Gold will break below $960 – it’s in the script

DeepseekerADS

Gold Member
Mar 3, 2013
14,880
21,733
SW, VA - Bull Mountain
Detector(s) used
CTX, Excal II, EQ800, Fisher 1260X, Tesoro Royal Sabre, Tejon, Garrett ADSIII, Carrot, Stealth 920iX, Keene A52
Primary Interest:
Other
Gold will break below $960 ? it?s in the script - English pravda.ru

newlogo-all.gif

07.01.2014

By Robert Bonomo

As gold broke below the psychologically important level of $1,200 an ounce late in December of 2014, the mainstream financial media burst with headlines like this one from Marketwatch, "Gold's Safe-Haven Role is Over". The Noble prize winning economist from The NY Times, Paul Krugman, penned a wicked missive on the 'barbarous relic' by invoking Keynes and the absurdity of miners going to "great lengths to dig cash out of the ground, even though unlimited amounts of cash could be created at essentially no cost with the printing press."

The basis of a vibrant and dynamic society is an open and free marketplace where people 'vote' with their decisions on where to spend money, where to live, what to read, who to vote for, etc. In the United States, a good example of what occurs when decisions are centralized is healthcare and education- the key decisions are made outside the mainstream of the marketplace and the country ranks far below the rest of the developed world, even behind countries with considerably less economic wealth. As central planning and regulations remove potential players and solidify the positions of special interests, the quality of education and healthcare has plummeted.

So what does this have to do with the price of gold? Everything.

What is Money?

Gold is money. Federal Reserve Notes are not money on one important score; they are a poor long term store of value. One ounce of gold in 1938 was worth just about $35 and a new car was worth $860. If a new car dealer took the money from the sale of a new car in 1938, converted it to gold and gave that gold to his new born son, when the boy turned 75 in 2013 he could have bought a brand new Toyota Camry with the gold his father had given him. If instead, the father had given him the cash, he could have gone out and bought himself a fancy new bicycle with the dollars he'd held on to for 75 years.

If the old man, feeling flush, tossed in an extra ounce of the 'barbarous relic' for gas in 1938 his son could have bought about 350 gallons of gas for the ounce of gold. If the kiddo had held on to the gas money in the form of gold, he could have, in 2013, bought almost the exact amount, 360 gallons. But if the youngster had made the mistake of converting his ounce of gold into dollars, he could have, in 2013, bought a good bottle of Spanish wine with the Federal Reserve Notes he received in 1938 for his ounce of gold.

Money is a means of exchange, AND a store of value. The dollar is a great means of exchange but it's a pitiful store of value.

In essence, money is work. If someone wants to sell 1,000 kilos of wild salmon for $10,000 he might find a few buyers who, if they wanted to proceed, would ask about delivery. If the seller pointed toward the cold waters off the Alaskan coast and indicated that the fish were out there swimming around, he wouldn't have any buyers at any price. When someone pays for fish, they are not paying money for the fish, they are paying money for the work involved in finding them, catching them, and transporting them to market. Money is a means of exchange- the fisherman exchanges his work (the fish) for money and he uses the money to maintain the value of his work and later exchange it for the work of others. That is money for the working man.

The Sucker, the Conman and the Shill

Imagine the fisherman decides he needs a new boat and wants to finance the entire purchase price. He will go to his local bank and, if approved, will be given the funds to purchase the boat in exchange for signing a promissory note for the amount and terms of the loan.

When the fisherman signed the promissory note, he assumed that other fishermen, or their equivalents in productive society, worked, earned money, deposited that money in a bank to earn interest and that's the interest he was going to pay on his boat loan, plus the margin for the bank. The interest rate he was paying seemed reasonable, 7%. The guy who deposited the money needs a return, and so does the bank. In fact, it seemed cheap to him. He probably wouldn't continue fishing if the best he could do was make what the bank or the depositor made, say about half of his interest rate, 3.5%. For that, he would sell everything and buy a ten year bond that paid close to 3% and call it a day. But he's not a banker and he assumes they're making money some other way.

The banker is thrilled. He did take some deposits and put them in reserve (about 10% of the loan amount) and he will be paid interest (.25%) on that amount by the Fed. Then he created, out of thin air, the entire loan amount to give to the fisherman. The money he gave the fisherman never existed before the fisherman signed the promissory note. The banker is making more than 70% on the money he has left in reserve, for which is also earning interest. Worst case, if the fisherman goes belly up, the banker will sell the boat. He can't lose much.

