be right or effective. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that everything worked out great, when we haven't even gone through a full economic cycle.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I think you're overly enthusiastic and overly confident about methods that are experimental, and haven't yet been proved to be right or effective. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that everything worked out great, when we haven't even gone through a full economic cycle.


you seem to forget that we had no real alternatives, what else could have been done ? ... sure, it could all go south but so far it hasn't, we are working our way through

your position james is unarguable, you are so bearish and so committed to the idea that the system is corrupt that you can continually argue that sky will fall for the next 20 years

you are firmly in a well-known camp of perma-bears that play effectively on peoples fear

"the coming depression" or "the crash of 2016" or similar sounding financial armageddon titles have been coming out for the last 50 years

there is a huge market for paranoia and you and dog are caught up in it

i say again, i am neither a bull nor a bear, i try to prepare for both eventualities and have a 50/50 split of equities to safe fixed income (gic's, hisa'a and short duration bond funds)

you and dog are part of an army of bloggers and naysayers that litter the landscape, there is good money in paranoia


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

fatcat said:


> you seem to forget that we had no real alternatives, what else could have been done ? ... sure, it could all go south but so far it hasn't, we are working our way through
> 
> your position james is unarguable, you are so bearish and so committed to the idea that the system is corrupt that you can continually argue that sky will fall for the next 20 years
> 
> ...


Actually these people help to push the bull rally. When there is fear, there is more cash on the sideline to join later. There are also shorts that will be squeezed later. So let us be thankful these perma bears are around.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There are all kinds of different forms of "manipulation" going on in markets.

Some is subtle........some not so subtle. Some is devious...........some not so devious.

The mere fact that a manager of a large fund can talk to or visit the CEO of a company they are invested in........is a big advantage for them to have.

When Warren Buffet calls..........the CEO answers, and they can have long "chats" about the direction of the company.

Some big investors have managed to place "their guy" on a company board of directors.

Is this manipulation............or simply a good relationship?

Then there are bots, fast trading, and outright insider trading and fraud.

The small retail investors has always..........and will always.........find out the news long after the big players have made their moves, and that is why small retail investors are often the majority of those left holding the bag.

Bag holding only becomes a big news issue........when it is the big players who are caught holding it.

It is my 2 cents worth, that there are two ways a person who invests in the stock market can go.

One is to learn everything they can and be very hands on..........totally dedicated to shuffling their money around and paying attention to all markets.

The other is to learn nothing and do nothing except to invest in big companies that encompass a wide range of the economic spectrum..........and leave the driving to them.

Most people............would be better with option 2..................as they lack the interest or dedication for option 1.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Clearly the stock market has gone up and it is all due to the Fed, media and playing with the numbers. I didn't expect the Fed to go this far and have been wrong and I have pointed that out here. If the stock market does collapse because of the house of cards it is on should I come here on a constant basis and remind how everyone here is a perma-bull and so on without providing any useful information or argument.

The fact is Fatcat has earned my respect and deserved the gains he has made and always comes in with an open mind and a good argument. Others on here can only bash you or call you names or whatever and have no respect and I believe these are the players in great risk of losing because of their closed minds and having their blinders always on.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

If you don't like what the Fed is doing, invest outside of the US.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

andrewf said:


> If you don't like what the Fed is doing, invest outside of the US.


Not only does that not help, but it makes matters worse.
US fed Q/E policy influences bond yields and stock prices across the world, esp. in all major markets.

I am not arguing for or against manipulation, just saying that _if_ one believes that Fed is manipulating, investing outside the US does not help much.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Why is that? Valuations outside the US have not risen as sharply as the S&P 500.

I don't really understand the agenda of the anti-Fed crowd. They presumably wanted the economy to crater so they could cash in on their shiny metal bars?


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

All credit bubbles eventually end.

Some end when the central bank (Federal Reserve) withdraws the stimulus that created the bubble, as they did in the US in 1929.

In other cases the central bank continues printing money to infinity and beyond, as they did in Weimar Germany in the early 1920s.

In the meantime, life is a cabaret. Put on a party hat decorated with Zimbabwe trillion dollar bills, grab a bottle of champagne and dance while the music lasts.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Why is that? Valuations outside the US have not risen as sharply as the S&P 500.
> 
> I don't really understand the agenda of the anti-Fed crowd. They presumably wanted the economy to crater so they could cash in on their shiny metal bars?


They wanted the law to deal with the problems not paper them over and leave them to fester, behind a curtain of stimulus. If they had done this the economy would have taken a hit in 2007 - 2008 and recovered in 2009 - 2010. Instead we got a false recovery fueled by quantitative easing. There has been no increase in employment and no reform in the financial sphere. New scandals and abuses keep coming to light. We are not in a recovery because there has been no reform and genuine business is not going forward. We are in a new QE fueled bubble that must burst or be deflated some day.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Dogcom is exactly right about the manipulation.....especially of gold, to allow the printing of money without destroying the dollar.

Some here questioned the concept that gold ETFs don't have all the gold they would need to back their outstanding shares or redeem their investors.

Former Assistant Treasury Secretary Paul Roberts, goes a step further and states the ETFs have hardly any gold at all.

*The stocks of many of the gold trusts, such as GLD, are being looted . . . all of this gold is disappearing into Asian markets. The entire West is being drained of gold.”* In the video linked below, Dr. Roberts states how the bullion banks are buying shares in the ETFs and then demanding redemption of bullion, which is then sent to China to honor sales. The Chinese demand immediate delivery and will not allow any other entity to store their bullion for them. Dr. Roberts claims that the ETFs are basically are shares with no gold backing them.

He also says the US has no gold, and that is why Germany could only retrieve 5 tons of their gold last year.

