silver confiscation??

Howdy folks,

Note that the author doesn't think they'll come knocking on your door, but . . .

It's still about the spookiest thing I've read in quite a while and I read some pretty amazing things. And I'm NOT saying that I believe it. What is important is that there are people that DO believe it and are reacting to it.

Take possession of your silver and stash it very carefully.


http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_08/nielson031111.html

peace,

rono

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Wow.

If the author really does want "the (ignorant) general public" "(i.e. the sheep)" to view silver investors as anything other than paranoid "rabid-ranters", um, he's Doing It Wrong.

 

Silver is not going to be confiscated by the government. I seriously doubt the government would even attempt another gold seizure.

 

Sigh.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again...

The situation in 1933 was unique. By law, the money supply was a function of the amount of gold available in the banking system. As example - every time a nervous citizen went to a bank, got a $20 gold piece and stuck it in his mattress, the government BY LAW had to remove $100 in FRNs from circulation. It doesn't require a PhD in economics to know that during a depression, the last thing you want to do is shrink the money supply.

By requiring (in a toothless, exhortative, no door-to-door searches kind of way) people to bring hoarded gold coins to the bank and get notes in exchange, the government was attempting to grow the money supply within the legal restrictions that existed.

Today, the money supply is no longer legally restrained by the number of double eagles in a vault some place. The government has a variety of modern economic tools available it can use to change the money supply. There is no realistic scenario in which the government will consider it necessary to compel citizens to give up their gold, much less their silver.

So unclench, everybody.

 

Then why did s/he promulgate such overt nonsense ?

Then why did you post this ? ...and why would you say something like this...

Get these fear-based propaganda artists out of town.

Interesting the author... whoever it is... uses phrases like "rabid-ranters" to refer to others, but s/he can't see it in himself (or herself).

That article borders on hate speech. They "got issues" in a big way.

 

It points out an interesting phenomenon... even really good things have some negative side effect.

For instance, consider cell phones. A really, really good thing. And yet, they have side effects, such as distracted driving. We accept the good while mitigating the bad; the net effect is we are way ahead.

Similarly, the Internet has ushered in The Information Age. Clearly, that's a huge positive. And yet, it has a significant negative side effect... The Mis-Information Age.

The Internet allows individuals unprecedented access to speak their minds and express their ideas. Many of the most passionate are not very well informed, but they speak with a bullhorn and convince others of absurdities.

It was inevitable. The Information Age had to be accompanied by The Mis-Information Age. The wonderful blessing of the Internet had to accompanied by a negative side effect. We accept the good while mitigating the bad. Overall, we're way ahead.

Individuals need to reject fear-based rants. We need to quit burying our heads in the most negative perspectives we can unearth. Authors like that "got issues". They need help. It just goes to show how extreme things get when people see only half the story, which is very common with us Homo Sapiens.

Hmmm. Homo Sapiens. "The One, The Wise". I'm beginning to wonder.

 

Well, I've had my morning laugh...

 

I think it is far more likely that the banks will simply be bailed out, as has happened in the past. This is much simpler and cleaner than actually trying to confiscate silver.

 

I have no way to know if the silver "thing" is really 100% true. However I have read about this last year. If you Google search - JP Morgan, Silver You get a LOT of hits for manipulation. I read a bunch about them selling on paper but no actual real metal if everyone pulled out their actual assets.

Nothing wrong with reading, reading, and reading. Eventually something will ring with the truth.

The other thing is that because the 'bail out benefactors' are the ones entwined with all the hoopla, I would not put anything past them.

 

Thank you!

 

I'm glad this forum isn't composed of gullible ignorant nut jobs.

 

People read and believe these things without ever considering the source. The author, Jeff Nielson, is a Canadian lawyer who claims to have also studied economics as an undergrad. He has no experience in any professional money management or economic forecasting position other than writing his own blog for fun and profit, as far as I can determine. A lof of what he wrote seems like a ripoff from Ted Butler rather than original research [and conveniently fails to attribute anything to Ted]. I'm not sure why anybody should take his opinions as actionable advice.

 

Note to board. This is a forum about investing in bullion and mostly gold and silver. In that vein, there are many articles that are posted by both kitco and gold-eagle. I've always wanted to see what the fringes were saying on the issues - both sides. It's always helped me to set parameters. If this story offended anyone, that was not my intention.

rono

 

No offense taken. I just wanted to provide a counterpoint to the "the gubmint wants your gold (or silver)" argument.

 

the total paranoia gets old, and if you're into it, try the forum called www.goldismoney2.com. lots of doom n gloom and watermelons on the white house lawn type of stuff.

 

It is important to soak in all possibilities. But I think it is also equally important to look at the bio and investment record of the author before reading the article so you know how much weight to give the opinion.

 

I think Texas John's response to the original post was a nice counterpoint and enough said. Most of the rest of this was along the lines of lecturing and dog piling. I think the contributions Rono has made to these forums is deserving a little more respect than he got in this thread.

Bluesboy65

 

I didn't mean to disrespect anyone personally. just tired of the end times stuff.

 

Agreed on all counts.

I would also add that nobody has attempted to refute specific information in the article, only its premise and the character of the writer. Yes the article is biased and is pretty much a rant in its own right, but that doesn't mean that his opinion of other ranters demonizing silver hoarders is incorrect (or correct, to be fair). As Rono said the author isn't worried about people coming to your door. What it does express concern over is confiscation of ETF's and safety deposit boxes, which doesn't really sound that far fetched to me in the event that paper money fails. Just because the same reasons it happened before don't apply doesn't mean that it can't happen again for different reasons. As with all speculation I take it with a grain of salt, and file it away as an unconfirmed possibility, but to ignore something altogether before assessing it isn't how you stay ahead of the game. To be perfectly honest, the more people who speak against something, the more likely I am to pay it mind. :]

 

These articles gain traction simply because the 1933 gold confiscation is almost completely misunderstood. There was no "confiscation". Despite reports, which never provide any quoted sources, gold was never forceably taken from anyone. What did happen is that financial transactions in gold coin and gold certificates were made impossible and people with modest means and assets, had to turn in their gold currency in order to maintain their savings, cash, etc. There was no reason there wasn't anything wrong about the FRNs they were replaced with because, at the time, they were freely redeemable for silver. Since a FRN could be exchanged for a silver dollar, people for the most part, people complied with the change.

These days, silver is not used at all for currency as the $ is 100% fiat. (not the case in the 1930s) So the government doesn't need or want PMs from people in order to increase spending. All they need to do is simply print more dollars which is exactly what they are doing.