The PhD Nobel Laureate, writing for a one of the world's great newspapers, never a word he speaks of this, for if he did, only for Zero Hedge would he write and not a penny would he see for his poetic prose. So instead he writes about Democrats and Republicans and higher taxes on the fisherman to pay for the bigger deficits he is so fond of. More deficits, more debt, he exclaims. Just print the stuff like it's going out of style and we'll all be living high on the hog.

The fact is, only the fisherman actually does something worthwhile for society, while the banker stuffs his pockets and the PhD stuffs his ego while filling the masses with fantasies.

So what does this have to do with gold going below $960? Everything.

The Script

To survive as a human being in the United States, as well as in most corners of this world, one needs money. Money to put a roof over one's head, money to buy food, money to heat one's house, money to put a shirt on one's back. The banker's script says that fiat money (dollars, yen, euros, etc.) is real money, the same as gold. Money is work, and gold stores the value of work. Fiat money is a claim on future work- it's not work itself.

What banks do is the equivalent of allowing people to become indentured servants, signing away their futures for a stack of instantly made Federal Reserve Notes, and they get their hooks in early. The average college graduate in 2012 had just over $20,000 in student loan debt on graduation day as well as additional credit card debt. The banker's ability to create money out of nothing and lend it to kids is a good example of how they have completely demolished any semblance of democracy in America. Who in their right mind would loan a kid $20,000 for a college education if the money they lent was earned through work? Would we pay billions to the NSA to spy on us, or trillions to fight imperial proxy wars all over the world if we had to pay for them with work (gold)?

Of course we wouldn't. If the money that was loaned to governments, businesses and individuals was real, much more critical thinking would be involved in its allocation and the cumulative votes of investors would render practical results, instead Twitter is valued at over $30 billion. But when the Fed is pumping trillions into markets, who is thinking about risk? If people actually decided on public policy through having to pay for those polices through work, the world would look much different than it does today. When money is created by the trillions out of nothing and simply laid as claim on the future work of the populace, then the only ones deciding on those policies are the money masters who control the printing presses.

If gold were used as the basis of our money, the only way to make more of it would be to dig it out of the ground and that takes work, something bankers and shills are quite averse too. To loan money they would first have to either work and earn it, or make a spread on what they paid in interest and what they earned on loans, becoming intermediaries. Neither variant is to their liking as they much prefer to print it out of thin air, loan it out and keep the interest. The now infamous 1% are dependent on this model of money creation and when their ponzi scheme collapsed in 2008, they turned on the presses overtime and made it all back and more in a few short years.

Gold is incredibly democratic in that there is no machine to print it. But there is paper gold, which the bankers have leveraged about a 100 times and with which they can drive the price of gold wherever they want with their fiat money. The script says that their money is real- the new and improved version of the outdated gold. Gold is the enemy of fiat money because its intrinsic scarcity and universally accepted value is a constant reminder of the banker's ponzi scheme.

In April of 2011 gold hit a record high of $1,923 an ounce. Come hell or high-water, the banksters want to announce in the corporate media they own, that once and for all the shiny stuff has been deemed a relic, nice for jewelry but wholly useless as money. To do this they will drive the price below $960 an ounce, halving its price in dollars in about three years. It doesn't take much to imagine the headlines, Is Gold a Worthless Investment? etc. But Dr. Krugman would say these are the fantasies of conspiratorial gold nuts. Really Dr. Krugman?

On April 11, 2013 gold closed at $1,562 an ounce. On April 12 someone sold 400 tons of gold, 300 of which was sold in just 30 minutes, driving the price of gold down below $1,500 an ounce, crashing through important technical levels and for many, marking the end to gold's bull run which began in 2000. How much is 400 tons of gold? It's about 15% of all the gold mined in 2011 or .25% of all the gold ever mined in the history of man, worth about $20 billion dollars at the time. This was obviously not done by someone who owned gold because there would be no reason to drive the price down so dramatically if someone wanted to exit a position. This was a naked short, done by someone with deep pockets to make a dramatic, headline catching move in the gold market. Not surprisingly, Dr. Krugman wasted no time chiming in and on April 15, 2013 he wrote of gold bugs, "Maybe, just maybe, the gold crash will finally bring intellectual capitulation. But I wouldn't bet on it."

