GOLD

[warpig]

I don't think so, in a recent video interview David Morgan completely contradicts this, so either it shouldn't have his name attached or it's complete disinformation. I vote the later.

 

Scary rumour alert. The jackboots are coming..(maybe)

 

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article26409.html

 

[frizzers]

That is not going happen.

[G0ldfinger]

That is not going happen.

Yes, people simply don't get it:

 

In 1933, the perceived(!) (Keynesian!) problem was to be able to create price inflation. This was only possible by expanding the monetary base, which was tied to gold. Hence, gold had to be revalued, and for that, gold and gold certificates had to be called in.

 

Today, this is not necessary. Everyone is happily printing, and inflation is coming back big time, as we can see already.

 

Furthermore, as currency is not tied to gold anymore, the only thing central banks have to do to make the price go up is -- nothing! Watch it, it is happening right in front of you. No confiscation necessary. If they wanted the price to go even higher, then they would simply print some money to buy some.

 

As for confiscation, the one thing that will be confiscated to prop up state deficits is your pension. You'll get less, e.g. by direct cuts or by inflation, and if it is private, the assets might be seized (oh yes, that nice little SIPP or ISA or IRA) and turned into a public pension, devaluing whatever you will get in the end. This is also happening already in several countries, as has been pointed out before.

 

As for SIPPs etc., it is still worth to manage them as well as possible before they get seized. If you double the money before it gets seized, you will still get e.g. 40% in the end when everyone else will only getting 20% of the original value!

 

(Oh, and just to add, any bonds or savings accounts you have are getting permanently raided by inflation. There is another confiscation right in front of your eyes!)

[Pixel8r]

I don't think so, in a recent video interview David Morgan completely contradicts this, so either it shouldn't have his name attached or it's complete disinformation. I vote the later.

From:

[Gatesy]

But many of the above will buy into ETFs/remote storage and will lose everything anyway.

 

Do you not use Goldmoney at all Schaub?

[warpig]

Thanks Pixel8r, that's the one!

[Schaublin]

Do you not use Goldmoney at all Schaub?

No, I had an account at BV but wound it up some time ago. I trust third parties to look after digits on a screen but not physical. Didn't we get to where we are now by people foolishly entrusting their gold to the goldsmith as he had a good safe?

[Pixel8r]

No, I had an account at BV but wound it up some time ago. I trust third parties to look after digits on a screen but not physical. Didn't we get to where we are now by people foolishly entrusting their gold to the goldsmith as he had a good safe?

Trouble was the goldsmith wasn't audited.

 

 

[Jake]

That is not going happen.

Twitch

[Jake]

Trouble was the goldsmith wasn't audited.

Hope you are right. But what was that about the changing of the rules by Chris Martenson recently? Then there was the Rothschild buy in.

 

I am far from certain that anything is clear cut 'safe'. If all the banks go to hell then you can bet they will do 'whatever it takes' to make sure some prudent charlie doesn't walk away with all the stored gold, audited or not. Look what they did (and are doing) to the prudent savers at the expense of the sinning debtors...and the americans who thought they were safe as houses (lol) with UBS etc in Switzerland tax havens.

 

I don't know how serious a doo doo we are all in but you can bank on it that if we are in the sh*t they will make sure everyone is in it. I noted Paul Tustain said with his recent interview with Frizzers that he wouldn't keep any of his bullion in the UK. Telling that - from the company which won the Queens award last year and boss of BV.

 

I'm with Schaublin on this.

[Schaublin]

Trouble was the goldsmith wasn't audited.

 

Yes, but transferring your trust to the auditors still leaves you with the same problem. If you don't hold it, you don't own it - brutally simple but true as it ever was.

 

It is extremely tempting to go the easy route of digits on a screen representing bullion which can be swapped for fiat digits at the click of a mouse but giving in to that temptation has consequences...

[d2thdr]

Yes, but transferring your trust to the auditors still leaves you with the same problem. If you don't hold it, you don't own it - brutally simple but true as it ever was.

 

It is extremely tempting to go the easy route of digits on a screen representing bullion which can be swapped for fiat digits at the click of a mouse but giving in to that temptation has consequences...

 

 

I tend to agree with you. I have a feeling, at least 50% of BV customers will walk away with nothing. There is no easy way to own the stuff, than actual physical possesion

[Pixel8r]

Yes, but transferring your trust to the auditors still leaves you with the same problem. If you don't hold it, you don't own it - brutally simple but true as it ever was.

 

It is extremely tempting to go the easy route of digits on a screen representing bullion which can be swapped for fiat digits at the click of a mouse but giving in to that temptation has consequences...

I think you will find that in the rule of law you do own it, you are simply paying GM to store your allocated bullion for you.

 

I don't agree, in particular I think GM is run very well and that my gold or silver is definitely in the correct vaults. You can of course actually take delivery of 100 gram, kilo or lbma bars from them if you feel inclined. I would definitely say that you don't necessarily own gold if you own a ETF, but GM is different IMO.

