Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

We Are Not The First People To Work This Out!

Recommended Posts

I've been mentioning this guy on a couple of threads today.

I've known of him for years - during my training (read brainwashing) at Oxford and on Wall Street he was presented as a kook (although strangely the mentor of a Nobel prize winner) - but it was only today that I began to realise that he had entirely worked all this stuff we keep posting out, and was then suppressed by the forerunners of today's VIs and their "easy money" school.

Who is Ludwig von Mises?

Durch,

His theory sounds similar to that of C H Douglas, who expounded the A+B theory...he firmly placed the blame for the business cycle at the feet of the banks.

Basically he stated that because industry is in debt, it has to service this debt in addition to payments to shareholders and workers - call this A (wages) + B (dividends) + C (debt servicing). Therefore the business must charge enough money on its products to cover A+B+C. But the money going out to society to purchase these products is only A+B...therefore consumers also have to borrow to be able to avoid all the products.

Debt has enslaved us!!!

Well, actually, not me thank God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an excellent book about this - The Grip of Death: A Study of Modern Money, Debt Slavery and Destructive Economics by Michael Rowbotham. Won't start banging on about it other than to say that - one of my favourite conspiracy theories - Abraham Lincoln issued a monograph about the need to end the banks' power to create money by issuing credit and was assassinated just a few weeks later! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard of the Gold Standard, but don't know what it is really. Can somebody explain in laymans terms, firstly what it is and secondly, what 100% of Gold Standard means?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a kook. What is the govt supposed to do buy X million tons of gold? Will that make the economy better? What about when a new baby gets born. Buy more gold? What about poor countries. I guess they should stop buying useless stuff like machinery and oil and buy gold instead.

He isn't the only one to go on about the money supply. Look what the BoE did during the Thatcher era. They kept money supply targets as their primary aim and it was one of the main reason rates went so high and the whole economy went t*ts up.

Sheesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the govt supposed to do buy X million tons of gold? Will that make the economy better?

There are many strong arguments for a gold standard or something like it, advanced by some of the most eminent economists of our time.

http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion/Greenspan.html

Look what the BoE did during the Thatcher era. They kept money supply targets as their primary aim and it was one of the main reason rates went so high

Actually one of the main reasons rates went so high was the Treasury's quasi-official policy of tying the value of the pound to the deutschmark:

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessi...ack%20Wednesday

When the ERM had been set up in 1979, Britain declined to join. This was controversial, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer Geoffrey Howe, despite his economically 'dry' credentials, was a convinced pro-European. Another chancellor, Nigel Lawson, was also a believer in a fixed exchange rate, and although he was a mild Eurosceptic he admired the low inflationary record of Germany, attributing it to the strength of the Deutsche Mark and the management of the Bundesbank. The Treasury followed a semi-official policy of shadowing the Deutsche Mark. The exchange rate was largely kept in place by the use of interest rates, set without matching action to control the domestic economy.
Edited by IPOD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Wiseman' you suffer from the basic delusion that governments need to issue currencies at all.

Let private companies issue convenient gold backed currencies (there are loads starting up on the web, now it's posible to do it electronically and internationally).

Really? How would such a company make money?

How much mind gold is there in the world and if we went to a gold standard, would the price of gold be less than a million dollars a gram?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a drink Tentpeg, but lots of old threads about why gold is nature's money (rare, fungeable, very hard to mine, mostly above ground, very dense so a little can be worth a lot in an international trade shipment, uncounterfeitable, unmakeable, easy for a layman to detect forgery as the weight is impossible to fake, etc.)

Given that it's nature's money, politicians should let the free market choose it (as it does) and only issue currency that is backed 100% with gold. A true 100% backing would not need currency names. The notes would read '1g of gold' backed (ie. exchangeable at a public window accessible 24/7) by a gramme of gold from the country's reserves. It could be called a dollar, but that encourages governments to engage in FRB and only keep enough gold to manage runs on their gold exchange windows.

100% means 100% reserves. No cons.

'Wiseman' you suffer from the basic delusion that governments need to issue currencies at all.

