why is gold and silver going down right now?

The article you reference doesn't mention the word "naked" or imply naked ( shorting without the proper position) shorting, but instead refers to "false " comments as to the company mentioned by an alleged website. Of course that is Fraud ( if true) and the defendants who evidently held a true short position, will be liable under SEC regulations if convicted. This occurs many times a year to various companies. That is a good reason not to base ones financial decision on other than their personal research, including this one.

I would not say it doesn't occur, but I disagree it is widespread and rampant. I would appreciate where this viewpoint is based, other than hearsay. Not being contrary, just that financial actions should be based on solid facts when possible.

jim

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There are other articles out there that do say naked. Anybody can punch it into a search engine to verify. My viewpoint is based on the evidence provided by Andrew Maguire. I have done my due diligence. It's up to others to do the same.

 

Yes, I am aware of Maguire. And to refresh myself, I did as you mentioned and searched to see if any updates had occurred since the original allegations, and there are none. Many people do not think that true shorting is a normal allowable market position, and is more often profitable compared to being long. These people see "manipulation" and "suppression" by the Fed., "Banksters", and "Men in Black gov. agents". Yes, GS did acquire Bear Stern's short gold positions during the failure of B.S. Since it was shorts, it had to be traded as such, sold for what they could reclaim. Manipulation, yes, in the sense bullion market makers are twisting market fears, and I suspect Maguire got caught on the wrong side of the trades, and tried to convince agencies and whoever would listen that it was legally wrong. It has been years since this was raised and his "evidence" is still alleged , and no action has been taken and probably never will.

You are correct, everyone should search the story out, but as bad as Wikipedia can be, the bullion sites are more ridiculous on this story. Sometimes I am long on PM, and some times I see much better deals elsewhere and sell it. Due diligence is a constant action, and not to be done once and taken as truth forward. IMO.

 

Great post Jim. To me it reinforces the caution of reading sites written by basically one person. How do you know what his motives are? Is he really a champion of truth, a PO'ed investors wanting people to "pay" for what happened to him, a doomsday hard asset guy, or something in between? After the dot-com implosion there were tons of people writing blogs on how people need to go to jail because the "manipulation", and people are doing the same with housing today. Most of those I read are basically ticked off investors who made horrible decision, and now want someone else to pay for their errors.

Before the internet maybe you could trust half of what you read, since most media still had some semblance of editorial control. On the internet, there is no control and most of what you read is written at a severe slant. If you read something on the internet, please make sure you can independently understand and confirm it, (and not by going to a similar site). Not being able to confirm something by independent source does not always mean there is a conspiracy and the truth is being suppressed, sometimes it means the first source is a conspiracy nut with an axe to grind.

Not directed at you Inflexion, as usual, just friendly advice to anyone reading stuff on the internet.

Chris

 

I don't believe most people want to confirm what they read. The beauty of the stuff posted on the internet is that someone can read a half dozen blogs about the Fed and speak "authoritatively" about how they manipulate markets, steal wealth from the people, destroy the currency, etc... It would be far more difficlt for them to gain a real education about money and banking, and that wouldn't be nearly as much fun as posing as an expert with more knowledge than the Chairman of the Fed.

 

I try to remember that the price of any stock, commodity, bond, etc., is going to be where 1/2 of the investors trading think it just got too risky to keep and where the other 1/2 of the investors think it is not.

Yes, naked shorts ( selling shares they don't own or intend to acquire) and fake longs ( worthless counterfeit shares) are bad for the market, that is why they are illegal in the US and most international markets Naked shorts and counterfeit shares can only function through legitimate brokers or marketmakers acting illegitimately. It has been much better since 2008 , as before that certain markets ( especially German and other European markets allowed naked shorting). Counterfeit shares were usually by small cap ( Lower OTC stocks) whose main purpose was to pump and dump more shares than they claimed they had. IMO.

Jim

 

Maguire did not just make allegations. He sent e-mails to the CFTC that predicted price movements exactly before they actually happened because he had inside information from a contact at JP Morgan. This is evidence that anyone may examine and is in fact evidence regardless of the CFTC's inability to perform their regulatory duties. The timestamped e-mails and the subsequent price moves are publicly available information at this point. This is a crystal clear indication that is what it is regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit.

