Mega Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/IMF-to...how/5029572.cms I lost count of JUST how many times the IMF was going to unload 400 tons of Gold in favor of paper. Note the way they say "We do it so not to upset the Gold market". F*ck off, your love to crash Gold, but China (Bless them) have told their 1.3 Billion people to start buying it! And this "We only sell a bit at a time" is to cover the fact that you wouldn't! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 IMF sales are traditionally very bullish for gold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvark Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 400 tonnes, whoopee - china will just buy it with chump change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 MFI: Sell your furniture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realistbear Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Gold is a one way bet. It only ever goes up.* _______________________ * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Atomic Bull Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 gold will peak at $1400/oz and then crash massively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Gold is a one way bet. It only ever goes up.*_______________________ * In case you hadn't noticed, Fiat is disintegrating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Gold is a one way bet. It only ever goes up.*_______________________ * You show a fundamental lack of understanding of the role of gold. The point is not whether the nominal price is going up or down. The point is whether the currency gold is priced in is being debased/protected. If a currency was run sensibly, with virtually no inflationary tricks, I would expect gold to be low - a reflection of the value of the paper money. The nominal price of gold is almost irrelevant. Value is everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) You show a fundamental lack of understanding of the role of gold. The point is not whether the nominal price is going up or down. The point is whether the currency gold is priced in is being debased/protected.If a currency was run sensibly, with virtually no inflationary tricks, I would expect gold to be low - a reflection of the value of the paper money. The nominal price of gold is almost irrelevant. Value is everything. Economies need inflation to be healthy. This idea that money should be a permanent store of value is nonesense and simply avaricious. Edited September 19, 2009 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sacks Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 You show a fundamental lack of understanding of the role of gold. The point is not whether the nominal price is going up or down. The point is whether the currency gold is priced in is being debased/protected.If a currency was run sensibly, with virtually no inflationary tricks, I would expect gold to be low - a reflection of the value of the paper money. The nominal price of gold is almost irrelevant. Value is everything. Yeah, but back in the real world gold doesn't behave like that at all. It's either massively over valued or massively undervalued. It's naive to think that the gold market is the exception and the price is driven by anything other than fear and greed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Economies need inflation to be healthy. This idea that money should be a permanent store of value is nonesense and simply avaricious. Completely disagree. We managed an almost unbroken period of virtually no inflation in the 1800's through mid 1900's. The sort of grotesque inflation of the last decades only began in 1970-ish when all links with gold were finally severed. Inflation = theft. Simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 ... fear and greed. Surely these should balance each other out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Economies need inflation to be healthy. This idea that money should be a permanent store of value is nonesense and simply avaricious. irony becomes you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) Completely disagree. We managed an almost unbroken period of virtually no inflation in the 1800's through mid 1900's.The sort of grotesque inflation of the last decades only began in 1970-ish when all links with gold were finally severed. Inflation = theft. Simple. Oh yes and what a great period of prosperity that was for the average man. The demographics today are entirely different. Inflation is not theft. No one has removed your personal property. Edited September 19, 2009 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgia O'Keeffe Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Surely these should balance each other out? why would they at any snapshot in time, did fear balance greed in 2006-7? or 2000 or any other bubble or subsequent crash. At any moment in time one always has the collective upperhand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr ray Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) Gold is a one way bet. It only ever goes up.*_______________________ * Governments all over the world can be trusted to look after your savings*. ________________________ * Edited September 19, 2009 by dr ray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody777 Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 gold will peak at $1400/oz and then crash massively. To state what the gold price will be is fools gold pun intended Gold is a measure of value and generally money supply/inflation doubles about every 10 years in real terms I would expect the gold price to copy this fact over time hopes and fears in gold and money will not allow a straight line and decade long plus bulls will happen in gold to catch up to a fair value and decade long plus bears in gold will happen. To value gold consider generally an amount gold buys a house a car or a loaf of bread when the price of gold buy more of these things than normal then gold is overvalued and WELL correct for the best of my knowlege its still playing catch up and I would expext as all bull markets for gold to overshoot its real value Lets say mid 1980s gold around $400 what was the average house price then I am not sure but they have probably gone up 5 fold so gold is due to catch up or its just an underperforming asset I dont expect houses to five fold over the next 20 years but I expect them to be higher and gold too. Both asset classes gold and houses have cycles for now its golds turn and surly at some point it will be houses. Forget blips for an odd year the trend for houses is down for a long time to correct to a fair value and will probably overshoot and gold is still on the up I think a fair value for gold is $1500 to $2000 as of today for me but what I think and what the markets will do thats a different matter I have bought and will hold until I think its overvalued then sell and move to what I think is a undervalued asset buy low and sell high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Bunny Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Gold is a one way bet. It only ever goes up.