*“They don’t have any more gold. That’s why they can only give Germany 5 tons of the 1,500 tons it’s holding. In fact, when Germany asked for this delivery last year, the Fed said no. But it said we will give you back 300 tons . . . . *_
_
He offers some troubling commentary in this article.

http://usawatchdog.com/fed-they-do-not-have-any-more-gold-paul-craig-roberts/

In other stories that seem to dovetail with his comments........China has doubled it's gold reserves, and the German bank said the gold held in New York isn't formed as they wish and they will be melting it down and manufacturing new bullion bars.

http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.a...announce-increase-in-gold-reserves-52048.html

Could it be they are checking the gold..........or obliterating serial numbers?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monkey...stored-at-the-ny-federal-reserve-bank/5364090

Full video of the interview, where Dr. Roberts, explains how the US has been dumping huge amounts of gold onto the markets at the worst possible time, which drove down the price of gold. He claimed that no investor would liquidate their gold in such a manner unless they wanted to "maximize losses".

A must see video that is interesting and easy to understand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0rGaWcRiNo#t=873

It sounds like we are well beyond the "conspiracy theory" level.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Do you recall the last time we tried dealing with a deleveraging with tight monetary policy? It wasn't brief or pleasant. 

Can you point to an example of a total financial system collapse with return to healthy growth after 2 years?


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Why is that? Valuations outside the US have not risen as sharply as the S&P 500.


Exactly !
Bond yields are a major determining factor in equity valuations.
Observe the huge upward swings in bond yields of emerging market countries following the "taper talk" of spring 2013.

Since the US is the reserve currency and the US bond yields are the touchstone for yields in the rest of the world, any "manipulation" of bond yields by the Fed causes ripple effects across the world.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags, he's just speculating. If X then Y, not Y therefore no gold. Who knows if his premise is sound.

And all this about a shortage of bullion. Are they really trying to say that if I went to a gold dealer and said I wanted to buy gold, I would be rebuffed? If there was a shortage, there would be none to be had.

A shortage looks like AMD graphics cards in last Nov/early Dec when litecoin spiked. Every retailer was cleaned out and cards were selling for double MSRP on craigslist. A shortage means I can't walk into a gold broker and convert my liquid net worth into gold tomorrow.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Speculation...........or the powers of observation and deduction?

According to Dr. Roberts we won't have to wait long to find out.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Rusty mentioned the constant abuses being carried with just fines and no jail times. These abuses as part or as a consequence of manipulation that the Fed fuels and doesn't seem to care about is very bad for everyone. 

Right now the stock market is king but what happens when these guys decide it is time to make money by destroying the stock market as the Fed decides it can't wonder down this path anymore. As far as I am concerned they should have let the banks go down as I mentioned before except for the depositors. After which they should have fixed the education system and put the money more towards main street if they wished to fuel a little inflation. The reason they didn't do this is because the Fed is really owned by private bank shareholders so that is their real concern. Allowing criminals to get away with huge bonuses while destroying their businesses as part of the bailout.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As mentioned in the video......the policeman doesn't arrest himself.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Do you recall the last time we tried dealing with a deleveraging with tight monetary policy? It wasn't brief or pleasant.
> 
> Can you point to an example of a total financial system collapse with return to healthy growth after 2 years?


You don't get a total financial system collapse if you deal with the problem honestly. Look at the depression that hit the US in 1920 and 1921. The country was awash in money during WW1 due to wartime spending. When this spending stopped the war fueled economy suddenly collapsed. Very quickly business adapted, factories retooled to produce autos, radios, and clothing instead of weapons and uniforms. Within months the economy was back on track. During this period the government did NOTHING.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Similar situation after WW2. The government cooperated with industry to retool for civilian production. With educational institutions to retrain GIs under the GI Bill. With the construction industry to build new housing.

Meanwhile wartime rationing was slowly done away with, the last rationing and price control laws only done away with in 1951.

A potential economic collapse dealt with by cooperation between government, industry, finance, and the public working together to see real business, real products and real jobs created. Not a fake recovery aimed at enriching and protecting a gang of crooks.

I might point to the Truman Committee or Senate Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program. It was formed during WW2 to deal with graft, waste, inefficiency and profiteering in war industries. It saved $10 to $15 billion dollars and thousands of lives.

Wonder what they would think of the coverups, special deals and trillions in bailouts handed to the admittedly corrupt banks of today.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You dodged the question. When has a debt deleveraging been addressed with tight monetary policy, leading to quick economic recovery? The only way you get rapid deleveraging is through debt defaults. By the trillion, in this case. Do you think the US could have experienced trillions of dollars in debt defaults and returned to potential GDP in 2 years?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

BNN with a CME floor trader.........with some interesting and troubling observations of recent activity.

Has the US manipulated gold prices to lower the price of gold, so bullion banks could purchase it and deliver it to foreign owners?

He doesn't address any of the "conspiracy" theories..........but recommends "follow the money".

http://www.bnn.ca/News/2014/1/17/Buy-physical-gold-and-avoid-paper-CME-Trader.aspx


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

sags said:


> BNN with a CME floor trader.........with some interesting and troubling observations of recent activity.
> 
> Has the US manipulated gold prices to lower the price of gold, so bullion banks could purchase it and deliver it to foreign owners?
> 
> ...


No, the US has manipulated gold prices because the Fed wants people to finally stop talking about what a great investment it is.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

So how exactly is government manipulation supposed to work? Gov't sells a bunch of gold futures contracts, clearing the market of buyers in order to drive down the price (as well as other willing sellers, who think gold is worth more). Banks then buy gold futures at artificially low prices, from the government (there are no willing private sellers by definition of the price being artificially low). The government has a huge naked short position that it either has to roll or close. Either would trigger a huge rise in the gold price, causing the government to lose vast sums.

Why would the government do this rather than just giving cash to the banks? This seems absurdly circuitous.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> You don't get a total financial system collapse if you deal with the problem honestly.
> 
> Look at the depression that hit the US in 1920 and 1921. The country was awash in money during WW1 due to wartime spending. When this spending stopped the war fueled economy suddenly collapsed ...
> 
> Within months the economy was back on track. During this period the government did NOTHING.


 < side track on the Great Depression deleted >

Not quite sure this is true (now that I'm looking at the correct period :rolleyes2: ).

The Federal Reserve raised the interest rates while President Harding raised tarriffs through the Emergency Tariff of 1921 as well as expanded the tax base while lowering tax rates.

