http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/TOTRESNS.txt 2008-01-01 44.891 2008-02-01 43.823 2008-03-01 43.774 2008-04-01 45.035 2008-05-01 46.874 2008-06-01 45.809 2008-07-01 45.977 2008-08-01 45.791 2008-09-01 102.893 2008-10-01 314.799 2008-11-01 609.135 2008-12-01 820.876 2009-01-01 860.235 2009-02-01 700.960 2009-03-01 778.129 2009-04-01 881.737 2009-05-01 902.806 2009-06-01 809.734 2009-07-01 796.542 2009-08-01 828.743 2009-09-01 922.595 2009-10-01 1056.716 2009-11-01 1141.597 2009-12-01 1140.450 2010-01-01 1112.375 2010-02-01 1225.481 2010-03-01 1184.492 2010-04-01 1117.447 2010-05-01 1111.335 2010-06-01 1099.205 2010-07-01 1087.751 2010-08-01 1085.053 2010-09-01 1047.863 2010-10-01 1039.671 2010-11-01 1038.635 2010-12-01 1078.001 2011-01-01 1110.349 2011-02-01 1263.701 2011-03-01 1434.881 2011-04-01 1527.988 2011-05-01 1589.809 2011-06-01 1665.828 2011-07-01 1696.559 2011-08-01 1666.555 2011-09-01 1643.454 2011-10-01 1638.918 2011-11-01 1592.413 2011-12-01 1598.716 2012-01-01 1619.192 2012-02-01 1659.924 2012-03-01 1606.345 2012-04-01 1586.705 2012-05-01 1558.506 2012-06-01 1555.380 2012-07-01 1583.770 2012-08-01 1582.193 2012-09-01 1517.507 2012-10-01 1525.583 2012-11-01 1546.110 2012-12-01 1570.383 2013-01-01 1636.934 2013-02-01 1733.393 2013-03-01 1811.300 2013-04-01 1884.689 2013-05-01 1981.983 2013-06-01 2062.906 2013-07-01 2147.706 2013-08-01 2252.631 2013-09-01 2333.852 2013-10-01 2427.797 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TOTRESNS It has been stable in the period may 2011 till december 2012. 2008 added 815B 2009 added 252B 2010 removed 2B 2011 added 509B 2012 added 17B 2013 added 790B so far At current 2013 increasing rate, 2013's QE will match 2008's peak and likely even exceed it. How does this fit in all the talk about QE tapering? The QE action, is exactly the opposite of the QE talk. This total amount reserves determines the amount new billions that US state receives from the Fed, at a same interest rate. So the inflationary part of it is the interest rate part alone, not the total on the balance. A higher balance allows the Fed to 'donate' more dollars without increasing interest rates, as to not give for ex bank depositors also more dollars.
It is not a smart thing to do to use Q.E. as a guide for future gold price. With all this Q.E. gold price is still falling......there is no fixed relationship....at all.
Gold price is a largely a function of which amounts central banks buy/sell but this aside. The interest rate part of QE is the new fiatcurrency that gets into circulation. More fiatcurrency without more produced value leads to higher prices. People that swap their fiatcurrency to certain products alike gold and silver and whatever are seeking compensation, better than a bank accounts interest, for these higher prices. So this alone already draws a relation. Of course, it's not a fixed one, and certainly not on the short term, but if you average out decades, you see a high correlation. For alot, existing/unchanged, products, alike commodities. A correlation doesn't have to be a parallel in order to be named as such. Periods of divergence, whether days, weeks, months or years, do happen, simply because it's hard to find out what the result will be of all peoples actions together, and thus people make errors, and others take advantage of this, causing the price fluctuations superimposed over the decades average trend. So generally, the amount created and spent fiatcurrency, does serve as a rude measurement for an estimation of price inflation danger. And you know all this as well as me. The goal isn't a fixed relationship, the goal is to have a general idea of what price may be fine to pay, for the next years/decade/your time horizon, to come. I used it when I started stacking silver early 2011. It prevented me to buy above $32. If I had been aware of the Excess Reserves existence, and the real meaning of QE (interest rate part matters, not the balance total) I would have set a much lower $limit. The new circulating money is about 2008's amount + 40%. 2008's silver price average was $15. $15+40%=$21. 2013's average so far is $24 and will likely drop some more with 5 weeks to go. It isn't far off, isn't it? Can be applied to 2008's bottom price of $9 too, $9+40%=a chance on $13. Not that I'll wait till there, I decided a strategy to purchase at new bottoms, so if $17 passes, I'll probably already purchase some, also taking into account the futures position, that gives an idea which part of the price is not due to actual silver purchases. There is still a trend of a same total net position at a lower becoming price. The speed of this trend is much smaller than it has been before, but still it's there. Just to make clear: if you take into account more and more elements, you get closer to picking bottoms. Picking peaks is an entirely different story, that just depends on estimating the degree at which people can be misled, haha.
To add new TOTRESNS data to aboves list of 3 months ago: 2013-10-01 2427.797 > 2013-11-01 2517.052 > 2013-12-01 2541.019 > 2014-01-01 2556.400 > 2014-02-01 2650.127 Tapering where? I assume that if a central bank talks about doing something, it's about doing something / action eh? It said it would 'taper'. But their balances show not any indication of a trend change. The past months I saw a hang, but in previous years such hangs happened too. But now it again made such a typical jump of about 100 billion. Tapering? Where? What changed? Nothing?