 

You can't very well hold on to hundreds of thousands worth of bullion at home can you? That would also have it's own risks.

 

 

[Schaublin]

I think you will find that in the rule of law you do own it, you are simply paying GM to store your allocated bullion for you.

 

I don't agree, in particular I think GM is run very well and that my gold or silver is definitely in the correct vaults. You can of course actually take delivery of 100 gram, kilo or lbma bars from them if you feel inclined. I would definitely say that you don't necessarily own gold if you own a ETF, but GM is different IMO.

 

You can't very well hold on to hundreds of thousands worth of bullion at home can you? That would also have it's own risks.

 

Why not? £100 000 GBP is only 100 OZ more or less. Gold does not have to be stored at home just in a place that only you know about. Of course nothing is without risk - a shocking amount of bullion has been lost in boating accidents from what I read on the Internet

 

As Jake has pointed out, the danger of owning gold through a company - allocated or not, comes not only from dishonesty in the company but also from the State which may decide to confiscate it for 'the general good'.

[G0ldfinger]

... Gold does not have to be stored at home just in a place that only you know about. ...

That's bad for the heirs, but good for treasure hunters.

[narrowescape]

Yes, but transferring your trust to the auditors still leaves you with the same problem. If you don't hold it, you don't own it - brutally simple but true as it ever was.

 

It is extremely tempting to go the easy route of digits on a screen representing bullion which can be swapped for fiat digits at the click of a mouse but giving in to that temptation has consequences...

 

^^ What he said

 

While gold in your possession can be lost or stolen if you're careless or unlucky, if that happens it is your fault, and should some one try to steal it you at least have the opportunity of defending yourself against such an attack. A piece of paper claiming ownership is not the same as ownership. All it takes is a letter to revoke that ownership and there is pretty much sod all you can do about it. Possession, 9/10 ths and all that...

 

 

[Jake]

Yes, people simply don't get it:

 

In 1933, the perceived(!) (Keynesian!) problem was to be able to create price inflation. This was only possible by expanding the monetary base, which was tied to gold. Hence, gold had to be revalued, and for that, gold and gold certificates had to be called in.

 

Today, this is not necessary. Everyone is happily printing, and inflation is coming back big time, as we can see already.

 

Furthermore, as currency is not tied to gold anymore, the only thing central banks have to do to make the price go up is -- nothing! Watch it, it is happening right in front of you. No confiscation necessary. If they wanted the price to go even higher, then they would simply print some money to buy some.

 

One could conjecture that the US could decide to revalue their (supposed) 8000 tons to whatever they liked. Kill the dollar and pay their debts in a new currency.

 

Everyone is 'happily printing' now. But there are trillions and trillions to go. And people might not like it then when they can't afford sweet FA.

 

I don't think there is a 'get it' or 'don't get it' box anymore. They fiddle the rules to please themselves. I get that.

 

[d2thdr]

One could conjecture that the US could decide to revalue their (supposed) 8000 tons to whatever they liked. Kill the dollar and pay their debts in a new currency.

 

Everyone is 'happily printing' now. But there are trillions and trillions to go. And people might not like it then when they can't afford sweet FA.

 

I don't think there is a 'get it' or 'don't get it' box anymore. They fiddle the rules to please themselves. I get that.

 

And US will also loose its credibility. I feel they prefer to take everyone down along with them.

[Pixel8r]

Why not? £100 000 GBP is only 100 OZ more or less. Gold does not have to be stored at home just in a place that only you know about. Of course nothing is without risk - a shocking amount of bullion has been lost in boating accidents from what I read on the Internet

 

As Jake has pointed out, the danger of owning gold through a company - allocated or not, comes not only from dishonesty in the company but also from the State which may decide to confiscate it for 'the general good'.

The problem is that I have a lot more silver than gold, would need a large safe to put it in. Plus you don't have the ability to sell it quickly and the UK VAT problem.

 

I do keep some coins as SHTF protection, but the majority of my silver is in diversified vaults.

 

IMO if things really get that bad as states are confiscating bullion from vaults, then it wouldn't be of much use anyway.

 

 

[Schaublin]

The problem is that I have a lot more silver than gold, would need a large safe to put it in. Plus you don't have the ability to sell it quickly and the UK VAT problem.

 

I do keep some coins as SHTF protection, but the majority of my silver is in diversified vaults.

 

IMO if things really get that bad as states are confiscating bullion from vaults, then it wouldn't be of much use anyway.

 

 

I take your point about the volume of silver but I have always regarded safes as thief magnets and would never keep anything valuable in them. The ability to sell quickly is a valid point and in the case of silver which may experience great volatility, makes sense but again, this convenience does carry some risk.

 

I don't agree that State confiscation would necessarily mean a Mad Max scenario. Some study of history is helpful in understanding how private property whether it be gold, agricultural land, forestry etc was and will be appropriated by the State in times of stress for 'the general good'.

 

The general public in the UK has no understanding of gold (doesn't own any) and would have no interest if the State decided to 'curb gold speculators who are hoarding gold and damaging the economy'.