Economists have several interpretations, including Allan Meltzer, who suggests that deflation and the flight of gold from hyper-inflationary Europe to the U.S. also contributed to the rising real money stock and economic recovery.


Cheers


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

richard said:


> No, the US has manipulated gold prices because the Fed wants people to finally stop talking about what a great investment it is.


I believe that is part of it but gold really isn't an investment but rather insurance against paper money. All Fiat currencies go down and one would eventually need some protection from it when it does go down. Gold might be an investment when the price out of whack like some might say today with money printing and someone clearly gaming down the price at times. This can go on for awhile as long as there is gold to find to game the price as Dr. Roberts has said who Sags mentioned. There are a lot of stories like the German repatriation and the latest German investigation into price fixing which caused Deutche bank to exit its participation in setting precious metals prices.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...ing-worse-than-libor-bafin-s-koenig-says.html


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

andrewf said:


> So how exactly is government manipulation supposed to work? Gov't sells a bunch of gold futures contracts, clearing the market of buyers in order to drive down the price (as well as other willing sellers, who think gold is worth more). Banks then buy gold futures at artificially low prices, from the government (there are no willing private sellers by definition of the price being artificially low). The government has a huge naked short position that it either has to roll or close. Either would trigger a huge rise in the gold price, causing the government to lose vast sums.
> 
> Why would the government do this rather than just giving cash to the banks? This seems absurdly circuitous.


The Feds want gold............to repatriate to Germany, and for the COMEX to fill Chinese orders.

So, they drop a pile of naked shorts onto the exchange when there is light volume.........drive down the price........and have the bullion banks get the gold from the "back door" via redemption of their ETF shares and buy gold at the cheaper price anywhere they can. The demand for physical gold is huge and the demand for "paper" contracts and derivatives is falling sharply.

Another reason to drive down the price of gold is to protect the value of fiat currency. India has introduced a 10% import tax on gold and Pakistan is doing the same. Physical gold sells in other countries with a 15% cash premium to the spot price. Governments are trying to protect their paper currency and keep people away from buying and storing gold instead.

It could be an attempt to defray the inevitable results of printing Trillions of dollars, without having the value drop precipitously.

Then they ship the gold to China, who demand physical delivery..........or they melt it down and recast it, so nobody can prove it isn't the original gold they gave to the US to store for them.

The Germans demanded their 1500 Tonnes of gold. They were told no, but you can have 300 Tonnes over 8 years. They were supposed to receive 50 Tonnes last year and only received 5 Tonnes. The delay was blamed on the need to refine and recast the gold. Why would it be necessary to recast Germany's own gold? Why not just send them back the gold they sent to the US originally?

It is all very James Bond like and murky..........for sure, and it is looking like amateur hour, since the gold traders aren't dumb and can follow the events in real time.........but, maybe the Fed has no other choice but to do it this way.

Events and news from traders and other experts, are starting to dovetail together to present a clear picture of what is transpiring behind the scenes.

Are they all misguided and wrong? Time will tell as more people are watching more intently now.

It is either do what they are doing........even if people are starting to figure it out.........or default on their gold owed to Germany........and default on the gold sold to the Chinese.

And then admit to the world..........the US has no gold........they have stolen ETF investor gold...........and watch the US dollar become worthless.

As Francis Horodelski commented in the BNN interview with the trader.....if true, there will be blood spilled.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Why? Gold has a slightly positive real return. Bonds and stocks and land etc. all have better real returns over the long run. Saying that gold outperforms cash is damning with faint praise. It probably only matches savings accounts.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Why not just buy the gold? If Germany is owed 1500 tonnes of gold, this has a market value of $60 billion. This is an immaterial amount. The US loses more than that in its couch cushions.

The conspiracy theories don't hold water. They don't make any sense.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

How does the US government lower the price of gold without losing a lot of money in the process? Whenever someone claims that commodity markets are being manipulated, I usually call bullshit. Exceptions are when banks deliberately tie up inventories in exchange warehouse like GS is doing with aluminum.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Why not just buy the gold? If Germany is owed 1500 tonnes of gold, this has a market value of $60 billion. This is an immaterial amount. The US loses more than that in its couch cushions.
> The conspiracy theories don't hold water. They don't make any sense.


andrewf, the goldbug theory is that there isn't 1,500 tonnes of gold left to buy.
China and Russia hold more than half the total gold bullion in the world.
Rest is with some European countries such as Italy and Switzerland, which did not mortgage its gold to the US for "safe keeping".

The US cannot simply buy 1,500 tonnes of gold because there aint none.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't know.......but to me it is pretty simple.

When you are promising many more times the amount of gold than you have............you have a big problem on your hands.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is interesting to read the Bitcoin forums and learn how intently and closely those involved in bitcoins follow every single transaction in the blockchain.

Anything unusual pops up.............and they are all over it.

Gold trading is somewhat mysterious to most of us, and few people take a big interest in it.

Quite a noticeable difference in "investor participation" as watchdogs between the two.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> You dodged the question. When has a debt deleveraging been addressed with tight monetary policy, leading to quick economic recovery? The only way you get rapid deleveraging is through debt defaults. By the trillion, in this case. Do you think the US could have experienced trillions of dollars in debt defaults and returned to potential GDP in 2 years?


Sorry I was not clear. Debt deleveraging DOES NOT lead to quick economic recovery. Let me repeat, debt deleveraging DOES NOT lead to quick economic recovery.

I hope that is clear.

The last time the US went through a period of inflation fighting debt deleveraging was in the 1970s and it was pure murder. Do you remember inflation, stagflation, the energy crisis, oil prices through the roof, odd and even days, 20% interest rates? Volker basically killed the economy for 2 years. It brought inflation under control though. 

Then Reagan came along and started the whole debt spiral over again.

This is why you have to be careful how you use government spending and deficit financing in the first place. Like any other drug it's a great high when you start but you never know where you are going to end up. The time to worry is before you start using, not when your only choices are death or rehab.

The secret is to not get hooked, not go into the debt spiral in the first place. 