Let private companies issue convenient gold backed currencies (there are loads starting up on the web, now it's posible to do it electronically and internationally).

Governments should tax people (and get paid in gold) and spend their gold on defense and police (and whatever else your heart votes for). No need ever to buy gold.

Not had a drink yet. Was a serious question, and I'm too lazy/busy(contradiction?) to go trawling through loads of other posts to find an answer.

I understand the reasons for Gold having a value etc, but is there enough of it to go around? If it's a closed system, i.e no extra gold is dug up, over time and as population grows, there is less gold per head. If there is only the amount of currency in circulation that can be backed by gold, then what happens when people hoard large amounts of it (saving)? It effectively goes out of circulation, and there is a currency shortage?

Ultimately there is a finite supply of the stuff, and surely digging up more of the stuff from new mines= inflation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? How would such a company make money?

How much mind gold is there in the world and if we went to a gold standard, would the price of gold be less than a million dollars a gram?

Remember that he was writing a while ago, when the gold standard was not such a distant memory and there was a lot less nominal money in the world. Advocates of monetary reform don't suggest making sudden transitions to a system in which banks can't create money or can create a lot less of it - it would be a fundamental overhauling of the global monetary system. And before you have a wobbly about that, it was done at the end of WWII at Bretton Woods and could be done again if there was the will, which of course there isn't because most people have no idea how most money comes into being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For my tuppenneth worth, I do not think a gold standard is necessary (although it may be sensible I am not sure)...rather money supply can remain 'fiat' - i.e. attached to nothing more than confidence in the system - but should be handed over entirely to the government rather than banks.

What's that I hear you say....'but the government already supplies our money...we have the national mint don't we?'

Yes, you are right, we do have the national mint, but this only supplies 3% of the money in the economy - all the rest is supplied by the financial institutions (using the money multiplier effect) in the form of debt - go to the BoE statistical releases and look at the ratio between M0 and M4 if you don't believe this. First off I don't think it is fair that one small section of society (banks) should get to just magic money out of thin air, and secondly, this debt-based money supply mechanism is why our economy is so cut-throat...collectively we are all in debt to the tune of 97% of the total money supply - this is constantly being serviced/paid off - and so everyone is fighting for their share of a shrinking money supply that is structural incapable of being adequate for our requirements.

Unless of course we get into more debt (which is what we are doing) and shore up more problems for the future.

Money is meant to be a convenient medium of exchange to allow us to progress beyond barter, but it has morphed into something else entirely...a means of control and institutionalised inequality in favour of the money-men. Money is a tool for society, and therefore should be supplied to the economy by society - i.e. the government - not a greasy cabal of conmen. And it should be supplied in quantities sufficient to allow the economy to function - this is what debt-based money supply is unable to do (unless more and more debt is taken on ad infinitum).

Think about it...some governments have already been effectively supplying a proper amount of money to their economies, through their national deficit....national deficits constantly get rescheduled and bigger, so they are effectively a government supply of money by another name - and they work: countries with big deficits roared ahead in manufacturing etc....Germany, Japan, etc., whilst the UK, with a comparatively small national deficit (fiscally prudent is how it is presented) is f**ked.

Do not underestimate the power of government to stimulate the economy through spending.

Some banker-types argue that government supply of money is inflationary - this is ****** of the highest order. Are they seriously implying that loose lending and hence money supply by the banks is NOT inflationary!?! Get real.

Obviously there should be a balance as to how much money government should be able to create, but I think the current situation where banks get to create nearly all the money is stupid. Think about it...banks don't just supply money to us as consumers....they supply money to the government (leading to the budget deficit discussed above). GOVERNMENT GOES TO THE BANKS FOR MONEY. Do this seem fundamentally right to you? The government...the GOVERNMENT, by and for the people, has to go cap in hand to the banks to raise money. Kind of tells you what the real order in society is:

Bankers

Government

People

It does not have to be this way.

Edited by marko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard of the Gold Standard, but don't know what it is really. Can somebody explain in laymans terms, firstly what it is and secondly, what 100% of Gold Standard means?

