pixha said:
None are operational yet, to the best if my knowledge.
Dive in Silver Price a "Setup," Says Sprott
- Thread starter Naphthalene Man
- Start date
None are operational yet, to the best if my knowledge.
Why does the definition of military power (superpower) have to be equated to the projection of force? I would say that China's abiity to effectively defend itself (which includes the capacity to launch lots of retaliatory ICBM's as well it's unassessed ability to take out satelites......and perhaps an ability to dominate the cyberwarfare medium) gives China some credibility to consideration as a superpower.
Yippe-Ki-Ya
New Member
grinners said:
Read Mike Maloney's book and all will be revealed
alor said:grinners said:
this ratio throughout time is between 2 and 110, plus and minus , occasional extreme can be during war time fleeing, when you want to swap heavy bulky silver for gold but the guy who stay behind holding silver and live, he will be VERY rich!
so long as the ratio is within this range, there is ALL logic that that will happen ALL the time, this is NO BLACK SWAN.
this is VERY obvious, why you guys can not come to believe this probability.
the things call demand and supply arguments are Crabs, you have been deceived!!!
if we saw the ratios moving from one end to the other, we just look at the direction of the move. just like recent past it was 83 moving to 30, now we moving up to 43.
THIS IS GOOD OPPORTUNITY, if you think 30 is low, then take out your silver and change to gold, and if you believe that 43 is a good enough price for your gold then change it to silver, the difference you can keep as your increase. MORE IS BETTER.
if you started 1oz gold and change to 70 silver and change your silver, 30 for gold then get 2oz gold + silver 10, then change back at 43 = end up with 96 silver. what an increase! if you live that long and know how.
You quoted me but didn't address my point at all.
Yippe-Ki-Ya
New Member
malachii said:
To be honest, you make a good point. The question though is whether people believe that silver is a store of wealth or not?
Most people believe that it is a store of wealth - protecting you from government and central banker theft engineered through inflation.
Another question is how much longer governments can get away with confiscating precious metals either directly via confiscation or indirectly via "capital gains" taxes?
This is a very complex question, but there are many who have the hope that this will not last much longer, and certainly not another 100 years..
malachii said:
Actually i was not aware that silver was "manipulated upwards" by the US government between the 30's and 60's... ?
that does not really correlate with the reality that people were hoarding their dollar coins for their silver content, simply because they believed that the true value of silver (contained in the coins) was much higher than the denominated value on the coins minted by the Fed.
In fact, this is the very reason that the US government removed silver from their coins in the late 60's - because people knew that the government decreed value of silver - represented by the coins' face value - was much much lower than the actual value of silver.
I would argue that this indicates that the government/Fed did indeed try to suppress the value of silver via their coinage ...
Unloading billions of ounces of silver onto the markets at cheap prices by central banks the world over was also another way they used to artificially suppress the value of silver.
savvy??
Yippe-Ki-Ya
New Member
Fiat = Ponzi said:
Slight correction ... the strongest economic powers become the strongest military powers....
Based on this fact, China is destined to be the new dominant military power. To a lesser extent, but due to the economic resurgence of Russia, they are also a military power of note.
Certainly if they act in unison, the Russian/Chinese block would pose a serious threat to Anglo American military dominance.
Once the Anglo American ponzi finance system collapses this "realignment" of the world military powers will become more apparent.
Yippe-Ki-Ya
New Member
hyperinflation said:
That situation will change soon
Yippe-Ki-Ya
New Member
hiho said:
I guess that could vary depending on the relative IQs of the nation in question. However, assuming we're talking about the Chinese, this would not be applicable since they have the highest IQ's of all the races. fact ...
I believe they'll catch on pretty quickly
I thought the price of silver was a rob by the banker controlling the treasury.
KEEP it ready as a contestable seller into the market.
and in the shadow selling the bulk of the people's silver back to the Silver User's association member companies which are the opposite party at huge discount.
this way its a steal deal.
KEEP it ready as a contestable seller into the market.
and in the shadow selling the bulk of the people's silver back to the Silver User's association member companies which are the opposite party at huge discount.
this way its a steal deal.
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
Based on this fact - the mob of Bankers will be the new dominant military power !!
They have milked mankind for at least the last 300 years - the Chinese are poor compared to them and are the
dust in the people's eyes.
China aint gonna be the next Hegemon.
hiho said:
Exactly... how many opportunities have the Chinese had to test their hardware...
Like what they're doing or not, US troops have current combat experience. Not too many Chinese troops out there in the Afghan hills
Silverthorn
Well-Known Member
I've read that china is big on subs. Subs first carriers coming?