Or, you can take the attitude that it's not the drugs that hurt, it's doing without them that hurts. The US today is like a coke head who has lost his job and his family but thinks he has his addiction under control because he still has a few things left he can sell. Plus he can quit anytime.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Haroldcrump is right that there isn't enough gold to buy and with lower prices the physical demand is sky high while mine production drops because of the cost of production to the gold price. I would guess the Fed could get its hands on the gold it wants but it would expose itself by paying high prices or confiscating it through the US government like in the 30's but once again exposing itself. 

Andrewf you say BS but how can anyone explain the huge knockdowns in the middle of the night or during light trading. It makes no sense at all for someone to sell such huge amounts to get the worst price possible. The only reason they pay attention to gold is because people around the world feel it is money and have for the life of almost all fiat currencies. If the US dollar and Euro and such were sound then you would not need to pay any attention at all to gold but since they are not people look to it as insurance or protection. The Chinese by the way are buying other stuff around the world so they have something to show for the paper money they own.

Sags I believe if you go to the East you will find the opposite is true that gold holds value and their trust and the paper does not.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

HaroldCrump said:


> andrewf, the goldbug theory is that there isn't 1,500 tonnes of gold left to buy.
> China and Russia hold more than half the total gold bullion in the world.
> Rest is with some European countries such as Italy and Switzerland, which did not mortgage its gold to the US for "safe keeping".
> 
> The US cannot simply buy 1,500 tonnes of gold because there aint none.


India's consumers import 1000 tonnes per year. Would it really be so difficult for the US to get 1500 tonnes?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

dogcom said:


> Haroldcrump is right that there isn't enough gold to buy and with lower prices the physical demand is sky high while mine production drops because of the cost of production to the gold price.


If this were true, there would be a shortage. I wouldn't be able to go into a jewelry shop and buy gold, and gold dealers would have no inventory. Is this currently happening?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Andrewf if the Fed just went out and bought 1500 tons then there would be a shortage of gold for dealers to buy. Instead they used other methods like looting the COMEX and GLD as mentioned here and by telling India to tax and restrict gold imports into India. If there was no shortage of gold then why would they bother India to do such a thing.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Any evidence that they instructed India to restrict gold imports? I know there are reasons why India might want to discourage saving in gold rather than financial assets (which can be invested in increasing economic capacity). Gold is an idle hoard.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I don't have the evidence but I think if India continued to buy gold as usual then the demand from China, Russia and such couldn't be satisfied to keep the price down.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

But India has indeed restricted gold imports for its citizens.
The Indian Minister of Finance has imposed punitive import taxes for physical gold import.

They imposed those taxes starting in 2012.
At first no one gave a s*th.
Second time, it maybe made a blip.
It took about 3 rounds of taxation to make a dent in the gold import by India.

I don't have any latest numbers, but India gold imports have fallen in 2013.

Of course, there is no evidence to say that the US asked India to impose those restrictions.
It was more likely because gold imports were draining India's forex reserves.
Which, in turn, is a side effect caused by the US Fed Q/E policy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

andrewf said:


> If this were true, there would be a shortage. I wouldn't be able to go into a jewelry shop and buy gold, and gold dealers would have no inventory. Is this currently happening?


Apparently it has been happening since last July at least.

An interview on CNBC with Rick Harrison, the owner of Pawn Stars (of reality tv show fame)

_“I retail a lot of gold and silver and I’m having a real difficult time right now getting physical metal. “It’s the crazy world about gold and silver: Sometimes the paper market is going down but you can’t find actual physical items.”_

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000179015

Interesting that he holds gold himself as an insurance policy he doesn't hope to cash, but he buys his gold at a big discount from people selling rings and jewelry, whereas if a person walked into a jewelry store or pawn shop they would have to pay a steep premium to gather gold in any quantity that way, due to much of the markup value being in the jewelry itself, rather than the pure gold content. A person would also have to pay the refinement cost or lose again on the selling of the gold to a refiner.

He mentioned the value of gold since 1971 or long term...........and I wonder if his dad has accumulated a big private stash over the years.


----------



## lonewolf (Jun 12, 2012)

The stock market is the greatest game ever invented. Boys with big egoes are smaller then the market.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

If you have a large amount of gold to sell, and you want to get the best price, you will do it in a certain way. You will do your selling when the American and European markets are open, and you will sell it in small chunks, being careful not to kill the market by dumping too much at one time.

On the other hand if you want to drive the price down as far and as fast as possible, you will dump hundreds of contracts at once and you will do it after hours when the markets are thin.

This is exactly what happened, time after time. Look at any chart of gold futures prices. The big smash downs stick out a mile. Look up comments by experts for those dates and you will see that everyone agrees the price was deliberately monkey hammered, although who did it and why is up for speculation.

The government regulators or the exchanges could look up the identity of the sellers in minutes but they never do.

Would it be possible to smash the market by dumping hundreds of contracts in a few minutes? Then buy back those contracts a few at a time, $100 an ounce cheaper over the succeeding days or weeks? Any experienced trader could do this easily.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Why would the price not snack right back? Why would sellers start accepting lower prices because someone sold a bunch of contracts at low prices when the market was illiquid?

If sophisticated market participants know they government is trying to manipulate prices, why don't they bet against gov't? Eventually the government will have to unwind their position. This is like London Whale...

Another example is the flash crash. Prices snapped back in minutes.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

The smack down was only part of the effort. They would also make sure timely bearish calls came out from Goldman Sachs and such to aid in the effort. At the same time they would make sure the media reports all negative news possible as well. The main stream media will never look into and report the strange trading that is going on.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

So, vast conspiracy. Sorry folks, this is pretty thin gruel.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

andrewf said:


> So, vast conspiracy. Sorry folks, this is pretty thin gruel.


Not so vast.........just a few ex-Goldman Sachs/JP Morgan people talking over dinner.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Like it or not somebody deliberately hammered gold down from the 1600 level to the 1200 level. Who or why I don't know. If you want to know how, it's all on the record.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

But why would other sellers accept below market prices? If the allegation is that the government+bank conspirators are net neutral (governments sell to tank prices, banks buy to replenish their inventories) in terms of positions.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> But why would other sellers accept below market prices? If the allegation is that the government+bank conspirators are net neutral (governments sell to tank prices, banks buy to replenish their inventories) in terms of positions.