Thanks

Hi there Tentpeg. My understanding of the backing of currency is that if a currency is 100% backed (by gold, a reserve currency (which the dollar was globally under the Bretton Woods System from end WWII until 1972) or whatever) whoever creates money has to actually hold gold or currency to the value of the currency that they're creating, and that's not an inflationary process - they can't just print more and more money, so the currency retains its value.

Banking is currently run on the basis of fractional reserve banking. The required reserve is (I think) 8%. This means that if you go to a bank for a 100 grand mortgage, the bank has to have 8 grand of the money in reserve. So they can 'lend' you 92 grand that they don't have. I don't want to start up the long debate about what happens at that point but actually what the hell. At that point the bank isn't 'lending' you money, it's creating money at the stroke of a pen - creating an asset for itself and a liability to you - in effect, merely saying 'you owe us 92 grand' and by saying it making it so. That's why it's inflationary. People might post to the effect that they're not really creating money, they're just writing it up and down as they lend it and get it back, but they are, and that's why there's so much money sloshing around in the economy now - it's not all government-created debt-free coins and notes. Get your head around that - it's amazing. But it explains why it is that there is more debt AND more money than ever in the UK economy - most money is created as debt>

OK so have failed not to bang on about it but there you go. It's really interesting stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Wiseman' you suffer from the basic delusion that governments need to issue currencies at all.

Let private companies issue convenient gold backed currencies (there are loads starting up on the web, now it's posible to do it electronically and internationally).

Durch,

A book, The Creature from Jekyl Island by G. Edward Griffin provides good insight into the Fed's Fiat currencies and why they are such a scam. He is I suppose a Conspiracy Theorist, albeit a very sensible and respected one. I am not, but I do know how to recognise a set-up when I see one.

He explains in the book that pre 1913 (Federal Reserve Act, 1913) nobody payed taxes at all. Up until then the Government just created money out of thin air by simply writing balances into a ledger, just as the Banks do now. The Government currencies were backed with Gold and so there was no such thing as boom/bust, inflation etc... Further, he shows the link whereby, since 1913, our taxes go to the Government, who in turn pay the Global Reserve Banks interest for lending the money to them. A stroke of genius really.

The book can be had at G E Griffins website here; http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/f...seaction=issues

He has also started to issue private sector currency.

but they would probably lead to solar system wide economic explosions to match.

Do you have the recipe handy for those cocktails you're on ?

---

Marko is on the money.

---

Edited by Buylowsellhigh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banking is currently run on the basis of fractional reserve banking. The required reserve is (I think) 8%. This means that if you go to a bank for a 100 grand mortgage, the bank has to have 8 grand of the money in reserve. So they can 'lend' you 92 grand that they don't have. I don't want to start up the long debate about what happens at that point but actually what the hell. At that point the bank isn't 'lending' you money, it's creating money at the stroke of a pen - creating an asset for itself and a liability to you - in effect, merely saying 'you owe us 92 grand' and by saying it making it so. That's why it's inflationary. People might post to the effect that they're not really creating money, they're just writing it up and down as they lend it and get it back, but they are, and that's why there's so much money sloshing around in the economy now - it's not all government-created debt-free coins and notes. Get your head around that - it's amazing. But it explains why it is that there is more debt AND more money than ever in the UK economy - most money is created as debt>

NLRG, your example is misleading. The money is only created if the person with the loan gives the money to someone who puts back into the same bank (or the other bank has a transaction the other way). The bank cannot just loan out endless money from a small piece of capital. If it could do this banks could have savings accounts with 10% rates and mortgages with 1% rates and still make money. They don't because they can't.

The basic rules of the modern economy:

1) 97% of money is supplied to the economy as debt by financial institutions. Because of the requirement to service debt by industry and consumers, there is never enough purchasing power in the economy (distributed as wages or share dividends) to allow citizens to buy all the production of the economy. Result? We must all get further and further into debt - the fundamental structure of the money supply demands it.

marko, you don't understand how money works, if you did I think you'd be less upset.

