ziknik

Do you know of a dealer that accepts credit card payments or do you balance transfer to your current account?

A lot of people here have bought from them. I placed my first order at the weekend. They’ve been dead good so far. I haven’t got my coins yet because I asked them to hold the delivery for a month.

Article on gold price in Telegraph today. I’ve not noticed it posted. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../bcngold109.xml

Oils gone below $100!

Central Banks usually look at their gold as a value and not a number of ounces. They try to maintain the value.When the price goes up they sell and when the price comes down they buy.

FWIW, I’m expecting silver to fall further in price. I think we will see oil sub $100 and silver will come down with it. I’ve got some dry powder in my GM account waiting for the price to come down some more. I’m not waiting to try and spot the bottom before I buy. I’m not lucky enough to get these things right so I’m buying a little more on every big price drop. I don’t see price drops as a loss. Each Oz of silver is still an Oz of silver regardless of price. I haven’t got any intention to sell my silver coins at the moment. I’m trying to build up a holding to keep for the rest of my life (and then I will gift it to my kids at least 7 years before I croak it ;) ). I haven’t got many coins at the moment because I don’t want to keep anymore than is covered by standard house insurance and I’d like to think that I’ve got at least 50 years left to buy I’m going to swap my GM silver for gold at some point and then sell the gold when I buy a house regardless of price/profit/loss.

Can you re-produce that chart up to today’s date please?

OK, but for clarity. I didn’t say there was a shortage of coins. I said logistical problems meeting demand EDIT: ****, I did say short of coins in #160 above.

Yes, speculators can make huge profits by buying and selling at the right time. But quality professional coin dealers are not speculators. Developers are not buying land at the moment because they can’t sell the land. That’s my point. Coin dealers can sell the coins (if they can get them) because there are people queuing up to buy. I know I can’t prove nothing either way, but I would still be buying if all coin dealers put there price to 5x spot because I know I can sell at this price on ebay.

A dealer make his money from dealing in coins. Not by sitting around waiting for the prices to go up and down. I’ve spoken to Chards a few times. They have people queuing for coins but they can’t get them in fast enough (logistical problems). A huge delivery arrived (at Chards) 2 weeks ago but they wouldn’t sell any to me because they’d had other people waiting weeks. I’d been waiting too; I’d just not thought to pay in advance . I waited 6 weeks (or something like that) for coins from the Royal Mint. Why on Earth would Royal Mint delay deliveries if they weren’t short of coins?

Under £10 pounds! I’m buying!

The latest bank to fail was called ‘Silver State Bank’ Do you think it really had Silver and was forced to sell? http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....ost&p=57240

Try http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../bcnmort105.xml

It’s more difficult to write and understand the deflationary scenario because we have experienced deflation. Most money is created as debt, it requires an interest payment to be made as (or when) it is repaid. To pay the interest, more money needs to be created in the future, usually as debt. In a deflationary scenario, there is negative money supply creation. Assuming the deflation continues, there is not any net money creation and therefore, there is not enough money for somebody to repay their debt certainly not everyone). They default on the loan. The bank is forced to pay the debt on behalf of the borrower and this constrains the banks ability to hand out other loans. There is not enough money creation to meet the demand required to pay the loans + interest. This causes more defaults and spirals out of control Yes, money velocity can slow deflation and stop in spiralling out of control. But money velocity is not enough long term. Sooner of later, money supply must turn positive again or the deflation keeps spiralling out of control. It is not possible for people to work their way out of debt because the money doesn’t exist and nobody wants to borrow or is unable to borrow. The economy is not healthy. The end point is when everyone has defaulted and there are no debts left Yes, the same money circulates around many many times. I’m just taking extreme points of view in my examples for simplicity. I’m a touch confused by what you mean (in the text I have bolded). I agree with the rest of it. The problem for us is that we are the borrowers and Asia are the depositors. Then again, when it goes to rat **** it we may well find that we have got the better end of the deal.