 

I am just asking, how is it that you know more that the regulators, and know for a fact that they are truly unable to perform their duties versus performing their duties and there is no law being broken. There is usually a lot more to these things, and its usually less dramatic than a grand conspiracy theory involving hundreds of people. I find such thing can be done involving 2-3 people tops. After that way too many people have their own motives to not keep such things secret.

That's just me though.

Btw, you ever wonder about this inside contact and the illegality of that? Regardless of whether JPM movement was illegal or not, (it may have just been a market stratgy), passing on insider information is a felony.

 

where does it say 1960's in you past post?

 

I can answer this pretty easily.
If you want silver/gold to go up stop buying physical silver and buy stock in it.
Just because tons of people buy physical silver doesn't mean the price is going up.
Lets be honest, if the same amount of people who bought physical silver actually bought shares in it instead the price would be a lot higher, not insanely high because you'd also have people selling to offset.
I could buy stock in silver but I prefer not too.
Because I, just as many others, like to posses my silver. Most of the people trading it are doing so to make money as they would with any stock.
I find these prices to be 'low' and am using it as an opportunity to stock up.

 

You didn't get the context. My response was in reference to the claim that a gold standard would hamper these things from happening. i.e. If a gold standard was in place, you couldn't have economic expansion. Obviously this is completely untrue since they all the things you thoughtfully list occurred during the time when a gold standard was in effect. Hence you provide further evidence that conversion from fiat to back to a PM standard would not hamper the economy.

 

Hmm. They found gold in Charlotte in the 1700s. What year is your coin?

 

Ahh, you are using someone else's opinion to argue for you. I listed an act of law. Get back to me with figures that came from official governmental sources.

 

Yet, we have MF Global and the complete lack of any prosecution, arrests or anything 1/2 year after the events occured. I will say that on the other side of the coin that when laws that regulate the finance industry are not being followed, enforced, and punishment dealt out, that confidence is slowly destroyed. People leave these markets never to return. This is clear enough from people the extremely low volumes on the stock exchange, and the wild swings that are occuring on the comex. You described how it works almost perfectly (though you did contradict yourself) but what amazes me is that you don't seem to recognize what is wrong with the picture that you described. No matter. We both basically say the same thing. i.e. Silver & Gold price is currently only decided by banksters playing in the paper generated markets. Same for equities.

 

What does it mean when a computer trades the stock 175,000 times in a single day? Certainly it's got nothing to do with risk.

One example from last week:

" Pursuant to Rule 11890(b) NASDAQ and NASDAQ BX, on its own motion, has determined to cancel all trades in security Century Aluminum Company (CENX) at or below $11.61 that were executed in NASDAQ and NASDAQ BX between 12:06:00 and 12:07:00 ET. This decision cannot be appealed. MarketWatch has coordinated this decision with other UTP Exchanges. NASDAQ will be canceling trades on the participant’s behalf."​

Legitimate traders have no chance in this kind of mess.

 

It requires the reader to actually think. (though not too hard)

 

​

Obviously, no one's computer gained sentience and decide to trade on its own. It was programmed to buy or sell under certain conditions by a human. Just because it does so rapidly, doesn't change my original point on the price/risk. If you put an incorrect assumption into the trading program, you just lose faster. If you are certain the stock or commodity "has" to increase and has a low risk ( as many PM traders seem to think),and program a computer accordingly, you just lose your money faster.

If you are an average trader, you make a single correct trade on a certain day, you will make more profit than someone's computer who makes 175,000 incorrect trades the same day.

 

Hit the nail on the head!!

 

Exactly the same thing can be said about going to Las Vegas and heading to the roulette tables. All it takes is one correct bet and you win the house. Hardly a reason however to make such a move. The romantic notion that you paint of the stock market being a place where you go and buy or sell based on price vs risk doesn't exist simply because there is no way to judge risk now.

I will give you this. Gold and silver have been going down because the Federal Reserve, along with the other banks want it down, and stocks are going up because the enormous amount of money being created can be put there without causing much real price inflation. You will see this model maintained until after the election. So based on this alone put your money in stocks and have a plan to get them out by mid October. Of course, with this kind of system, anything can happen at any time to knock it off course. I'm reminded of that now infamous line from 2008 "...the fundamentals of our economy are strong...".

 

OT Political Comments not allowed! i wouldn't get my hopes' up.