I can't imagine. Have you ever sold a stock or other investment at a loss? Why didn't you make the stock go back up, and sell it at a profit? Or just wait until it went back up on its own?


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

There is another angle on all this conspiracy stuff. If you know the markets are manipulated you can avoid losing money (don't go long gold when it is near its lows and don't invest in gold stocks) or even make money.

How about the Bernanke Put? Fed chairman Bernanke announced in no uncertain terms, that his number one goal was that the stock market never go down. And, while he was in office, it never did.

His successor Janet Yellen has announced that she intends to keep to the same policy. So, you have been told. Don't believe me, look up her press releases and news stories.

If you KNEW the Fed had your back would it affect your investing choices?

The gold slams and the Bernanke Put are a couple of well known, tried and true manipulations you can count on.

Does anyone know of others?

PS I just remembered the Fed's Zero Interest Rate policy. All the world knows they are suppressing interest rates by buying billions in government bonds every month.

Also there is Prime Minister Abe's crusade to inflate the yen and reduce its value by half as quickly as possible. He announced this policy a year ago and it seems to be working a treat.

I guess if they announce beforehand that they are going to manipulate a currency, bond market or stock market it does not count as a conspiracy.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't sell stocks because someone took a really low price after hours when there was no liquidity. 

You're conflating explicitly announced QE by the Fed and BoJ with secretive and illegal market activity (selling gold futures). When central banks want to intervene, they trumpet the fact that they will do so. They'd rather the market react in anticipation of their intervention than having to intervene in the first place.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

What's the difference as long as you know what is going to happen?

I didn't sell my gold either and now it is down around what I paid for it. I didn't believe it was possible to drive down the price of gold and keep it there either, until they did it. If I denied the reality after seeing it with my own eyes I really would be a kook.

I'm forced to believe that 1000 people just happened to put in sell orders in gold at exactly the same moment, and that this extraordinary accident happened exactly the same way, again and again. Or, that some extremely rich trader made the exact same mistake over and over again, never learning his lesson even though each mistake cost him hundreds of millions of dollars. Or, that someone deliberately hammered the gold market for reasons of their own.

As Sherlock Holmes said, once you eliminate the impossible you are forced to believe the improbable if it is the only explanation left that fits the facts.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

From what I remember there were a few events that took place before the tremendous gold smash in April. Number 1 was the Cyprus bail-in and number 2 was the ABN AMRO default. ABN AMRO was unable to deliver on its gold contracts and the Cyprus bail-in shocked people who had money in the bank.

http://www.examiner.com/article/largest-dutch-bank-defaults-on-physical-gold-deliveries-to-customers

If they didn't smash gold as hard as possible during these events and beyond then there could be a stampede to buy gold and out of paper.

I almost forgot to mention that they knew where the stops were and used that as fuel to the downside.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Shame on anyone dumb enough to use stops.



> I didn't believe it was possible to drive down the price of gold and keep it there either, until they did it. If I denied the reality after seeing it with my own eyes I really would be a kook.


The other possibility is that this is the current market-clearing price of gold. Where are all the people who are convinced that gold is worth a lot more? Why are they not buying? If they are not buying, is gold really worth more?


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

If someone is purposely selling lots of gold for a price much lower than its true value, you're taking advantage of this by buying as much as possible right?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

All the conspiracy theories could be crushed............if proper audits were allowed.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Shame on anyone dumb enough to use stops.
> 
> 
> 
> The other possibility is that this is the current market-clearing price of gold. Where are all the people who are convinced that gold is worth a lot more? Why are they not buying? If they are not buying, is gold really worth more?


The thing is they are buying all of it Andrewf at a discount. The east is taking advantage of the smack downs and taking delivery of the physical and these are strong hands. So if the west wakes up and wants to buy physical gold in quantity then they will have to pay a very much higher price for that gold. You see the paper market being 100 to 1 to gold is not the place to buy anything so you need to get the physical and properly store it or find a fund that is 100 percent backed by the physical. 

Sags is also right about proper audits but of course you can't have that when the gold is not there.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

So why isn't the price of gold being bid up? 

I think there is a lot of confirmation bias going on here. Latching on to fringe-media reports to support the premise that gold would be trading at $2k+ per ounce if only the government hadn't sold some futures contracts while simultaneously threatening to kneecap anyone who bid up the price, all while keeping it secret. All for an inconsequential amount of money.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

My guess is China and others want to buy gold and other commodities cheap with their hoard of US dollars while they can. I am sure when the US started QE 1,2,3 and so on the holders of US debt would not have been very happy, so in order to pull it off they would have to make deals to keep the system going.

The funny thing in all of this is that many believe that bonds, stocks and other markets are rigged but somehow this doesn't happen in gold and silver. We know the Fed is buying the bonds gaming up the stock market but when you mention it happening in the PM market you here the no that is a conspiracy theory. The main stream media is bought and paid for so it is no better then the fringe media if that is what you think when it comes to reporting.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't believe that the Fed is manipulating equity prices beyond setting expectations and keeping bond yields low. That's enough to support equity prices.

In the long run, it doesn't really matter if you are a long-term investor and buying at reasonable valuations. If you're a speculator, I can understand how you might be upset about short term behaviour.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Shame on anyone dumb enough to use stops.
> 
> 
> 
> The other possibility is that this is the current market-clearing price of gold. Where are all the people who are convinced that gold is worth a lot more? Why are they not buying? If they are not buying, is gold really worth more?


China and India. The Chinese government buys hundreds of tons of gold every year and encourages private citizens to buy more. India recently banned the import of gold to stop massive money outflows. Gold is selling in India for $100 above the "official" price and smuggling is rife.

The US mint regularly sells out of gold coins within days.

Comex and the big banks have drawn down their gold stocks to where they are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Germany is still waiting for their gold back from the US. Supposedly they have 1536 tons on deposit in New York. They asked for it back. One year ago the US offered to give back 674 tons - by 2020. That would be about 96 tons per year.

So far they have given back 37 tons, of which only 5 tons came from the US.

