Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About UndercoverElephant

  • Rank
    HPC Regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. Re: missing the boat. Perhaps there will be a boat that most people will miss. I think it is inevitable that at some point in the not-too-distant future there will be two prices for bullion, and it is at this point that you want yours to have the right one rather than the wrong one. The vast majority of gold trades and gold ownership is not of physical bullion at all, but paper instruments which are supposedly backed up by metal. These can be traded very easily, and there's no worry about security and storage costs, etc... The problem is that most of that bullion doesn't actually exist. It's just another scam like fractional reserve banking. The idea is that because there will never be a time when everybody actually asks for their physical bullion, it doesn't matter if it doesn't actually exist. However, as the price of gold and silver inexorably rises due to more and more printing of money, more and more individuals and organisations will decide they want actual physical bullion, because they are worried that the paper bullion may end up being worth no more than the value of the paper. This will in turn lead to a situation where bullion dealers can't actually get hold of the physical metal. They will have a long line of customers, but no means of delivering anything. Bear in mind that this mountain of paper bullion is currrently being used to manipulate the price of gold and silver. At the moment it is possible for large amounts of this paper bullion to be sold at the same time, which drives down the price of physical bullion without the need to sell any actual physical bullion. This is good news so long as it is still possible to buy physical bullion at the price determined by the paper bullion market, but eventually the time will come when the prices will de-link. Bullion dealers will simply charge a higher and higher premium over the "official" price, because they know that this is what they can sell it for. At the same time, everybody who owns physical bullion will not want to part with it for any amount of fiat currency, so the only bullion coming to market will be new production and forced sales coming from people who have no choice but to sell their bullion or go bankrupt. And so the physical price and paper price will rapidly go in opposite directions - the price of paper bullion will plummet whilst the price of physical bullion will go orbital. The only other possible outcome I can imagine is that the powers that be step in and freeze the physical bullion market. They may make it illegal for people to own bullion, and try to force people to sell their holdings to the govenment at a price dictated by them. This will be very bad news for the holders of the 2% of paper bullion which is allocated (fully backed by metal which is audited every year), because their gold will be automatically seized. Anyway....if gold and silver are still freely tradable after something along these lines happens, then you don't want to miss that boat. Disclosure: I have given up hope of being able to use my cash assets to buy a house, and am in the process of turning a large proportion of it into gold and silver. I plan to turn it back into property at some point in the future, after The Catastrophe has played out.
  2. Yep. Nice shiny 1kg bar of silver just been delivered this morning. Gold will break the barricades down, then silver will charge through with no resistance, with triple (or more) the percentage gains of gold over the same time. What a lot of people don't know is that the world has hardly any silver stockpiles left. Most of the gold which has ever been mined is still above ground and owned by somebody, but we use silver in all sorts of industrial applications, and most of that silver is now back underground in landfills. And then there's the whole "paper bullion" scam waiting to be uncovered... That's just you, yes.
  3. Yeah, it's about that time. I sold a house in Brighton in November 2008 and decided to rent for a while. I got £228K for a 3 bed terrace off Lewes Road. The buyers have completed stripped and redone it (and I mean everything). They must have spent about £30K on it. It is now back on the market for £270K. I doubt they'll get that for it, what with the stamp duty threshold still lurking at £250K. This is partly why I chose not to do it up myself - I was worried that I wouldn't be able to ask enough over £250K to stand a decent chance of getting it. So what does this tell us? I think it tells us that it is not easy to make money any more out of buying houses, doing them up and selling them on. By the time you've added the cost and hassle of moving twice it wasn't really worth their bother, even if they make a marginal profit. And they might even end up threatened with a loss, which will mean that it just sits there on the market going nowhere, like so many other properties right now. But renting hasn't helped me much either, because of the "joke" interest rate we have combined with rampant inflation. I don't believe things are going to change much in the forseeable future. Interest rates will stay low, inflation will stay high, banks will remain reluctant to lend money, sellers will remain reluctant to lower their asking prices and all sorts of people who cannot get on to the ladder now will remain unable to get on it in the future. The value of their savings is going down whilst house prices stay about the same. They may drift lower, but not fast enough to make much difference to people. Savers are being screwed. The bottom line is that the government cannot allow the real value of houses to collapse back to something sensible because this would cause another banking crisis. Looks like game over to me for anyone who hasn't got either a massive salary, a massive deposit or preferably both. I think I have decided to look elsewhere in the country, both for a job and a house. It's bad enough everywhere else, but in Brighton it is just ridiculous.
  4. Two reasons. First, there isn't plenty of unused good land for farming. That's why many countries in Asia in the middle-east are currently buying up large swathes of the fertile bits of Africa. But more importantly, it's not really the land that is the problem - it's the vast amount of oil required to farm it using modern industrialised agricultural methods. Permaculture works by deliberately planting crops together which maximise the available nutrients, water and sunlight. So you have one crop which fixes nitrogen from the air, another which sprawls on the ground keeping weeds out and moisture in, another which grows tall, another one which is a climber growing up the tall crop, etc... It is vastly more efficient at turning sunlight into food energy, and it's sustainable.
  5. No overthrow is required. The system will eventually collapse on its own. If you persist in trying to sustain an unsustainable system there can only be one outcome. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...-climate-change [continues with Monbiot's response and an extended exchange]
  6. You are assuming that they were politically capable of doing so, and that it was technologically possible to solve the problem. They "aren't acting" because the scale of the problem is far too big and far too global and far to structural. See previous post: the whole system has to change.
  7. Did you watch the program? This is no scam. You're right, we could grow more food, just not by more intensive agriculture. We have to do what the Cubans are doing - permaculture projects where lots of different crops are grown in the same field and the whole process is done by hand. You can produce 25 times as much this way from the same amount of land, but it requires a lot of manual labour and the final product is expensive. This is a perfect example of the scale and nature of this problem. We can't fix it by trying to tweak the old model. We need a whole new ideology - a whole new way of looking at the problems. Are you ready for that? Most people aren't.
  8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_uranium I actually really like geology. Especially the geology of the British Isles. I mean....**** me, we hit the geology jackpot, right? We are living on a bit of slammed-together shrapnel from multiple ancient continent-collisions.
  9. Not surprising, since the point you were trying to make was roughly equivalent to running around circles with your tongue lolling out going "wooooooooooooo! blibberjabber! Save me from the eco-fascist loony-leftie monsters under my bed!!!"
  10. You are a complete ******ing idiot who has no idea what the words spewing from his keyboard actually mean. You have no idea what is going on in the world, what has gone on in the world in the past or what is going to happen in the future. You don't understand science, you don't understand politics and you don't understand history. Is there anything you do understand or are you just a waste of a human life?
  11. Oh yes, I remember you from before now. I remember the "eco-fascist" tripe, and how several people told you you were being a complete twit. Seems you don't learn much.
  12. Because you cannot negotiate with reality? Except most people aren't interested in reality, are they? No, telling them they can probably expect worse. Sorry, but that is pure fantasy. The economically-recoverable uranium isn't going to last more than about twenty years. The amount of energy recoverable isn't even enough to keep the lights on in the western world, let alone support US-levels of energy consumption worldwide. This problem is about a hundred times more serious than you think it is.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.