Silver – Keep It Simple!
Posted by Deviant Investor on March 11th, 2013
Nixon dropped the link between the dollar and gold in 1971. Thereafter, the money supply rapidly expanded, consumer price inflation went wild, and both silver and gold increased in price by over a factor of 20 in early 1980.
Volcker raised interest rates, killed both inflation and inflationary expectations, and changed the economic landscape to allow for a nearly 20 year bull market in stocks. Silver and gold dropped below their long-term up-trend. Why put money into silver from 1982 – 2000 when it was easy to make money in stocks?
The stock market crashed in early 2000, and the world changed after September 2001 (9-11). After that event, borrowing, spending, massive deficits, exploding national debt, war, and even bigger government became the norm. Stocks have gone nowhere, on average, for the last 13 years. Silver and gold, anticipating the massive increases in debt and money supply, woke from a two decade sleep and began a bull market that is likely to run for many more years.
The correlation is simple. More debt means higher prices for silver. Examine the following graph. Note that RSQ = 0.916 for smoothed (13 period moving average) monthly silver prices vs. National Debt – a close correlation.
You may not believe the bull market in silver will continue, but I suspect that nearly everyone believes that debt will continue to increase – or until the system resets in some future catastrophic event. I’m not suggesting that increasing debt forever is good or sensible or even possible, but I have seen no evidence that indicates Congress or any president is willing to balance the budget and initiate a sane spending policy.
If silver and gold prices correlate, on average, with the national debt and debt will increase until a crash/implosion/hyperinflation event restructures our economy, then you can bet on much higher silver and gold prices in the future.
Volatility will increase. Gold accelerated into a new high in 2011, and silver almost exceeded its 1980 high that same year. Both markets have been ugly, from a bull’s perspective, since then. Expect future parabolic rallies and vertical drops to become more intense in the next four years.
with Gold & Silver
by GE Christenson – aka Deviant Investor
Expect more frightening and silly statements from Goldman Sachs et al about gold going down to $1,200, while they prepare to book fantastic profits from the rally they will encourage, when the time is right for them. The names differ, the game is the same. It hasn’t changed in hundreds of years.
If you want stress, play the futures market in silver. If you want a long-term investment, buy silver at these low prices and wait for the powers-that-be to devalue the various Dollars, Euros, and Yen that we use. Silver and gold prices will be much higher four years from now, regardless of what you are told via the “party line” from the Goldmans of the world.
KEEP IT SIMPLE! Debt is increasing, money supply is increasing, silver and gold prices are increasing.
There is no political will to make any material change in the system until a crisis forces change upon all of us. After the crisis, would you rather own gold, silver, Goldman promises, paper dollars, or sovereign debt paper issued by an insolvent government? Read Ten Steps To Safety.
Buy silver at depressed prices (like now). Sell some, not all, after a big rally, such as in 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2011. Another big rally is coming. Read commentary from Jim Sinclair.
KISS: Keep Investing and Stacking Silver. Keep It Silver-Simple.
It is your choice. Silver or paper? Physical metal or computer-generated paper equivalents? Thousands of years of history where silver has functioned as a store of value and as valuable money or decades of broken economic promises? Keep Investing and Stacking Silver!
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:33 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
An Elegant and Simple Explanation of Why Increasing the Minimum Wage Actually Hurts the Poor (Video)
Removing the bottom rungs of the economic ladder by raising the minimum wage only helps a very narrow band of wage workers and even then by a very small amount. Overall, for the unskilled, an increase in the minimum wage over the market indicated wage is destructive and leads to greater unemployment.
View full post on AgainstCronyCapitalism.org
By Daniel J. Mitchell
Now that new numbers have been released by the Congressional Budget Office, it’s time once again for me to show how easy it is to balance the budget with modest spending restraint (though please remember our goal should be smaller government, not fiscal balance).
- I first did this back in September 2010, and showed that we could balance the budget in 10 years if federal spending was limited so it grew by 2 percent annually.
- I repeated the exercise in January 2011 after new CBO numbers were released, and re-confirmed that a spending cap of 2 percent would eliminate red ink in just 10 years.
- In August of that year, following the release of the CBO Update, I showed again that the budget could be balanced by limiting spending so it climbed by 2 percent per year.
- Most recently, back in January after CBO produced the new Economic and Budget Outlook, I crunched the numbers again and showed how a spending cap of 2 percent would balance the budget.
I’m happy to say that the new numbers finally give me some different results. We can now balance the budget if spending grows 2.5 percent annually.
In other words, spending can grow faster than inflation and the budget can be balanced with no tax hikes.
And here’s the video I narrated almost two years ago on this topic. The numbers have changed a bit, but the analysis is exactly the same.
In other words, ignore the politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and special interests when they say we have to raises taxes because otherwise the budget would have to be cut by trillions of dollars. They’re either stupid or lying (mostly the latter, deliberately using the dishonest version of Washington budget math).
Modest fiscal restraint is all that we need, though it would be preferable to make genuine cuts in the burden of government spending.
View full post on Cato @ Liberty
It’s Simple – Think Like A Criminal
When you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed. Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged" (Francisco D’Anconia money speech)
A good friend and colleague asked me my thoughts on the recent blogosphere posting over the weekend about the disclosure in JPM’s 10-Q of pending litigation related to mortgage originations at JPM, Bear Stearn and Wash Mutual totalling $120 billion.
