Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (169472)	3/14/2021 1:06:40 AM
From: sense	Respond to of 217749

Gold and silver have a bright future... exactly as they've had since I started believing in them... which was when gold was first liberated by Nixon and stunned people as it spiked to $80. I was just a kid back then... and my Dad laughed at me when I said "buy gold" even as it hit $56... only turning sullen when it soon hit $800... but von Mises made more sense to me as a kid than the obviously fraudulent theory of money that had been being used... which even if it is not intrinsically fraudulent... intrinsically enables fraud. Liberating gold by legalizing its private ownership seemed no brainer pick to me. Enough of that fraud in money existed already... but it became much worse after 1980... a date worth noting... mentioned in the link below as a reference point... The question, though, in re-monetizing gold, is one of timing the events in the necessary recognition steps that will revalue gold, again, only incrementally... but otherwise with almost exactly the same impact as occurred back then... only more so now... Obvious now, if not then, that "legalizing" ownership back then didn't end the price suppression... but only privatized it... and thus expanded it. The Basel III can has been kicked down the road multiple times already... and, its once again re-scheduled implementation is again causing grinding noises now... seen most notably as the U.S., which is already, in theory, fully Basel III compliant... has the COMEX unable to deliver gold to meet the physical demand... but COMEX has instead legitimized a new fraud in which they enable "delivery in London"... only what that means instead of physical delivery is that they instead "deliver" unallocated gold in London. That sounds good... but its an exercise in "opposite-speak"... as in London "allocated gold" is that which is "good for delivery" with a 1 : 1 contract to physical ratio... and the claimed "unallocated" gold is not unallocated, but is instead multiply-allocated... ie, "paper"... Here's an update on Basel III... that fails to mention that obvious risk in the timing issues, exposed in the COMEX problems being a proof that the Basel III implementation isn't going all that well... But seeing that clearly does suggest new risk of revisions in some expectations in timing... given it highlights that London is not yet compliant, and isn't scheduled to be compliant until January 2022... So what we see happening... is banks transferring the trade that can't settle at current prices from "Basel III compliant" U.S. accounts to London... while pretending that solves the problem rather than avoid it... Can the U.S. trade convert from what we see now... to every trade being backed by physical at 85%... and make that work in June ? Note that Basel III isn't a solution to market manipulation of gold and silver... and doesn't pretend to be... rather than being an inducement to double down on the fraud,. working it harder until all the metal there is can be wrung out of the market by using the fraud in price suppression while enabling accumulation... which is now the transparent goal being enabled by the fraud ? And, yet... as accumulation proceeds, we don't see the frauds being unwound, and the paper:physical ratio in the trade isn't changing ? Gold is still 100:1 paper to metal... Silver more like 188:1 or more ? Ignore the "settlements" on the COMEX... focus on the physical deliveries occurring... and ask: how long at the pace of physical deliveries now... before the problem in bank capital can be resolved by accumulation ?One problem is in not knowing how big the deficits in the banks are... but the ratio of paper in the trade is not independent of the problem ? Maybe the paper short trade will just stop on June 21st ? And all the metal that's allocated for SLV... or at least 85% of it... will be there... right ? What sense does it make, in that context... that they'd deliberately starve the mining sector of capital over the last decade... to prevent mining generating sufficient new supply to meet that need in demand ? Games being played... that appear they don't make sense ? Particularly in silver... Seeing the systemic "threat" posed by the cryptos... in context of the BIS being unable to get the banks back into a non-fraudulent relationship relative to its precious metals derivatives... a decade and a half after the bank frauds were exposed in the mortgage market, back in 2008 ? Noting that the fraud in banking is both flagrant and ongoing... as a function of the money being fraudulent... and "fix it" by coming clean is not exactly what the plan is... ?