Some speculate that the smack down is to allow the US to repurchase the gold they owe Germany, and that was sold, leased, hypothecated and rehypothecated to a fare thee well years ago.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Heres a link to Dr. Roberts explaining the hows and whys of gold manipulation.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/01/17/hows-whys-gold-price-manipulation/


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

So the US is going to buy back gold, by selling even more? Even my rudimentary understanding of economics suggests that something doesn't add up with that theory.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I don't believe that the Fed is manipulating equity prices beyond setting expectations and keeping bond yields low. That's enough to support equity prices.
> 
> In the long run, it doesn't really matter if you are a long-term investor and buying at reasonable valuations. If you're a speculator, I can understand how you might be upset about short term behaviour.


They are also buying $85 billion a month of government paper and a lot of that money is going into the stock market. Plus all the speeches Bernanke, and now Yellen have given pledging to support the stock market. Other than suppressing interest rates, feeding money into the markets and giving their official blessing to stock speculation they have done nothing to boost stock prices. Nope, no conspiracy there.

Are there any conspiracies you do believe in? How about the ones that have been proven beyond doubt and publicized in the main stream media?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I believe they did buy it back by looting the COMEX and GLD as well as 1300 tons from the vault in London. On the London vault I remember a piece where on the the bank website they had x amount of gold and then a few months later the bank had 1300 tons less and was posted on the website. I found a link to the story.

http://www.silverdoctors.com/alasda...admits-1300-tons-of-gold-removed-since-march/


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

dogcom said:


> Heres a link to Dr. Roberts explaining the hows and whys of gold manipulation.
> 
> http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/01/17/hows-whys-gold-price-manipulation/


There are a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions. How does he know that BNS, HSBC, JPM are acting as agents of the Fed?

I mean, he claims a bunch of things are so, while offering no evidence.

The underlying claim seems to be the Fed and co-conspirator banks are selling a bunch of futures contracts to dupe dump holders of gold into selling their holdings while simultaneously hoping that no one else jumps on the opportunity to buy gold for cheap. How do they prevent other market participants from bidding up gold prices?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Nope, no conspiracy there.


You're right, it's not a conspiracy. They've announced what they will do at press conferences.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Of course none of us can get hard evidence except the authorities or if we were in on the game. What we do know is the BOE is shorter 1300 tons of gold there are very strange large trades and the GLD has seen a huge drop while the SLV under the same pressure has not.

http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldn...Shocking_Developments_In_The_War_On_Gold.html

The reason is they needed the gold and not the silver to deliver.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The other thing that doesn't make sense is the assertion that the Fed is trying to keep the USD strong. Really, a weaker USD would be extremely helpful for the Fed in achieving their objective of reflating the US economy.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Not to hot, not to cold is where the Fed sits on the USD. If it got to cold there could be a run on the dollar and if it got to hot then you would get the trade problems.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

paul craig roberts is a major guest and one of the pillars of the alex jones show
he's a right wing loonie and is even more nuts than the rest of the right wing loonies like jim rogers and marc faber
this is a religion with these guys
they are revival tent preachers selling armagedddon and making good money
it isn't worth the trouble to fact-check them since they just plainly make sh#t up without batting an eye

andrew, you will go mad if you even _think_ of trying to make _actual_ _sense_ out of this nonsense


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I see. If it is officially acknowledged it is not a conspiracy. If it is not officially acknowledged it does not exist. Got it.

I would only ask that you try to keep up. The Kennedy assassination, 9/11, the LIBOR fixing scandal, the 2008 real estate crash, and many others have been acknowledged as conspiracies by official government and main stream media sources.

A good way to keep up is to watch for multi billion dollar fines paid by Goldman Sachs, J P Morgan and other big institutions for laundering drug money and other crimes.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty, I would settle for some evidence that was logically consistent with the theory proposed and did not boil down to the word of some guy saying that a bunch of things are happening. Making claims in the form of assertions when you do not know for certain hurts the credibility of the person making the argument.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Rusty, I would settle for some evidence that was logically consistent with the theory proposed and did not boil down to the word of some guy saying that a bunch of things are happening. Making claims in the form of assertions when you do not know for certain hurts the credibility of the person making the argument.


Go look at a chart of gold prices. Notice the big slam downs. These are mathematical facts, unless you think the exchanges are making them up.

Now go find your own explanation. The only information I can find, is that some party or parties unknown, have the habit of selling mass quantities of futures contracts, amounting to billions of dollars worth of notional gold, at exactly the wrong time if they want the best price, but exactly the right time if their goal is to drive down the price.

Beyond that I cannot say. The facts are there and they are not in question.

The LIBOR price fixing scandal is also on the public record, and is under investigation by the British government. The fact that the biggest banks in London conspired to rig interest rates is not in question.

I don't believe in conspiracy theories either. But when one of America's biggest banks pays billions in fines and settlements you would have to be retarded not to see they were up to something.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/01/jpmorgan-jamie-dimon-raise-regulators

You can believe whatever you like. I prefer to live in reality land rather than fantasy land, although I must admit I was happier in fantasy land.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

As long as the stock market doesn't face any of these flash crashes or smack downs then no one has a problem.

In 2006 with the stock market rising if you said housing was going to collapse because they were repackaging and selling loans and mortgages you would be called a conspiracy nut. Worse yet you say it will effect the entire world financial system and bring down the stock market you would be sent to the nut house.

After the stock market drops in 2008 suddenly you pay attention to the problem and because the stock market drops this now has meaning to you. So the Fed is smart to keep the stock market rising because as long as it does, it doesn't register with anyone that there is 50 million on food stamps and huge unemployment when taking in those who have dropped off the unemployment list.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A huge withdrawal of gold from the COMEX on January 23, 2014

Interesting that J.P. Morgan held most of the COMEX gold and sold their vault and commercial building to the Chinese in October.

Remember the Golden Rule..........he who holds the gold.........makes the rules.