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
What % of silver is used for industrial uses? I have no doubt Chinese and Indian's are buying silver but will that be enough to pick up the tab of industrial consumption if there is a slowdown?
You say demand is not a big deal but silver has a huge portion of its demand being industrial so it can be hit allot harder especially if we see a slowdown in China and India let alone a collapse in those markets.
It's not denying the potential of silver but rather considering every possible outcome.
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
And this is what concerns me about (not just YKY) people making grandiose statements about how the Government has so little silver now compared to back in the 50s, 60s and 70s. They had so much silver because they had been forced to buy any silver that their miners couldn't sell on the open market. This had got to a stage where it was totally out of whack with the rest of their fixed assets. As any wise person would do when you are overweight in one investment - they sold out and diversified. It would be irresponsible for the US government to build their silver reserves back to what it was then (as a % of total assets).
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
I'm not sure I understand how removing the silver content from coins would suppress the value of silver? Sure - it reduced the immediate "coinage" demand on silver but this was quickly absorbed by industry (can't find a silver consumption graph quickly but if you do a bit of research on google I think you'll find that the demand didn't dip much at that time). It had become uneconomical for silver to be used as a component. Are you suggesting that the government should have made a loss on manufacturing their coinage just to keep using silver? Surely that would be another case of government mismanagement.
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
Maybe - or maybe it was just a rebalancing of "useless" or unneeded assets. Now whether it was done in a sensible way is another argument.
Yippe-Ki-Ya said:
hhmm - no, not really - I usually just feel sorry for people who can't conduct a sensible discussion without ending with a derogatory comment.
malachii
Nukz said:
http://www.silverinstitute.org/pr28mar2011.php
This report from the silver institute shows demand sectors in 2000, 2009 and the anticpated demand in 2015. You can see how great the industrial demand is (> 50% and increasing) and how little investment demand is. There are better charts than this that break it down much more but cant search for in a hurry. There is another by the silver institute that really breaks it down and shows that industrial demand is somewhere around about the 75% in 2010. If this halves - the price of silver will take a hammering. If investment demand doubles - it will have very little impact overall.
malachii
hyperinflation said:hiho said:
Exactly... how many opportunities have the Chinese had to test their hardware...
Like what they're doing or not, US troops have current combat experience. Not too many Chinese troops out there in the Afghan hills
Totally irrelevant! If China kicks off they will do it in style. It won't matter how much combat experience ANY nation has, when you have 1.3Billion people, the shear numbers alone will overwhelm any nation. India on board could cause some hick ups but they can't compete with China in any aspect.
Forget about how much hardware they have now. If they decide to kick off the ability to mass produce quality military hardware will be unprecedented in history and simply breathtaking. By the time the diplomatic process even begins to wind up it will be too late.
malachii said:
Interesting, the demand is more than i even thought it was, this is exactly what worry's me. You hit the nail on the head that even if investment demand doubles but the world economy has a slowdown this will erode any price buffer increased investment demand will provide.
The question should be posed, is it completely unrealistic the possibility of a global slowdown or even recession in some of the worlds largest economy's in the next 3 years? i believe the answer is absolutely this is not unrealistic
Lovey80 said:hyperinflation said:hiho said:
Exactly... how many opportunities have the Chinese had to test their hardware...
Like what they're doing or not, US troops have current combat experience. Not too many Chinese troops out there in the Afghan hills
Totally irrelevant! If China kicks off they will do it in style. It won't matter how much combat experience ANY nation has, when you have 1.3Billion people, the shear numbers alone will overwhelm any nation. India on board could cause some hick ups but they can't compete with China in any aspect.
Forget about how much hardware they have now. If they decide to kick off the ability to mass produce quality military hardware will be unprecedented in history and simply breathtaking. By the time the diplomatic process even begins to wind up it will be too late.
I don't doubt the manpower capabilities of China.. but there is a big difference between having the troops and sensing them where they're needed.
Once they commence producing massive amounts of military hardware, do you think the USA/Europe, or even Russia won't be a bit alarmed and take 'appropriate' action?
In the past 50 years, the Chinese have not had too many military successes. The millions of troops deployed by China couldn't hold South Korea... They got their a**es handed to them by the Russians in 1969. They couldn't even achieve anything decisive against Vietnam in 1979... What hope would they have against a highly experienced enemy that's on the other side of the Pacific?
Not to mention that Europe + USA (NATO) has a comparable number of people (857mil + 307mil), therefore manpower available, should it ever come to it.