Pirocco
Well-Known Member
gold won't be money (in the form of currency) either.
the central planners didnt went through all the effort to make people accept fiat to just return like that.
On some day in the past, two central planners met eachother. A US one and a USSR one. The USSR ruble (and all the rest with it) was closing in on its end, and the Gossbank guy asked the Fed guy what to do. The Fed guy told him to return to a real gold standard, because that would be the only way to convince people to accept the ruble again. The Gossbank guy then asked, if a gold standard is so good, why did you people in western countries abandon it? The answer of the Fed guy was very remarkable in its implications: he said that the western currencies had a history of gold backing, and that this history made them accepting the fiatcurrencies. This implied the openly admission that the western central planners knew that they were cheating their populations, but that history allowed them to get away with it.
Let's now warp to decades later, today. A situation with the former two world blocks united to a cooperating single world block, with as capital goal spreading their inflation over the world in an evenly fashion, along bail outs / currency swaps across borders and oceans. Look at all the regulation they added over the decades. All geared towards wiping out differences between their fiatcrap and blocking/limiting. Look at what the Fed does with treasuries. People don't want to borrow govt their savings, which would normally drive up the fee the govt has to pay in order to still find willing people, and the Fed uses new dollars to replace the lending, and hold down the fee for those that still hold treasuries, which thus suffer the risk without a compensation/reward.
Why would central planners then give gold any other role than just making it more expensive when speculators want to swap their fiat for it, and making it then cheaper when speculators want to swap it back to fiat to then buy what they really wanted?
So actually, gold is the lap dog of silver, without the central planning holding off tenthousands tonnes, the gold/silver price ratio would be driven towards the real ratio's CLZ gave.
But things are like they are, until the central planners dumped the rest of their gold stocks.
About that rhodium argument, industrial usage isn't the price trend driver for gold / silver. Obviously not. Otherwise we should have seen industrial demand more than doubling and halving in recent years.
The sole difference between gold and silvers storage of value / monetary usage is based on which side of the crisis owns which metal. Like it is now, the parasiting side dominantly owns the gold,
while the producing side dominantly owns the silver. Unless you want to argue that central banks / central planning govt institutions, don't own 30000 tonnes gold, 20000 down from where they came from 60 years ago. And not just in the beginning. Between 1989 and 2005 they sold 6960 tonnes on the market. They pushed down the gold (and silver) price trends for decades. And they clearly anticipated the speculation due to their fiatcurrencies printing/devaluation and brought the CBGA's into existence as to inflict the speculators that wanna buy exactly then a higher price and thus less ounces. Suppress the price when few want to buy, drive it up more/faster when alot want to buy. So stacking gold as longterm savings? Heh. It may be a good idea for the buy now sell within X month club, if they manage to get out ahead of the next central planners entities reversal. Drawback of silver is the amount less informed / easy believers of all the bogus vested-interest origining stories around. But that's solvable. Solving central planners crap is harder, due to their monopoly on violence.
the central planners didnt went through all the effort to make people accept fiat to just return like that.
On some day in the past, two central planners met eachother. A US one and a USSR one. The USSR ruble (and all the rest with it) was closing in on its end, and the Gossbank guy asked the Fed guy what to do. The Fed guy told him to return to a real gold standard, because that would be the only way to convince people to accept the ruble again. The Gossbank guy then asked, if a gold standard is so good, why did you people in western countries abandon it? The answer of the Fed guy was very remarkable in its implications: he said that the western currencies had a history of gold backing, and that this history made them accepting the fiatcurrencies. This implied the openly admission that the western central planners knew that they were cheating their populations, but that history allowed them to get away with it.
Let's now warp to decades later, today. A situation with the former two world blocks united to a cooperating single world block, with as capital goal spreading their inflation over the world in an evenly fashion, along bail outs / currency swaps across borders and oceans. Look at all the regulation they added over the decades. All geared towards wiping out differences between their fiatcrap and blocking/limiting. Look at what the Fed does with treasuries. People don't want to borrow govt their savings, which would normally drive up the fee the govt has to pay in order to still find willing people, and the Fed uses new dollars to replace the lending, and hold down the fee for those that still hold treasuries, which thus suffer the risk without a compensation/reward.
Why would central planners then give gold any other role than just making it more expensive when speculators want to swap their fiat for it, and making it then cheaper when speculators want to swap it back to fiat to then buy what they really wanted?
So actually, gold is the lap dog of silver, without the central planning holding off tenthousands tonnes, the gold/silver price ratio would be driven towards the real ratio's CLZ gave.
But things are like they are, until the central planners dumped the rest of their gold stocks.
About that rhodium argument, industrial usage isn't the price trend driver for gold / silver. Obviously not. Otherwise we should have seen industrial demand more than doubling and halving in recent years.
The sole difference between gold and silvers storage of value / monetary usage is based on which side of the crisis owns which metal. Like it is now, the parasiting side dominantly owns the gold,
while the producing side dominantly owns the silver. Unless you want to argue that central banks / central planning govt institutions, don't own 30000 tonnes gold, 20000 down from where they came from 60 years ago. And not just in the beginning. Between 1989 and 2005 they sold 6960 tonnes on the market. They pushed down the gold (and silver) price trends for decades. And they clearly anticipated the speculation due to their fiatcurrencies printing/devaluation and brought the CBGA's into existence as to inflict the speculators that wanna buy exactly then a higher price and thus less ounces. Suppress the price when few want to buy, drive it up more/faster when alot want to buy. So stacking gold as longterm savings? Heh. It may be a good idea for the buy now sell within X month club, if they manage to get out ahead of the next central planners entities reversal. Drawback of silver is the amount less informed / easy believers of all the bogus vested-interest origining stories around. But that's solvable. Solving central planners crap is harder, due to their monopoly on violence.