That's very interesting coming from a Nobel prize winner who doesn't even understand the basics of money creation, as was clearly shown in his debate with economist Steve Keen.

Gold is much more than an investment, it's the backbone of liberty. Without it we will be led by the banksters and their shills down the merry way of slavery, plutocracy and totalitarianism.

It's in the script.
 

I will sell when it doubles the 960 mark -
 

There is only one reason why I feel gold and silver could have one last drop in price which would cause it to hit some of the ridiculous sounding numbers like the OP posted, and that is due to the fact that in the past there has always been a V bottom in place before the big rise in prices, and so far we have had more of a W, or rather several W's lined together. So if we are to follow old patterns, we could get than final V bottom, which would mean it could drop to a low number but would not STAY there for long.

The idea of waiting for that final bottom price before buying is talked about alot on forums like this and is a bit enticing, but I wonder how much will a person have available to spend when that magical day arrives (if it ever does). I know a wanna be PM bug (old timer at the gym) who keeps saying he is waiting for lower prices before buying silver. Maybe he will get that price someday, but how long will it stay there? I asked this guy how much he planned to buy when it hits whatever his low target is and he said "$10,000 or so". This guy has probably 100 or so ounces now, thus if price hits say a target of $16, then $10K will buy about 600 or so ounces not counting premiums. Now this is a guy who really believes the S will HTF and that the dollar is going to crash someday and PM's are the place to be.

I don't want to judge anyone's ability to stack, but this guy has lots of cash (to me anyway). If we really get a dollar crash or something else, and silver/gold go way up, I don't think a few hundred ounces will really make much difference, even if silver quadruples from here. And human psychology being what it is, I would bet this guy will be as hesitant to buy at 16 as he is now at 20, since many feel better buying high when price is rising vs. buying low when price is depressed.

The great thing about dollar cost averaging (assuming some day the price does go up) is that I am buying each month and NOT spending that same cash on crap today that I don't really need nor will bring me any gain in the future. The downside obviously is seeing the price decline over time and feel like I lost somehow. So there is no perfect plan I guess.

At least with dollar cost averaging I am putting away silver each month that will keep adding up, instead of hoping for that one great score someday. My PM bug friend might get a cheaper price than I paid, but unless he decides to really load up what good will it be?

Just my opinion.

Jim
 

i will keep digging it up!i have no faith in the markets. but i know i will always get a loaf of bread for my lil bit of gold.
 

There is only one reason why I feel gold and silver could have one last drop in price which would cause it to hit some of the ridiculous sounding numbers like the OP posted, and that is due to the fact that in the past there has always been a V bottom in place before the big rise in prices, and so far we have had more of a W, or rather several W's lined together. So if we are to follow old patterns, we could get than final V bottom, which would mean it could drop to a low number but would not STAY there for long.

The idea of waiting for that final bottom price before buying is talked about alot on forums like this and is a bit enticing, but I wonder how much will a person have available to spend when that magical day arrives (if it ever does). I know a wanna be PM bug (old timer at the gym) who keeps saying he is waiting for lower prices before buying silver. Maybe he will get that price someday, but how long will it stay there? I asked this guy how much he planned to buy when it hits whatever his low target is and he said "$10,000 or so". This guy has probably 100 or so ounces now, thus if price hits say a target of $16, then $10K will buy about 600 or so ounces not counting premiums. Now this is a guy who really believes the S will HTF and that the dollar is going to crash someday and PM's are the place to be.

I don't want to judge anyone's ability to stack, but this guy has lots of cash (to me anyway). If we really get a dollar crash or something else, and silver/gold go way up, I don't think a few hundred ounces will really make much difference, even if silver quadruples from here. And human psychology being what it is, I would bet this guy will be as hesitant to buy at 16 as he is now at 20, since many feel better buying high when price is rising vs. buying low when price is depressed.

The great thing about dollar cost averaging (assuming some day the price does go up) is that I am buying each month and NOT spending that same cash on crap today that I don't really need nor will bring me any gain in the future. The downside obviously is seeing the price decline over time and feel like I lost somehow. So there is no perfect plan I guess.

At least with dollar cost averaging I am putting away silver each month that will keep adding up, instead of hoping for that one great score someday. My PM bug friend might get a cheaper price than I paid, but unless he decides to really load up what good will it be?

Just my opinion.

Jim

Jim, I've watched a number of your threads. My friend, you speak reality!
 

