G0ldfinger

OK, I herewith delete Bonner from my To Read list. I guess it started with his malinvestment in Argentina...

I don't think that Bonner has revoked his "trade of the decade" yet.

Further to this, links to all data: http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/?page_id=53&a...&type=daily http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/?page_id=54&a...&type=daily http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/index.cfm?pag...atistical_table http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/?page_id=55&a...e=gold_forwards http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/?page_id=56&a...silver_forwards

I think the LBMA have only moved the data elsewhere on their page. I could still find everything when I looked the last time. Simply a new design. AA might have overlooked that.

I suspect BlackPepper has been out in the sun and drinking TBH, but I agree that there won't be a real 'recovery' anytime soon.

I can not say too much because I agreed to do this work exclusively for a certain financial group. However, I can tell you that we have very likely one of the most sophisticated stochastic gold price models that there is (not that many people would work on this anyway... ). From all I can see, the downside risk to gold over the next 5-7 years is very limited. I don't say it is non-existent, but it is not worth gambling on it given the upside potential. The above applies even BEFORE the SHTF insurance aspect of gold comes in. Sorry for not being able to post more on this. But just have a look at the DJIA:Gold-cycle and then ask yourself how likely it is for the DJIA to fall below, say, 5,000. This alone will tell you a lot (except if your Bob Prechter, of course ).

I'd rather gamble with Google or Apple on that one. Selling your gold now is like standing in front of your burning house and ripping apart your fire insurance policy.

Seems to be a common theme. I always tell my wife that we have no money and that we are bankrupt. But because she knows that I mean literally "no money" and not "no wealth", she just continues spending anyway.

Who TF stole it??

DOUBLE POST Here is a comparison of how gold has performed as compared to a savings account that pays the Federal Funds Rate as interest. This means, to be a peak as in 1980 in this comparison, the price right now would have to be USD 1,200*7.79/1.98 = USD 4,721.21. (Edited for typo.)

The creditors themselves will demand it, because everyone will think that they themselves will be able to get out first. Now, as for every country, I think Russia defaulted on Ruble(!) bonds in 1998.

I think it is a receipe for disaster for non-professional traders (and we have more than enough of those on here). They'll most likely get wiped out by see-sawing, and being positioned for deflation when hyperinflation will hit swift and merciless.

Not sure what you are trying to say. The Fed is accounting for mortgage-backed securities that they bought at face value (see: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/Current/ point 1. and notes 2. and 4.). This means that the Fed assumes that there will be no default, not even of any interest payments. ("Current face value of the securities, which is the remaining principal balance of the underlying mortgages.") This is clearly a grossly optimistic pricing fantasy that is going on here, because the market did not want any of these mortgages anymore (i.e. value was small, without the Fed it would possibly have been zero). Hence, this is the equivalent to pay for used toilet paper in equal amounts of, say, twenty pound bills, where the important part is that the twenty pound bills simply get printed to do so. OK, now your telling me that this is not inflationary.

Yes it is. The central banks are purposefully overpaying for these mortgages. If a mortgage is worth zero since no one in the freee market is willing to buy it, but the Fed buys it "at face value" with freshly printed money, then this is inflation at its best - in money supply terms, since money got created, but also in terms of paying outrageously high prices.

Of course it's cash. It is given to banks by means of them selling MBSs at outrageously over-inflated prices to the corresponding central banks. Maybe what you want to say is that the difference to Weimar so far is that back then more governments bonds got monetized than today? But keep in mind, we are just getting started. No HI is exactly like any another. So, no surprise there, and maybe Argentina is the better example, who knows. I thought it had been discussed to exhaustion before why Japan (as a succesful exporter and with very special investment demographics) can't really be compared to the present situation.

OK, so you just want to view or "declare" all outright money creation illegal it seems. Because one thing is for sure: all that was done in Weimar, the US, the UK, and in Zimbabwe was "legal".

I have no idea what you try to say here. We're not talking forging, we talk cold hard cash, be it printed or not (which makes no difference at all as long as transactions are not illegal). Not necessarily. All crises turn out (slightly) differently.

This myth has been busted many times before. That Bernanke does not have to "literally print" is due to electronic cash, but the money is just created in the same way (buying treasuries). Why do you repeat this misleading (IMO outright WRONG) thought over and over again? It tells us that each HI is different. As such, it isn't telling much at all. It's just common sense.

His chart is a little out of perspective, as was discussed back then IIRC. http://gold.approximity.com/since1885/Gold_USD_LOG.html

Approximity has now longterm charts of the gold price in Yen and Yuan. http://gold.approximity.com/since1971/Gold_JPY.html http://gold.approximity.com/since1981/Gold_CNY.html http://gold.approximity.com/since1981/USDCNY.html

http://gold.approximity.com/since1913/Real...Growth_USD.html

http://gold.approximity.com/since1968/UK_H...es_RPI-adj.html

Yeah, sad to hear this.

I thought that was obvious: nails & makeup, takeaways, travel agencies.

That doesn't look like popcorn.