_J.P. Morgan is the primary holder of physical gold and silver for the U.S. Comex, and up until recently, they stored metals eligible for contract and delivery at their headquarters across from the N.Y. Federal Reserve. However, in October of last year the financial center sold its underground vault and commercial property to a Chinese company, and has been divesting itself as the primary gold and silver depository for the futures market._

http://www.examiner.com/article/gol...largest-daily-withdrawal-history-leaves-comex

Excerpt from an interview with Eric Sprott:

_*Erik King*: Are we looking at a possible gold shortage? Because paper claims versus physical gold have skyrocketed to 112 to 1?

*Eric Sprott*: It's absolutely ridiculous. Dealers have something like 11 tons of gold on the Comex... 11 tons. China imports about 100 tons a month... I mean 11 tons is like nothing. February is a big delivery month. Last year it was 40 tons, and God forbid it's 40 tons this February, and there are a lot of contracts still outstanding.

All my work suggests that we are going to see a failure of delivery in some market to some country... something going to give here._

http://www.examiner.com/article/gol...ault-and-fail-to-deliver-as-early-as-february

Well.............it is almost February.............and we shall see what happens.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

An interesting summary of where some of the gold bank vaults are located and how big they are.

The JPM vault is very interesting and apparently is designated as the gold vault of the US Federal Reserve. It is the world's largest vault.....so much for the Fort Knox mythology. Also the building was put up for sale and now belongs to a Chinese company.

Also interesting is that the Bank of Nova Scotia had a vault destroyed under World Trade Building #4 in the 9-11 attack.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-...vault-largest-world-located-next-new-york-fed

The murky world of gold is certainly an interesting place................


----------



## richard (Jun 20, 2013)

dogcom said:


> In 2006 with the stock market rising if you said housing was going to collapse because they were repackaging and selling loans and mortgages you would be called a conspiracy nut. Worse yet you say it will effect the entire world financial system and bring down the stock market you would be sent to the nut house.


That wasn't a conspiracy, it was millions of people making bad decisions based on emotions and a system that encouraged it. If you told me in 2011 that the gold price would collapse soon because millions of investors had bought into an emotion-based story far too hard and weren't making rational decisions anymore, I would have believed that (and did). Incidentally all the gold buyers would have called you a conspiracy nut 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone is trying to push around the gold market. It doesn't matter to most people though. Based on the information I can find the value of all gold ever mined is about $6.8T. The value of the US stock market alone is somewhere around $12 - 16T so the global stock market is somewhere around $30 - 40T. The bond market is much larger than that, and derivatives can barely be measured. Gold, like physical cash, is pocket change that is forgotten most of the time.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Actually I 100 percent expected a nice correction in gold when it went to $1900 or beyond that and even shorted silver when it went to $50 because they were classic parabolic rises at the time. I even posted it here on silver before it happened I believe at the time. 

The 2006 story though I believe only a few were seeing the housing bubble and very few saw the disaster to follow and I do believe overall that it would have been considered a conspiracy theory at the time.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

richard said:


> Based on the information I can find the value of all gold ever mined is about $6.8T. The value of the US stock market alone is somewhere around $12 - 16T so the global stock market is somewhere around $30 - 40T. The bond market is much larger than that, and derivatives can barely be measured. Gold, like physical cash, is pocket change that is forgotten most of the time.


Indeed, this is what I've been asking myself: "so what?" What's the doomsday scenario here? $10k per oz gold? I just don't think it would matter, unless you're a gold miner.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I believe if gold were to climb that high it would be because of some sort of chaos or collapse. Gold only goes up like this or really matters in times of turmoil like the 30's, 70's and the 2008 crisis. And we still aren't out of the woods yet, since nothing has been fixed since the crisis in 2008.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Such a spike in gold would be transitory, as you'd see a lot of people dumping their gold holdings at that price.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

richard said:


> That wasn't a conspiracy, it was millions of people making bad decisions based on emotions and a system that encouraged it. If you told me in 2011 that the gold price would collapse soon because millions of investors had bought into an emotion-based story far too hard and weren't making rational decisions anymore, I would have believed that (and did). Incidentally all the gold buyers would have called you a conspiracy nut
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if someone is trying to push around the gold market. It doesn't matter to most people though. Based on the information I can find the value of all gold ever mined is about $6.8T. The value of the US stock market alone is somewhere around $12 - 16T so the global stock market is somewhere around $30 - 40T. The bond market is much larger than that, and derivatives can barely be measured. Gold, like physical cash, is pocket change that is forgotten most of the time.


It's the "system that encouraged it" that bothers me. Read Matt Taibbi's pieces from the Rolling Stone to find out how the boom and bust happened. It wasn't a conspiracy, just a lot of rich powerful people taking advantage of the system to make illegal profits and passing the losses on to the taxpayers.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Here we have the classic takedown after the FOMC meeting. This of course is as natural as spring coming after the winter. Nothing to see here just the normal flow of money.

http://www.silverdoctors.com/gold-silver-smashed-through-support-on-classic-post-fomc-raid/


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

So why aren't you buying?


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

If I wanted to buy, it is a better time to enter, after the expected normal takedown.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Some of you folks seemed to take exception to my claim that the Federal Reserve is fundamentally engaged in manipulating the market.

If you don't like my words, then listen to James Grant in this excellent brief video.



> [Federal Reserve] creates redundant credit that finds its way into other things. It does mischief... on Wall Street we call this mischief a "bull market" and we're generally all in favour of it
> 
> The Fed is engaged in a massive experiment of price control. They don't call it that. They fix the funds rate. They manipulate the yield curve. They, through this portfolio balance channel, talk up the stock market. They have their thumbs on the scale of finance.
> 
> We all live to a degree in a valuation hall of mirrors. Who knows what value is when the Fed fixes the determining interest rate at zero.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't think that's the same thing as manipulation. And absolutely none of that is novel or interesting. Of course QE raises asset prices--that's kinda the point. More cash chasing fewer assets to reflate the economy and encourage investment. That was the whole idea, publicly acknowledged, from the beginning. Not a conspiracy.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

They don't just talk up the stock market james4, although through their bought and paid for mainstream media they do but they also have the PPT or plunge protection team that will manipulate the stock market.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> Some of you folks seemed to take exception to my claim that the Federal Reserve is fundamentally engaged in manipulating the market.
> 
> If you don't like my words, then listen to James Grant in this excellent brief video.


