Why isn't silver going up.

But it could be argued that it was manipulated up as well. It rose 270% in just a few months which would indicate that something other than the economy was driving the price. Lest we forget, just one year ago, Silver was running $16-$18/ounce, a band that it had been in for some time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You called Sprott "credible" and I just wanted to point out to you and others that on the day of the very top of the PM market when prices are about to collapse, there is a very good chance that Sprott and the other asset managers who derive their income from selling PM products will probably still be saying "Buy!" Whether or not you invest with him is irrelevant if you follow his advice or others like him. It reminds me of the old saying, "never ask the barber if you need a haircut."

 

The difference is that the manipulation downward was a sheer drop off the likes of which I cannot find anywhere else in recent history. Although I haven't come close to looking at every chart available either. The gradual (in comparison) nature of the uptrend indicates to me that it is more representative of sentiment, even if there may have also been manipulation going on. And certainly before the blow off top it was not nearly so gradual. The question that arises in my mind is, who was doing the manipulation upward? I can't find any information on that, and so the argument that it was manipulated upward is much more speculative (even though it does seem plausible) as compared to the easily obtainable info about who manipulated it downward and how. It seems most likely that the manipulation upward, if that was the case, was done to set the stage for scaring people away from silver as a safe haven.

 

And yet if the barber needs to have his own hair cut does that mean he is biased, or that he just has hair growing on his head like most everyone else? I do think you are right to question people in a position of potential bias (actually questioning everyone and everything against your own research would be even more ideal), but I also don't think that's a reason not to examine what they have to say. Not that you were saying as much, but I'm just not a fan of shooting the messenger instead of the message.

 

I probably read most of what Sprott publishes, but I would never call him credible. It's good practice to gather facts and opinions from both sides [and also being able to tell the difference between a fact and opinion]. So I never put much stock in something said by a person with something to sell. If, on the other hand, someone with a good long term track record says, "this is what I'm doing, and this is why" I tend to pay more attention, always keeping in mind that they might be lying to me about what they are doing.

 

Well it's a good thing I held unto my silver or else I'd be doing what Riker is doing in this funny pic.

 

There is a good chance "Sprott and other asset managers" will be saying "buy" when the market is at its peak. Are you saying Sprott knows or should know when the market price will "collapse" as you put it?

Also, as you have read much of what Sprott has to say, which "collapse" will he be watching? The manipulated price crash of silver from time to time on Comex? Or the crash of debased fiat currencies - like the Dollar itself? If someone tells you to buy silver at $60 and it crashes to $40 the following week, you might well get upset. But if your whole currency then collapsed a month later, you might reason if you bought silver, even at $60, that you should simply count your blessings. But you seem fairly particular about such things, so I guess not - which is fair enough.

 

I'm saying that someone who makes a living accumulating assets to invest in PMs for which he extracts a fee may not be the best one to listen to for buy recommendations. And if Sprott has no way to know when to sell, why would anyone listen to his recommendations to buy? Now, you can do what you want. I see you are among the currency collapse crowd. But I generally demand more credibility before believing what I read.

 

Weren't there a variety of different ratios (not just in the timespan that the US has been around, but even going further back to the Spanish Empire, the Roman Empire, and the Greek city states)?

 

Everyone has biases. It's the listener's responsibility to distinguish upon advice based upon opinion, where the only argument is the credibility of the party giving advice, and advice based on logic where it can be judged independently.

 

I see you also like throwing around loose accusations of the kind: "I am among the currency collapse crowd..." You imply all such people (in the crowd) who are concerned by that issue are hysterical, or is it maybe just me? The question is rhetorical, no need to answer.

"Why would someone listen to recommendations to buy, if he didn't know when to sell..." Because someone might still find out something useful, that's why! And he probably does have his own ideas about when to sell. And when the conditions change to match his ideas about when to do this, he might, just might, say so. And if he did and said he was changing his opinion to sell, someone might find out something useful then, (but could also choose to completely ignore the advice.) But what he cannot sensibly do is both recommend buying and selling at the same time. Obviously?

However, I fully understand your unease with broker recommendations. No need to repeat them.

Now you can do what you want....

 

When currency collaspses what are you going to do with your gold and silver?

 

I always do.

 

This is a simple but very good question. It is highly unlikely that anyone will be able to walk into a supermarket and buy food with 90% silver coins. It is more likely that such transactions will be illegal and rewards will be offered for anyone who reports the attempt to buy with PMs. The best use of gold and silver in a currency collapse is to preserve some wealth and carry it from this side of the collapse to the eventual return to normalcy on the other side. But the US isn't Zimbabwe or 18th century France. Central banks have many more tools now than then, so while continued currency debasement is a high probability event, a collapse is not.

 

This would require active participation from the states and local goverments because there simply are not enough federal agents to police such a thing. And then there is that pesky constitution. It's more likely, that in some states, there would be no enforcement of such a provison. In fact one state has made gold and silver coins legal tender and several others are considering it. When the currency collapses, the federal government's control over the state affairs disappears for the most part.

 

Well the only real example we had was the US banning private gold ownership, right? Why not learn from history instead of conjecture?

When the US banned gold ownership, they would physically call the cops if you presented gold. My uncle had the cops called on him when he tried to sell gold coins to a jewelry store, even though it was legal. Even some coin stores, though it was legal, would call the cops if you tried to sell gold coins. If the Federal government banned the use of gold and silver in economic transactions, people would adhere to that law. Most citizens, unfortunately, today are sheeple, and will do what they are told is "the law", and blindly follow it. Yes, technically the Fed is only allowed to regulate interstate commerce, but look at the laws they are passing today. The Constitution is an inconvenient road bump easily bypassed in Washington today.

Chris

 

He's a great marketer and he makes money from his "physical" funds. He can sell his funds and get into more sensible investments (like actual real physical silver and gold) and his followers will still buy the fund with his name on it.

 

I think that is a dream. While there might be pockets of dissent, for the most part there will be a total economic lockdown of the nation. But a currency collapse is so remote that debating the issue is pointless. I just believe the silver owners with a survivalist bent are preparing for a future that will never exist.

 

You are offering up conjecture based on an unproven personal anecdote. In comparison, Idaho has passed a state law making gold & silver legal tender. This didn't exist in the 1930s.

Learning from history is meaningless if you can't figure out how it applies to the modern world.

Edit: oh and yeah, prohibition failed because the states, for the most part, refused to support it.

 

You are entitled to your opinion, but I think it is also ludicrous to think there will be federal agents in a local grocery store that would stop you from spending a silver quarter.