"collectively we are all in debt to the tune of 97% of the total money supply " is factually completely wrong. There is a credit in someones savings account (+ some bank capital) for every loan. Look at the balance sheet of any bank and you will see it.

If it was that great why don't you start your own bank? There already are a few hundred(?), you just need some capital.

Edited by Wiseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Durch,

A book, The Creature from Jekyl Island by G. Edward Griffin provides good insight into the Fed's Fiat currencies and why they are such a scam. He is I suppose a Conspiracy Theorist, albeit a very sensible and respected one. I am not, but I do know how to recognise a set-up when I see one.

He explains in the book that pre 1913 (Federal Reserve Act, 1913) nobody payed taxes at all. Up until then the Government just created money out of thin air by simply writing balances into a ledger, just as the Banks do now. The Government currencies were backed with Gold and so there was no such thing as boom/bust, inflation etc... Further, he shows the link whereby, since 1913, our taxes go to the Government, who in turn pay the Global Reserve Banks interest for lending the money to them. A stroke of genius really.

The book can be had at G E Griffins website here; http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/f...seaction=issues

He has also started to issue private sector currency.

Do you have the recipe handy for those cocktails you're on ?

---

Marko is on the money.

---

Money supply and Fractional Reserve Banking is a topic that has been discussed here often. At this point in proceedings, a character named "Monger of Doom" usually appears to argue ad nauseum that the fiat system and the creation of money by banks is totally fine, no problems. Perhaps "Wiseman" will be playing that role today.

I would like to add an appropriate quotation, which I noticed at the foot of "Free Thinker"'s posts today.

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." -- Noam Chomsky

On HPC.co.uk, the subject of monetary reform has traditionally been regarded as being beyond the pale, with the vast majority of regular posters refusing to comment (or perhaps thinking that it is nonsense).

I watch with interest to see if this time will be any different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a kook. What is the govt supposed to do buy X million tons of gold? Will that make the economy better? What about when a new baby gets born. Buy more gold? What about poor countries. I guess they should stop buying useless stuff like machinery and oil and buy gold instead.

He isn't the only one to go on about the money supply. Look what the BoE did during the Thatcher era. They kept money supply targets as their primary aim and it was one of the main reason rates went so high and the whole economy went t*ts up.

Sheesh

I wonder if you would mind explaining how endlessly increasing the money supply (i.e. simply printing new money as it is needed) is a sustainable model for an economy - particulary an economy that trades with other economies where an intrinsic estimate of worth (i.e. the exchange rate) must be maintained.

NLRG, your example is misleading. The money is only created if the person with the loan gives the money to someone who puts back into the same bank (or the other bank has a transaction the other way). The bank cannot just loan out endless money from a small piece of capital. If it could do this banks could have savings accounts with 10% rates and mortgages with 1% rates and still make money. They don't because they can't.

marko, you don't understand how money works, if you did I think you'd be less upset.

"collectively we are all in debt to the tune of 97% of the total money supply " is factually completely wrong. There is a credit in someones savings account (+ some bank capital) for every loan. Look at the balance sheet of any bank and you will see it.

If it was that great why don't you start your own bank? There already are a few hundred(?), you just need some capital.

I am a simple soul. I wonder if you could explain the following.

Everyone in a country owns a house 'worth' 100k.

Over the course of 3 years every house price doubles.

Every owner of the houses decides its time for a little fun and decides to borrow the increased value of their property.

All the lenders say 'no problem', your houses have doubled in price, so our loans are secure.

Where does the money come from that the bank lends to the houseowners? What gives that money it's own value? Any government can print money.

Why doesn't the goverment print a load off and give us a million each?

I believe we are all hypnotised by our current hollow money world. People snap out of hypnosis suddenly (but when?).

When there is a run on the pound and IRs are jacked up to maintain the exchange rate. That's when the markets snap their fingers and say 'Wake Up!'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money supply and Fractional Reserve Banking is a topic that has been discussed here often. At this point in proceedings, a character named "Monger of Doom" usually appears to argue ad nauseum that the fiat system and the creation of money by banks is totally fine, no problems. Perhaps "Wiseman" will be playing that role today.