Bloody heck I gave up reading that story, what a load of crap. Well guess what? We're off to a good start for the week with gold exceeding and closing above its 100-day moving average. End of the week $900 I don't think so, Maybe, should I say it? $1320 hell why not yea $1320 Lol Keep Stacking
 

Bloody heck I gave up reading that story, what a load of crap. Well guess what? We're off to a good start for the week with gold exceeding and closing above its 100-day moving average. End of the week $900 I don't think so, Maybe, should I say it? $1320 hell why not yea $1320 Lol Keep Stacking

Ahhhh... Remember, it's from Pravda!

It's good to see other world views here and there :)
 

Stacking is great, but I would also add that there might be an additional "play" that might allow one to obtain more fiat for stacking the metals. I am referring to the use of various ETF's, namely the leveraged ones. I am going to purchase (maybe soon?) one of the 3X inverse bear etf's, such as sdow or spxu. These are vehicles that are supposed to gain 3% for every 1% the Dow or S & P index loses, and vice versa should the market go up instead of dropping (meaning the shares would lose 3% for every 1% the dow or s & p go up).

These are not long term buy and hold investments like stock in a company. I believe there is some sort of "value decay" over time even if the market stays completely flat, and this happens with any of the leveraged ETF's from what I understand. I am no expert but I believe it is due to the way the underlying ETF assets are settled each day which leads to very slight "leakage" that could easily add up over time. But for short term gambles, they are great because you get the leveraged component, but are only limited to the amount you pay for your shares should be price fall (or go to zero), unlike futures where you theoretically have unlimited liability (until you close that position, should the market move against you).

If you think the market will keep going up, they have a leveraged play for that too that works the same as the above. They now have ETF's for basically any bet (up or down) on any of the major investment categories. I like the fact they do trade like stocks and thus will have low brokerage fees, etc.

I am only going to put in a small amount initially, but if the stock market were to fall like I think it will I can hopefully make some good gains along the way. I also plan to get silver ETF shares (AGQ) once silver breaks out past 27 or so. The reason is I don't want to be tempted to sell my metal if/when we start seeing 35 to 40, etc. If I can buy and sell the paper shares I will still be making extra $$$$ at a higher rate than the metals (due to the leveraged nature) and will have the metals stashed for long term holdings. I am NOT saying buy paper and not metals. But for me putting 10 to 15% of my silver "portfolio" into the ETF sounds about right to me once it is clear in my mind we are back in bull mode and heading to $40 and beyond. I don't plan to sell my metals for a long time but want to profit on any nice moves back up to $50, etc.

One thing about the leveraged ETF's is they split what I think is a lot. For example, let's say you have an ETF that has been losing (like a bullish silver ETF) over the past 2 years. Over time as the price per share falls too low, they will do a reverse split to get the share price back up to a higher number (you will have the same "value" in shares, but less in number). If the ETF you have is gaining, they often do a forward split when the price gets too high.

I have attached a chart of AGQ that shows how it has fallen due to silver's fall over the past few years. Compared to today's price, the "high" was over $700 back in April 2011. That wasn't the real share price then, but reflects what it would have been based on today's price taking into account all the past splits, etc. So if we got back to $50 per ounce silver, we should be close to that price level again in AGQ. That would be a 10 bagger or so if it happened from here with a current AGQ price of $67 or so per share.

ProShares Ultra Silver ETF Chart - Yahoo! Finance



All my opinion.

Jim
 

saw some guys on foxbusiness today, and sounds like gold has more dropping to do
 

Gold will drop till it bottoms some place around $600-650 in the next few years.

buy if it gets to $650.

the next high will be over $2000 but it will be a years away.
 

Gold will drop till it bottoms some place around $600-650 in the next few years.

buy if it gets to $650.

the next high will be over $2000 but it will be a years away.


Is this based on your analysis or did you read it some place? If it is your own theory, please tell us how you came to this conclusion.

Thanks!

Jim
 

Bloody heck I gave up reading that story, what a load of crap. Well guess what? We're off to a good start for the week with gold exceeding and closing above its 100-day moving average. End of the week $900 I don't think so, Maybe, should I say it? $1320 hell why not yea $1320 Lol Keep Stacking

LMAO Now was that a call or what LOL
 

LMAO Actually we went up to $1322.30 but it came back down but not to $900.00 Lol Keep Stacking
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top