It is over simplistic to look at only one loan transaction, you need to look at a series of the same transaction. In the series of the same transaction (over and over again) the money supply must grow or contract. It cannot stay the same. These are 2 simplified extreme examples. In an inflationary scenario, there has to be an increase in the money supply and it must keep growing. Otherwise we would not be able to repay our debts + interest. So the money supply keeps growing and you or somebody borrows more and more money to keep repaying debt + interest. In the deflationary scenario, the money supply has not increased (or somebody defaults to cause the money supply to reduce). There is now not enough money for repayment of debt + interest, not for everyone. More people default because there simply isn’t the money to repay the loan (for everyone) and the situation keeps getting worse. Both situations are balanced, slowed down a bit by default / new loans The fractional reserve banking system allows the banks to lend several times the money they have. If a bank has £10, it may loan say £100 (10 times) But if the entire £100 is defaulted on, the bank has to pay the money itself and it has lost the ability to lend £1000 (10 times)

Did I ? I didn’t mean to . Where? Can you point it out to me so I can clarify (back peddle ) The effect of the repayment of a bank's loan is in itself deflationary if you consider it in isolation - but of course they then go straight ahead and lend it out again. and the bank received interest and now has an ability to lend more (10 times / 50 times the amount it received interest). Over the course of a mortgage the interest may be 100% of the amount borrowed or more. I agree with you. It’s a bit impossible to give an absolute definitive ‘inflationary’ or ‘deflationary’ in a real example because there are some many banks interacting with each other. But remember, reducing the lending capacity in the overall banking system is not deflationary. It is less inflationary

Money supply has kept growing to cover the interest of past loans so there has been no deflationary affect. The interest causes deflationary affects only when money supply does not grow fast enough. This has not happened. Money supply in the past has grown to cover interest and more.

Agree with that. It is inflationary the maximum extent because all the banks that lent money to NRK got their money back in one day rather than receiving it over years. It could be deflationary if people paid back their loans within a few years but they are not going to do so. They are going to move their loans to another bank so it will make no/little difference.

If you take the SLS as an example: It is designed to stop the deflation. The BofE have put a lot of time in to the design of the scheme to ensure it is not inflationary. If it runs as per design, it will probably be a bit inflationary. It’s a difficult balance and it cannot be 100% right. The chances are that the SLS loans will run for several years and halt the deflation that is needed and cause some (a little) inflation. But, on top of the SLS, we have Northern Rock. NRK was a 100% bail out. The money will be unrecoverable and is very inflationary. If another bank on the SLS goes bust we have more of the same. Especially if it is 100% bailed out like NRK. Remember, there’s already enough money in existence to create a devastating inflation scenario (if not hyperinflation). We need some deflation

It may well come down to the lesser of 2 evils. The Government can’t keep printing money to cover losses or it will become worthless (hyperinflation)

Yes. I was keeping it simple for myself above. The Circa 10 times applies to the USA where the reserve requirement is 10%. In the UK, the reserve requirement is 2% (?) so the banks can lend 50 times the high powered money

Repaying a loan is deflationary in terms of prices because money is being used to repay loans rather than chasing goods. In terms of money supply, repayment is inflationary because the money is paid back with interest. This allows the bank to lend even more.

Collapse is very deflationary. The bank does not have time/years to play with the books and make up losses from future profits. The receivers will continue to collect debt repayments, but are very likely to call in every loan (where allowed by the T&Cs) causing more defaults. This allows the receivers to wrap up the bank quicker without having to wait years for debts to be repaid. When a Central Bank provides a loan to a bank, the Bank does not lose much of its ability to lend. It is a much less deflationary. Edit to add. Providing the CB provides a loan to cover 100% of the losses

Default is more deflationary because the bank must re-pay the loan on their balance sheet out of their profits/capital

G0ldfinger addressed that point above and you said, “That's a decent statement of the inflationary argument…….” http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....ost&p=56916