* That is the point. NO ASSET EVER ONLY GOES IN ONE DIRECTION. When will you get that into your head? However most asset classes go in one trend direction for a generation - stocks, bonds, proerty up from c 1980 to c 2000/05 (07 as extended by b0llocks). (Down in the generation before, in real terms) Gold and commodities down during same period. (And up in the generation before.) Now it has reversed. You really are blind to the obvious. No doubt, as usual, you will not respond and debate. Instead you will do your usual thing and start a new thread or jump on a bandwagon. Heaven forbid you should actually back up your argument by debating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abaxas Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 The other issue with gold is is not 'investable'. Ie you cant make money from it, other than it's valuation. Gold doesn't move you forward as you are attempting to 'stay the same'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggerUK Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 If a currency was run sensibly, with virtually no inflationary tricks, I would expect gold to be low - a reflection of the value of the paper money. The currencies of the world were not run sensibly from the end of WW2. Lots of printy printy, even before Nixon took dollar off gold. The rest of printy printy is history. The mismanaged currency manufactured the post war boom. Most people believed everything was hunky dory, and the lack of interest in the need for gold's safety kept the price artificially low. There were no political cabals of manipulators keeping price of gold (pog) down, the boom, because of easy money, kept pog down. What manipulation there was going on, was just sharp business practice and very normal. I'm not saying what you claim is wrong, it's just not the full story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggerUK Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Inflation is not theft. No one has removed your personal property. If the return I get for my labours is devalued, then I am being robbed. You talk as if inflation was a victimless crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr ray Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Inflation is not theft. No one has removed your personal property. Whaaat? What happened to the £20,000 I saved when I started working in 1985 which would buy you a house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) If the return I get for my labours is devalued, then I am being robbed.You talk as if inflation was a victimless crime. You have a surplus from your labours. You wish to trade this surplus for goods of another kind. For this you use the medium of money. If you are foolish enough to swap such a surplus into useless lumps of metal or bits of paper and no further then you really have misunderstood the purpose of money. Money is there to facilitate a means and not be the means itself. If you swap your chickens' eggs - which are due to rot next week - for money - why would you then expect that money to hold eternal value thereafter? Gold is a great way of gaming this natural law, and for some inexplicable reason some people want to impose it as the sole means of exchange - giving the little man little chance. We need money that conforms to the Law of Atrophy like the rest of nature. If you feel your labours are being stolen - maybe you should determine whether you actually created a surplus in the first place - or whether you were just ungainfully employed. Edited September 19, 2009 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realistbear Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) That is the point. NO ASSET EVER ONLY GOES IN ONE DIRECTION. When will you get that into your head?However most asset classes go in one trend direction for a generation - stocks, bonds, proerty up from c 1980 to c 2000/05 (07 as extended by b0llocks). (Down in the generation before, in real terms) Gold and commodities down during same period. (And up in the generation before.) Now it has reversed. You really are blind to the obvious. No doubt, as usual, you will not respond and debate. Instead you will do your usual thing and start a new thread or jump on a bandwagon. Heaven forbid you should actually back up your argument by debating. If you comments were addressed to me I suggest you look at my post and observe the asterisk that will lead you to a "footnote" in the form of a Of course gold is not a one-way bet--I was simply alluding to the naivete of some in thinking it is. "It may not have escaped the attention of the more astute among us (ecnomists) that gold, if oversold in the sense that paper transactions have extended beyond the actual supply of the physical metal, has become fiat." I have to agree. Edited September 19, 2009 by Realistbear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggerUK Posted September 19, 2009 Share Posted September 19, 2009 You have a surplus from your labours. You wish to trade this surplus for goods of another kind. For this you use the medium of money. If you are foolish enough to swap such a surplus into useless lumps of metal or bits of paper and no further then you really have misunderstood the purpose of money. Money is there to facilitate a means and not be the means itself. If you swap your chickens' eggs - which are due to rot next week - for money - why would you then expect that money to hold eternal value thereafter? Right, were exactly does one start with gobbledygook like this. Lets try at the beginning. "You have a surplus from your labours." If what I get for my labours is less now, than previously, due to inflation/price rises, are you trying to tell me I am better or worse off. I'm a simple old soul and feel I have "been robbed" if I get less, but that's just me I suppose. I am not confused what money as a means of exchange is. I know how to use the bit's of paper or plastic in my pocket. If it turns out that I have been buying into fools gold I shall be very upset. But I have to confess to you I do hold that it has "eternal value" I also feel that "bits of paper" as you describe them may not have the same eternal value, but again I could be wrong so don't take my word for it. Bartering chicken eggs is not something I am involved in, so I can't advise you what to do if they are going rotten next week. Perhaps you should use them for a nice omelet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.