Regarding the Future of the Bullion Section

I agree with tommybee. It is simply not possible to talk bullion without talking government and politics. One person had made a comment about even the mention of the Federal Reserve as being meaningless to a discussion of bullion. The actions of the Federal Reserve, as well as the FTC, SEC, executive orders of the President, and legislation out of Congress all have an impact on bullion...and that is only for the United States! What about actions of the Russian and South African governments? What about government interference in Australian mines and its affects on PM prices and availability. China scooping up PMs and base metals affects world markets and brings out much speculation on the matter.

(Granted I do not involve myself here in the bullion forums here much, but these are very real aspects that affect bullion production and prices, and users should not be blocked from discussing investment and speculation in a forum that lends itself by nature to such.)

Another problem that exists if the bullion forum become "regulated" here at CT is the fact that if there is only selective enforcement, then valid arguments and speculation on bullion can be muted because of one or more people's individual philosophy on the subject. Quite a way to create a forum of "yes" men.

And to silence all poli-economical speech is, as I alluded to, to silence all meaningful discussion regarding bullion, because politics are the main driving forces in bullion supply and price. Even in the U.S.A. one may not mine without a claim deed. Here in Wyoming, the government has restricted claim deeds to where there is about a two year wait, and only a handful of new claims will be issued in that period (2-3 a year).

This is politics! And it happens in every country. And it affects the production of PMs. So, as you can see, even the "insignificant" things about politics can have an affect on bullion that has meaningful discussion.

The bullion forums here are still in its infancy, and I personally believe that much discussion that *could* occur in the forum does not because of its political nature.

Just a little cud to chew on.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A Reasonable Approach!!

Your 2 previous presentations are logical "exceptions", which probably would have majority agreement. If you are a "purist", "Bullion" is a Numismatic ("money", and the study thereof) exchange medium, as I believe are clam shells , feathers, hides, arrow-heads, ammunition , medals, probably even casino tokens, etc.. It is believed inclusion of the aforementioned items would be digressing from the named forum title (i.e. COIN TALK), and thus a supporting argument for my choice "C" (an isolated site). I concur with your presentation, and suggest enlightened few would differ. Your manner/matter is eloquent/thoughtful/concise, as should be. I appreciate same, and suspect that virtually all would respectfully respond to comments as yours, presented without personal direction/vilification. We would enjoy more of the same without degradation, or violation of civil discourse ethics. Thanks for your views!! :high5:

 

Then I would say that the discussion should be about the impact of the resulting economic conditions on bullion and not about the politics. The impact on bullion prices is something you can react to and make money from. But discussing the politics of it has never made anybody a dime and inevitably gets off track and ends up with people parroting comments from political websites. It is simply not necessary to talk about government or politics to successfully invest in bullion. It is a distraction from the whole point of Bullion Investing -- to make money.

 

This is not highschool, no need for everyone to get worked up. There can be a level of tact without the need of emphasis on ones frustration. Everyone, including Moderators and Administrators need a reminder of that every once in a while, (Not trying to insult anyone or start an argument). My apologies everyone.

 

But you acted like a petty high-school type when you called Doug out.
You got worked up off of him saying damn.
Lets see how that looks, you are a new member who has called out Doug on saying damn, and you also told De Orc, another moderator, to take it easy.
The Mods and Admins do a great job, and IMO have never really crossed the line.

 

What is really amazing to me about this thread is that we were asked what to do about this section. I'd venture a guess that they have received complaints about the behaviour of some that post here. Then some, instead of coming up with something constructive or creative to solve the issues, offer up excuses as to why they can't follow the rules because of the topic. Sorry, you can, you choose not to. The topic does not have to be political, nor does it lend itself into attacking others ideas or opinions.

 

That's a good summary. I sure I'm on the "bad list" in some way. I've tried to offer the best information and analysis that I can as food for thought. But I realize that maybe this isn't the right place for some of it, so in the future I'll probably post a lot less and just spend more time reading posts of interest. The rules are pretty clear and should be followed. They have worked for many years and are well thought out.

 

I think we've all pushed the envelope at one time or another, or at least found it. That stated, I like most of the info exchanged on here, mostly from the posters that do not go off on emotionally charged tangents, that end up being incoherent rants. (You've not done that from my point of view, and your opinion is one that I have respect for)

 

I did say that, some people need to chill out, we're here to share ideas and exchange info, right? New member or not, just sit back and see some of the posts, people get crazy over nothing. Then there are monitors getting excited, thats not a way to deescalate a situation. Am I wrong? If you think I am, I will take no offense. Take care everyone

 

Please disreguard my comments then. I only said something because it appeared as if rules were not enforced evenly, but it appears I was wrong. Sorry about that.