The original source article which discusses this litigation is HERE
Let me be clear about one thing before I express my view on how this will turn out. I am 100% convinced that the housing bubble was precipitated and perpetrated by complete fraud, corruption, racketeering and felony activity. I think the people who were running the big banks involved like Countrywide, Washington Mutual, Bear Stearns, Merrill, Lehman, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and JP Morgan should be properly and rightfully investigated and prosecuted in criminal jurisdictional venues that are free from political influence and cronyism. Given that the Government, especially the Obama Justice Department, not only refuses to investigate and prosecute the big banks – thereby enabling the massive fraud and corruption to continue – we know this will never happen.
Many people over the past few years have asked me how I’ve been able to discern and predict the massive dislocations and events of collapse that have occurred and are unfolding. It’s really quite simple. You just have to understand that our system has been taken over by, and is being run by criminals. So you just have to think like a criminal. Once you free your thought process from any assumptions that people in power are "good" and our leaders are working for the people who voted them in office, then you can think objectively and thoughtfully about what is happening in the Untited States.
I read through the litigation disclosure in the footnotes to JPM’s latest 10-Q. Here’s the LINK
If you read carefully and between the lines in the sections preceding the part about the potential $120 billion face value liability, you’ll see that much of JPM’s recent mortgage-related litigation has ended in settlements or is being litigated with many plaintiff claims being denied or substantially reduced in scope. Part of the problem in litigating plaintiff claims of fraud is the law and legal precedence gives the courts a lot of leeway for interpretation in how legal theory and precedence is applied. For instance, if you read through the footnote that starts on pg 158 of the 10-Q, you’ll see that plaintiffs named JP Morgan as a defendent on claims related to Bear Stearn and Wash Mutual on the theory that JPM was the successor to Wash Mutual. Claim denied.
Quite frankly knowing what I know about the legal process, especially at the District court level, plus hearing plenty of war stories from a good friend who is a trial attorney in Denver, most District court judges are the by-product of heavy political and economic influence. Why? Because in many States like Colorado, County court judges are appointed by the Mayor and District court judges are appointed by the Governor. In other words, the process of judicial appointment has been completely politicized. If you don’t think that politicians’ decisions about judicial appointments are influenced by economics, then you are miserably failing the requirement of thinking like a criminal in order to understand what is happening in this country. If you think like a criminal, you’ll understand that in our current legal system judicial decisions at the District court level are heavily prejudiced in favor of the party with bigger economic influence.
Circling back to the $120 billion disclosure in JPM’s 10-Q, understand that this is a number that JPM’s auditor required JPM to disclose on the premise that there might be a 2% chance that JPM would ultimately be subjected to a claim this big. But also, per the previous comments, understand that the likelihood of ultimately seeing some kind of actual settlement of even 10% of this amount is quite low. Why? Again, think like a criminal. Does anyone really believe that a District court judge is going deny the many motions of objection or dismissal that JPM will inevitably file using tenuous legal arguments and barely relevant appellate court citations in order to object to most of the claims?
To be sure, ultimately there will likely be some kind of settlement. But it will be at a small fraction of the $120 billion total prima facie claim and it will ultimately be predicated on the ability of JPM’s counsel, Sullivan and Cromwell and Greenberg Taurig to beat down the plaintiffs with litigation chicanery. Greenberg Taurig specializes in buying politicians and influencing the Government. I’ll take Greenberg’s ability to maneuver the courts and defend JP Morgan over any plaintiff attorney in the country.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Tue May 15, 2012 10:21 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
Today we have released the fourth lecture in our Exploring Liberty series. Richard Epstein, the author of Simple Rules for a Complex World, gives a quick outline of the six conditions that he says provide the groundwork for the emergence of a civilized society: individual autonomy, first possession/private property, contracts, tort, taxation, and eminent domain. This lecture is a great primer on how legal orders have emerged to form the complex and intricate web of relationships we know today as modern civilization.
View full post on Libertarianism.org
Watching savings account balances drop could be a discouraging experience. Taking just a few extra minutes every few days, though, can help you save a substantial amount of money. Article resource: 4 easy ways to increase how much you save
1 – Automatically save
Rather than having a direct deposit into your bank account, direct deposit into your savings account. Then, every month, transfer the cash you have budgeted into your checking account. When you go over budget, it is a lot more work to transfer the cash into your checking account, which may change your mind.
2 – Set up regular contributions
Make sure you have regular contributions going to your retirement or savings accounts. You are able to treat it as if that cash never got to your bank account and budget without it. These transfers can be done instantly and electronically if you set it up.
3 – Spending with cash
Use cash rather than a card. Debit and charge cards are there specifically to give you disconnect with money. With money in your hands, you will see exactly how the cash is leaving you. You will be able to make real-time decisions. Only pull out enough spending money for the budget that month at the ATM or bank.
4 – Adding up with a change jar
Start saving cash with a change jar. You would be amazed how much cash you can save by all those pennies. You can deposit it into your bank account for free at most banks that have a change counter. If your bank does not have access to that sort of change counter, a CoinStar or other machine will take a fee to count your change.
Statistics: Posted by hellenaH — Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:39 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com