Jump to content

Gold Bulls - "Clawing the Sky" as prices fall


drbubb

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 653
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Its a quote from Isaac Asimov's Sci-Fi book "Foundation", of the Foundation series.

 

Its the closest I could get to a short answer that bore some kind of truth, without writing a novel of my own.

You can't answer the question without writing a novel!!!!!

 

What you are saying is that your predictive powers are a work of economic/science fiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bubb, I have asked you twice how those German property purchases of 2007 are going (that consortium thingy you had going), but you must have missed bioth questions as you haven't responded.

 

iirc it was 4 German properties wasn't it ?

 

it's just that with you being a loaded professional & me being a skint amateur, I was wondering if your 'buy at the top-ish' property strategy was working ok for you ?

iirc, you have sold some of your hong kong stuff at a profit (handy that ;) ) & still have 2 to off load ?

 

No chance with an answer GoM. ;)

He is not the MESSIAH just a very naughty boy

NoW PISS oFF :lol::lol::lol:

 

From:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed Errol you have been consistantly posting that but i thought and still do think that your whish for a return to $1000 is not going to happen but the true test of time will be the judge.

 

Marc Faber, Gold won't fall below $1000 level ever again.

 

From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGIVtKprwO4

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGIVtKprwO4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one of the better forecasters

 

 

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article15649.html

Further to this, you will remember it was a Fibonacci Resonance related projection to $1200 plus that we have been working off for some time that was originally our first big target we thought gold would hit before encountering any real trouble, and here we are this morning with the $ potentially counted out in the interim, along with the scary speculator related picture directly above. So again, although this is likely only a temporary pause for gold, the risk of a correction is high with the confluence of factors discussed above, so shorter-term traders should act accordingly. In terms of magnitude, if my larger degree count is correct, any correction here should only take gold back down $100 or so, making accumulation between $1100 and $1125 spot on. From there it should be up to $1300 in tracing out the widely followed inverse head and shoulders pattern so many traders are tracking, and then possibly to $1500 in potentially tracing out the larger degree Fibonacci resonance related projection seen here in Figure 1 before the first wave of Super Cycle Degree C higher is completed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't answer the question without writing a novel!!!!!

 

What you are saying is that your predictive powers are a work of economic/science fiction.

Of course, partly.

Prelude to Foundation (Asimov circa 1988):

The Emperor, who had listened carefully, said, "But doesn't that mean that you have shown how to predict the future?"

"Again, not quite. I have showed that it is theoretically possible, but no more.

To do more, we would actually have to choose a correct starting point, make correct assumptions, and then find ways of carrying through calculations in a finite time. Nothing in my mathematical argument tells us how to do any of this.

And even if we could do it all, we would, at best, only assess probabilities.

That is not the same as predicting the future; it is merely a guess at what is likely to happen. Every successful politician, businessman, or human being of any calling must make these estimates of the future and do it fairly well or he or she would not be successful."

"They do it without mathematics."

"True. They do it by intuition."

"With the proper mathematics, anyone would be able to assess the probabilities.

It wouldn't take the rare human being who is successful because of a remarkable intuitive sense."

"True again, but I have merely shown that mathematical analysis is possible; I have not shown it to be practical."

 

Me (circa 2004)

http://www.theborgmatrix.com/ltk/index2.ph...Intelligence/37

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Randomness is the essence of the universe since it is free will.

 

Maths will only be able to describe possible scenarios (distributions), it will not be able to predict one particular scenario.

 

Live with it.

Knowledge of 2 or 3 (similar) scenarios being likely, is infinitely more useful than an assumption that all scenarios are equally unknown.

Your will is not as free as you would like to think, in fact, for virtually the entire population of this Earth, it is manufactured from birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowledge of 2 or 3 (similar) scenarios being likely, is infinitely more useful than an assumption that all scenarios are equally unknown.

Your will is not as free as you would like to think, in fact, for virtually the entire population of this Earth, it is manufactured from birth.

I actually agree, but it does not change the fundamental situation (of randomness).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowledge of 2 or 3 (similar) scenarios being likely, is infinitely more useful than an assumption that all scenarios are equally unknown.

Your will is not as free as you would like to think, in fact, for virtually the entire population of this Earth, it is manufactured from birth.

And what of reason? Doesn't reason presuppose free will? That you are able to judge the merits of an argument and then freely decide whether it is true or false.... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually agree, but it does not change the fundamental situation (of randomness).

->And even if we could do it all, we would, at best, only assess probabilities.

 

The difference is between betting on a coin where the house always wins, and betting on a coin where the odds are in your favour.

 

And what of reason? Doesn't reason presuppose free will? That you are free to judge the merits of an argument and then freely decide whether it is true or false.... :)

In my experience, prejudiced perceptions suppresses all reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

->And even if we could do it all, we would, at best, only assess probabilities.

 

The difference is between betting on a coin where the house always wins, and betting on a coin where the odds are in your favour.

That's why I bet on (hyper-)inflation -- 99.9% guaranteed. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if everyone else at the same shop is betting on hyper-inflation, the odds my not be in your favour, even if you are right.

Don't worry, almost no one is. The proof is that otherwise we would be hyper already. Take it as a gift that everyone else is still sleeping. Accumulate now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...