 

Since I posted in this thread previous to becoming a moderator, I will comment as I would have if I wasn't. The "monitors" as you refer to the administrators and moderators should not even have to worry about deescalating anything, that should be the members. There are few rules presented to the members to follow to remain members. Peter who owns the board, is responsible for it. We are guests. If I say no smoking in my house, and a guest insists, out they go. My house, my rules. I suspect it would be the same for you. No one wants to have to resort to infractions or bans to have the members follow the rules, it should be self controlled by the members. All of us are guests here and should realize it. Sure sometimes in the heat of a passionate discussion, a moderator might feel the need to say cool it, and one should.

Jim

​

 

And that is why I voted to put these forum into a *hidden* mode (ie. opt-in)

This is exactly what I was referring to in my post. It will all come down to a group of people's philosophy on the matter that determines what line of political talk may occur.

History does not drive the speculator, trends and current events do. And speculators are the makers of the markets that lead investors one way or another. The current actions of government leaders affects bullion investment greatly.

What Bush did at the time, or Obama does now does in fact affect economic markets. You cannot just turn a blind eye to the fact because your own philosophies on the matter do not want to discuss our leaderships' abilities or inabilities and speculate on where that is leading a specific market...in this case, the bullion markets.

The printing of "money", the changing of interest rates, bail-outs, government sponsored loans, success or failure of other markets, executive actions, military actions...all of this affects prices and investment...not just in the bullion market...but in all markets.

And this is not historic information that affects these investments and speculations. It is the here and now current events that affect the markets. And these events are very highly politically motivated and driven.

As I type this, the poll shows near 60% of those voting wanting the situation either to stand as it is, or for the forum to be *hidden*. Only 30% want a "crack down" of the situation, and 10% want it moved altogether.

Now, if this same poll was taken on another forum (World & Ancient Coins, for example) I believe we would both be able to agree that the poll results would be steeply skewed toward a crack down.

My belief is that this would result because bullion *investing* is usually more highly speculative and driven primarily by political influences, and some people realize this. Coin investment is most certainly a more long term investment decision that is more driven by the peer market.

How often are classic American coppers going to be affected in price by a government decision to allow new mines to open, or the decision of a central bank to print more paper money, or to lower or raise interest rates, or by an influx of spooked investors from other markets?

Yet, these do affect bullion prices, supply, and demand. And, especially because a higher volume of cash is normally funneled through such endeavors, opinions for or against particular political influences rage in many involved with bullion speculation.

Government issued monies are more hobby-centric, while bullion speculation is more investment-centric. The more investment-centric one becomes, in my opinion, the more opinionated and political the individual becomes.

And I know there will be quite a bit that you will disagree with here (in fact, I would think something was wrong if you didn't), but this is a side of the issue that should be considered if the "future of the bullion section" is at stake here.

 

I might disagree with some of your statements, but you presented them in a way that allow for rational discussion, and there is one area that has concerned since the first of the thread ( and maybe some similar ones)

I agree with the above quote, but much of the problem hasn't been concerned with the here and now events, but past events, such as bailouts, taxes, etc. and who was in charge when they happened. No matter how much one likes, discussion of these people and their relations to the events that did affect bullion price, is in the past. It is history. It has happened, and although future reverse action could occur, the past can't be changed. The past action of politicians, bank CEOs, IMF, Treasury is history. Discussion of current events do play a part, and if presented factually are important for Bullion Investment discussion. Futuristic scenarios presented as facts to come can affect how one sees and invests in bullion, but it is substituting the BIG bullion investors into the roles played by the past banks, politicians, etc. Scare people and drive the price up. Anyone who depends on fear to move the market is not investing IMO.

I appreciate your posting.

Jim

 

I believe, succinct and proper. Well stated post and reply, of which, we probably need more. Kudos!! :thumb:

 

Persoanlly, I don't believe it is so hard to demarcate a political message. A statement of a previous political fact should be fine

ex: FDR banned gold ownership and that killed the double eagles

A statement of projected future political statement without an opinion for or against is fine

ex: If congress seriously audits the fed the price of gold will go through the roof

A statement about past political activity with an opinion for or against it: Should be disallowed
ex - Ending the Gold standard is pushing us to hyperinflation and was a terrible idea.

A statement about current or future political opinion should just not be allowed.

ex: We need a gold standard to save the nation


A statement recruiting others to a political opinion should be disallowed

ex: I vote for Ron Paul because he is for a gold standard...and you should vote for him as well.
or
ex Obama is an idiot for bailing out the banks and he is killing the value of our money

Both should be disallowed.

Any statement not directly related to coins should be disallowed

ex - Ronald Reagan IMO was a racist: or ex Jimmy Carter was a fool allowing Iran to push us around.

I just don't think it is really that hard to determine when a political point is a rules violation. Its pretty simple. If it is evangelizing, it is not appropriate for cointalk

 

Good thoughts Ruben! I remember the photo you posted from one of your political activist actions, so it isn't a surprise to me that you have thoughts on this. Cheers!

Jim