can you and dog understand that you appear to get all of your news from sources that are unabashedly bearish and have an absolute bias that is a) anti-fed and pro gold standard and b) promulgates conspiracies of all kinds c) are littered with ads for gold and silver ? ... i could go on but i find it kind of laughable that you guys put these stories up as though they have actual credibility

dog, quotes "silver doctors" as if they are going to look at precious metals with an even analysis such as you find on bloomberg where you will find stories supporting all kinds of competing views

you guys both cite sources that only reflect a single, bearish and biased viewpoint and you present them as though they were actual journalism (such as you will find in the economist or bloomberg or the new york times or wall street journal where you see stories that consistently report _all different sides_ and opinions on issues)

you guys only reference stories from sources that are clearly and unabashedly biased ... zero hedge being a great example, stopping reading zh was one of the best and most profitable thing i have ever done .. they will work you into a paranoid frenzy (as you guys both demonstrate regularly)

nothing personal i like both of you guys


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

So what, fatcat? Any time you turn on the TV, pick up any newspaper, or magazine (like Moneysense that is _often_ recommended around here) you see viewpoints that are totally aligned on the mainstream pro-industry, pro-banking view.

That's the overwhelming philosophy that we're all inundated with constantly. We're bringing just a tiny slice of something contrary to it.

Whether you like it or not, there are professionals out there with these kinds of view. Jim Grant is one of them and there are others too.

And last time I checked, all the sources you would have relied upon completely had their heads in the sand leading up to the 07-08 crash. How can you trust the mainstream view when they were so clueless, so out of touch with market reality? The only thing they got "right" is that market rally back and that's just because they're a broken record that's always calling for a rally.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

And fatcat, if you really follow the financial media so closely you have probably noticed how the bearish position has virtually disappeared from the media. Bloomberg for instance used to carry more critical stories and they totally stopped running them post 2008.

There's no bearish story out there. It's always positive, perpetual bull market in everything, banks will never fail again, etc.

Grant is just saying, it's a flood of credit and Fed money that has some consequences such as a "bull market". He's saying, it can't go on forever because history shows that manipulated markets can not continue perpetually. I think it's a sensible statement


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

james4beach said:


> And fatcat, if you really follow the financial media so closely you have probably noticed how the bearish position has virtually disappeared from the media. Bloomberg for instance used to carry more critical stories and they totally stopped running them post 2008.
> 
> There's no bearish story out there. It's always positive, perpetual bull market in everything, banks will never fail again, etc.
> 
> Grant is just saying, it's a flood of credit and Fed money that has some consequences such as a "bull market". He's saying, it can't go on forever because history shows that manipulated markets can not continue perpetually. I think it's a sensible statement


utter unadultrated baloney

bloomberg and the wall street journal and the economist all carried stories about overheated real estate before the crash that began around 06, they all carried stories about a bubble in tech in 99 ... they all carry stories that discuss all aspects of finance pro and con

they have carried thousands of stories in the last 5 years that are critical of the fed and their actions

bloomberg podcast guests present a wide range of views on everything, views that are far from being un-critically bullish ... i know because i listen regularly to bloomberg and i hear guests rip into the fed and their monetary policy all the time

look at james grant,he appeared on cnbc a network notoriously labeled as pro-bullish

bloomberg regularly has marc faber and jim rogers on as guests who sing their song of doom, they appear _all the time_ on bloomberg

you are just plain wrong and you don't even have your facts straight or your information sources properly vetted

you are locked into your confirmation bias james and ceaselessly look for material to justify your uber-bearish worldview

you really should write cnbc and see if they will have you on as a guest


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I have to say fat cat that the alternative sites do frustrate me with their righteous views that only take one side into account. They also have that goldbug thing going where you attack anyone that doesn't agree with your view point. I think safehaven gives you a little more range of view points then these sites do even though it is still a little over bullish to precious metals. The mainstream media does provide other views but they won't see things going on like the smack downs and give a more canned response to these issues. They also won't see many faults in the Fed and do cheerlead the Fed even though they will try to add some alternative views but not much in the way of balance. Of course they must give some different views because if they didn't they wouldn't have much credibility even if they are bought and paid for.

All and all it is frustrating that I must use these alternative sites when I see stuff that is not being explained by the mainstream media. For me my biggest fault is I don't trust anyone so I can get more caught up in bearish views then I should and not seeing the trades that are being offered to me. The Fed came into 2009 saying that basically they would support the stock market with all the liquidity needed like all the QE's so that was a gift for me if I wanted to invest in the stock market. Today however they are taking it away so it tells me they are not going to support the stock market unless they reverse course so we will have to see where they end up when Yellen takes control. At the same time I will have to look at the bond market and if the Fed reverses course but the 10 year jumps through 3 percent and keeps going then the QE will not be working and that would be big trouble.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

JP Morgan's Blyth Masters to join the Swaps Regulator Panel of the CFTC. You would think this was a joke but no I even grabbed it off a mainstream media site. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...he-masters-to-join-swaps-regulator-panel.html


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...ows-signs-of-decade-of-bank-manipulation.html

Of course this is a huge shock to many on the forum that manipulation is happening and this is now coming from the mainstream media who would have avoided these stories in the past. Anyone who has suggested on the forum that things are manipulated in the past were ridiculed, especially if the subject was gold. The scary thing is that if the mainstream media starts reporting it then we could all be in big trouble because it means they can't contain the truth from coming out. 

Another concern is the 6 high profile dead banker showing up in recent weeks and again not even a little concern on the forum. With this level of coverups going on and the level of manipulation by the Fed and many others it could have a hugely negative impact on the portfolios of the forum gang and yet there is very little concern for you money. I just find it interesting that people on the forum look at their money in such fine detail but yet ignore such huge risks. I am not saying sell everything and go away but instead saying watch out for these risks that could be much worse then 2007 - 2009.


----------



## Underworld (Aug 26, 2009)

Just found this thread - full of great information and opinion.

This made me lol "There will be no "collapse of civilization" with fiat out of circulation, with people bartering live animals or gold nuggets in the streets."


----------