 

Bottom line: If it is not known about, it cannot be stolen.

[Pixel8r]

I take your point about the volume of silver but I have always regarded safes as thief magnets and would never keep anything valuable in them. The ability to sell quickly is a valid point and in the case of silver which may experience great volatility, makes sense but again, this convenience does carry some risk.

 

I don't agree that State confiscation would necessarily mean a Mad Max scenario. Some study of history is helpful in understanding how private property whether it be gold, agricultural land, forestry etc was and will be appropriated by the State in times of stress for 'the general good'.

 

The general public in the UK has no understanding of gold (doesn't own any) and would have no interest if the State decided to 'curb gold speculators who are hoarding gold and damaging the economy'.

 

Bottom line: If it is not known about, it cannot be stolen.

For example in the UK if the government decided to confiscate gold/silver from speculators that would actually mean that they decided to liberate any gold/silver etf's held in peoples isa's. What about the pension funds which hold gold, would that be confiscated as well? Can you imagine the outrage, why stop there why not just liberate all shares and money held in bank accounts.

 

I agree that holding some coins is a good idea, but I don't think you should hold all your bullion that way, it makes it too difficult to sell and also you loose more on the premiums and sale commissions.

 

I really don't see this happening, gold is nothing compared to the amount of money they are creating in just the QE they have already done.

 

From:

 

 

[UNSHURE]

As for confiscation, the one thing that will be confiscated to prop up state deficits is your pension. You'll get less, e.g. by direct cuts or by inflation, and if it is private, the assets might be seized (oh yes, that nice little SIPP or ISA or IRA) and turned into a public pension, devaluing whatever you will get in the end. This is also happening already in several countries, as has been pointed out before.

 

As for SIPPs etc., it is still worth to manage them as well as possible before they get seized. If you double the money before it gets seized, you will still get e.g. 40% in the end when everyone else will only getting 20% of the original value!

Which countries are currently confiscating pensions?

 

I can see a few problems with the confiscation of pensions in the UK.

 

If it is undertaken by the Conservatives, it will hurt a lot of their own people. If it is done, it would probably be under a Labour government.

 

The older generation is currently expanding and the baby boomers tend to have a high propensity to vote for their own self interests.

 

It could be very bad for the housing market if there are large numbers of people relying on the cash part of the pension to pay off the mortgage.

 

Pensions consist mainly of bonds, equities, property funds etc. The government would suddenly find that they have taken a large slice of the ownership of these markets into the public sector. What would the government do with all these bonds and equities? They wouldn't be able to sell them to pension funds.

 

The government would, in an instance, wipe out a large part of the financial services industry. How would the industry react?

 

Pension funds buy government bonds. Wiping them out would cause one of the main purchasers of government bonds to be removed.

 

It could only be done once. Following that, everyone would be drawing state benefits and there would be no government income from the taxation of private pension assets (e.g. dividends).

 

If public sector pensioners were alowed to keep their final salary schemes, people would want similar schemes after their pensions had been seized.

 

Politically, it would be a move towards a more authoritarian government.

 

ISA's - do you tink that government wil seize savings accounts as well as pensions?

[huntergatherer]

Which countries are currently confiscating pensions?

 

I can see a few problems with the confiscation of pensions in the UK.

 

If it is undertaken by the Conservatives, it will hurt a lot of their own people. If it is done, it would probably be under a Labour government.

 

Gordon Brown (Old Labour) already robbed (confiscated) the pensions and abolished tax credits on so called tax efficient vehicles at the time.(PEPS)

 

Funds have been confiscated from the private sector to pay for public sector gold plated pensions, mal-investment, fraudulent practice and the large blackhole caused by them.

[electroweak]

Which countries are currently confiscating pensions?

 

....

ISA's - do you tink that government wil seize savings accounts as well as pensions?[/indent]

 

 

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....showtopic=12313

The PENSIONS CONFISCATION thread...

 

- Argentina has done it.

- Ireland is going for it, IIRC.

- Hungary, see below.

- Now France.

 

Hungary is giving its citizens an ultimatum: move your private-pension fund assets to the state or lose your state pension.

 

[UNSHURE]

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....showtopic=12313

The PENSIONS CONFISCATION thread...

 

- Argentina has done it.

- Ireland is going for it, IIRC.

- Hungary, see below.

- Now France.

 

Gordon Brown found a mechanism by which he could tax private pension funds and rake in several billion pounds. I dare say that there could be other wheezes to get tax income out of Private Pensions or delay/avoid paying public pensions:

 

Tax the cash component of Private pensions.

Abolish State Pensions for those on a certain level of income or asset wealth,

Abolish or reduce the current Tax incentives to invest in a pension.

Continue to raise the age at which people qualify for State Pensions.

 

You can be sure that wherever there is a big pot of money, there are several sets of greedy eyes watching over it and scheming how to get their gruubby hands on it.

 

However, a wholesale confiscation of ISA's SIPPs etc.is something different altogether. It would be difficult to accomplish for the reasons I stated in the last post.