7 Big News for Silver & Gold Soaring High

Discussion in 'Bullion Investing' started by SilverTard, Sep 14, 2012.

  1. SilverTard

    SilverTard New Member

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. CoinTopia

    CoinTopia New Member

    I had no idea Eric Sprott was short so many ounces of silver.


     
  4. coleguy

    coleguy Coin Collector

    I always hear a lot of people say world fuel prices effect the price of bullion, and all commodities, for that matter, yet fuel prices are lower now than they were five years ago, yet commodities are, for the most part, priced nearly 100% higher than five years ago. I think most of these predictions are nonsense, based on nothing at all.
    Guy
     
  5. lubelizard

    lubelizard New Member

    Whuwhat? Fuel (gas and diesel) were on average 80 cents per gallon LOWER five years ago this month.
     
  6. Witty38

    Witty38 Member

    That was written on July 13, 2012. It is now two months later. And, anyway, I don't believe everything I see in writing on the internet, do you?
     
  7. SilverTard

    SilverTard New Member

    Insider: Silver to Trade above $50 before December 2012

    Benton claims that the Oct 31st 2011 take-down of MF Global was SPECIFICALLY designed to prevent the group of former JPM traders with a chip on their shoulders against their old boss Blythe Masters from taking delivery of a massive amount of physical silver and breaking JP Morgan’s massive naked short silver position.

    Benton also claims that JP Morgan’s $36 silver derivative time-bomb is still in effect, and states that the ex-JPM traders have re-grouped, and that silver WILL trade above $50 before Dec 31, 2012.

    http://www.silverdoctors.com/wynter...cts-silver-will-trade-above-50-by-dec-31-2012
     
  8. yakpoo

    yakpoo Member

    If silver goes over $50/Oz...Sell, Sell, Sell. :thumb:

    Why? ...because it just isn't worth that much (in an efficient market).
     
  9. I think there are many people holding silver right now who will sell if it hits $40, which will likely slow down any further increase. TC
     
  10. Witty38

    Witty38 Member

    Ok, self proclaimed PM guru, who says that a one ounce silver round ain't worth 50+ mass produced paper dollars? :rollling:
     
  11. yakpoo

    yakpoo Member

    Who said 50+ mass produced paper dollars were worth more than their ability to wipe oneself?
     
  12. fatima

    fatima Junior Member

    Dear Heart, a market that is become increasingly controlled by government and the Federal Reserve (run by a handful of unelected bankers) is not efficient. In fact it is notoriously bad at picking winners and losers and very good at wrecking destruction on the economy.

    For example it costs $90,000 to produce a Chevrolet Volt yet somone can drive one for 2 years for ~$6000. Something is very rotten there. And this is just a minor example yet a very obvious one that would not occur if the market was efficient.

    Lest we all forget, the reason for buying PM is to hedge against this nonsense.
     
  13. yakpoo

    yakpoo Member

    I agree...efficient markets are fundamental. That includes a tax code that doesn't permit manipulations in the name of social or economic engineering.
     
  14. thedabbler

    thedabbler Member

    You realize this happens every time PSLV has an offering?

    During the time between PSLV accepting money for the new shares and PSLV getting delivery of the silver, it is short (come to think of it, your comment is ambiguous: PSLV / Sprott is not shorting silver. Instead, their inventories are low [short] the amount of silver they haven't received yet.)
     
  15. statequarterguy

    statequarterguy Love Pucks

    Regular hit almost $5/gal before the end of 2008 because quadrupaled profits weren't enough for the oil companies, so they got their final payoff from Bush before he was out.
     
  16. statequarterguy

    statequarterguy Love Pucks

    The market never has been and never will be "efficient", "free", or any of the other euphemisms used to describe a "perfect" market and not because of government intervention. Government intervention is meant to correct the market, so it works for as many as possible. The market will never be "efficient" as long as the thieves on Wall St. are allowed free reign to take advantage of the majority of us. That's the reason I invest a small percentage in physical PM's (and a few other things) - just in case these thieves' influence/control over our/my/The People's government continues.
     
  17. coinsider007

    coinsider007 gold digger

    say goodbye to price of gold below $1.999.99 an ounce after 2012. the gold will be trading above $2,000.00 for the whole year of 2013. why? the real inflated price of gold should be around $2,500.00 an ounce by 2013. inflation among many nations, more money printing by some key nations including u.s.a., europe financial uncertainty, middle east tension, far east tension, higher oil prices, many goods increases. people are hungry and no jobs, u.s dollars purchasing power decreases and many other more. silver should follow gold go higher and much higher. think about it.
     
  18. fatima

    fatima Junior Member

    LOL

    Government uses it's inherent threat of violence to transfer wealth from one segment of society to another. Government does this to create dependence and expand control. From the perspective of the market, there is nothing efficient about this. Markets can tolerate a small amount of this interference in normal operations but when it reaches the level it has now, normal market operations collapse and find that they themselves require massive interventions from the government (via wealth transfer) just to maintain the resemblance of normalcy. (good enough for the state)

    This is why gold & silver are rising. The end result of the above isn't pretty.
     
  19. statequarterguy

    statequarterguy Love Pucks

    Let’s not use the word, efficient, as there’s nothing efficient about allowing wealth to concentrate in a few hands, if we’re a democracy. The transfer you speak of goes both ways. As history and recent history has shown the transfer of wealth to the already wealthy destroys the middleclass. On the other hand, the transfer of wealth to the poor created the middleclass. Now, I know some like to call it a transfer of wealth, but since capitalism is based on greed, I like to call it forcing them to share the wealth. Although capitalism is the best system for an individual to prosper, over time, left unregulated, it concentrates wealth in fewer and fewer hands, until you have what we had at the turn of the 20th century and where we’re headed today, a few wealthy families and everyone else was dirt poor and treated like slaves. History has also shown that since we’re technically still a democracy, despite efforts by the wealthy to control the government, THE PEOPLE will rise up and take control of the government, hopefully by electing those who will look after the interest of THE PEOPLE rather than the alternative history has shown. I’m all for a system that allows those willing to work to prosper. Unregulated “efficient” capitalism allows only a few to prosper.
     
  20. jjack

    jjack Captain Obvious

    When it comes PM correlation to fuel prices you need to look mine's operating costs yes fuel does play a role in that but its relative to location where mine is located in whether it is Australia, South Africa or Latin America, so just because oil has dropped relative to dollar doesn't mean fuel prices have gone down (for example neuvo sol has weakened a great deal compared to dollar).
     
  21. SilverTard

    SilverTard New Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page