A spot of deja vu, STF?! Yes, that thread properly fried my brain, too, quite enough of that for a while and won't be starting that conversation again any time soon, oh, bugger, ok so I'll just pretend it's not happening and generally wind my neck in.

And will not return obsessively to the thread just to have a gander at what's being said. Will not.

Edited by North London Rent Girl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bank cannot just loan out endless money from a small piece of capital.

This is exactly what the Banks do. This is what makes Fractional Reserve Currency so dangerous ... and why they call it Fractional Reserve Currency.

The bank cannot just loan out endless money from a small piece of capital. If it could do this banks could have savings accounts with 10% rates and mortgages with 1% rates and still make money.

They don't offer 10% savings accounts and 1% mortgages because the less they have to pay out in interest the more profit they get to keep for themselves ...and the more they charge for mortgages, the more profit they get to keep for themselves. See a pattern ?

The federal Reserve Bank is not Federal, it has no reserves, and it is not even a proper Bank.

---

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money supply and Fractional Reserve Banking is a topic that has been discussed here often. At this point in proceedings, a character named "Monger of Doom" usually appears to argue ad nauseum that the fiat system and the creation of money by banks is totally fine, no problems. Perhaps "Wiseman" will be playing that role today.

I would like to add an appropriate quotation, which I noticed at the foot of "Free Thinker"'s posts today.

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." -- Noam Chomsky

On HPC.co.uk, the subject of monetary reform has traditionally been regarded as being beyond the pale, with the vast majority of regular posters refusing to comment (or perhaps thinking that it is nonsense).

I watch with interest to see if this time will be any different.

I don't think it is so much that people are afraid to comment. But they are afraid to comment at the level that these discussions are held for fear of seeming dumb. "Serous" discussions offer very little space for anything but serious people (see above for how this operates). And anyway, you have no idea how much of my brain was taken up in the struggle to get a grip on fractional reserve banking in the last marco lead debate :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fiat Money = Boom & Bust (IMHO).

You could continue to have Fiat money, but Governments and Banks find it too tempting to increase the money supply, hence the Boom!

... followed by the bust!

Tentpeg, some links you might find interesting:

http://www.wwdemocracy.nildram.co.uk/democ..._debt_banks.htm

http://www.financialsense.com/series4/part1.html

Edited by Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly what the Banks do. This is what makes Fractional Reserve Currency so dangerous ... and why they call it Fractional Reserve Currency.

They don't offer 10% savings accounts and 1% mortgages because the less they have to pay out in interest the more profit they get to keep for themselves ...and the more they charge for mortgages, the more profit they get to keep for themselves. See a pattern ?

The federal Reserve Bank is not Federal, it has no reserves, and it is not even a proper Bank.

---

Oh please. Why don't banks just print money and pay themselves? Why do they bother lending money at all? How come some banks go bankrupt? Why do banks limit risk if they could just print money to cover the loss?

Fiat Money = Boom & Bust (IMHO).

You could continue to have Fiat money, but Governments and Banks find it too tempting to increase the money supply, hence the Boom!

... followed by the bust!

Like there never was any boom and bust when banks had big gold reserves?

Yes there is some truth when the govt has control of the money supply it can lead to boom & bust, which is why central banks are mostly independant now.

Its quite funny everyone here blaming the fiat system when there is no alternative. If the gold reserve was so great why don't countries change to it? Oh I forgot because of the secret society of facist overlords who run the banks and make all the profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its quite funny everyone here blaming the fiat system when there is no alternative. If the gold reserve was so great why don't countries change to it? Oh I forgot because of the secret society of facist overlords who run the banks and make all the profits.

Wiseman, I'm not saying the current monetary system can't work or it is wrong. I'll understand how the system works, and i'll play it.

Clearly we can't go back to any 'backed' system... but the point was I think we shouldn't have moved away from it in the first place.

The system would easily work, if the new money going into the economy was measured correctly and interest rates were set to create an equilibrium. But this hasn't happened. Look at house prices and the massive debts that accopany them!

Why haven't these price increases included in the measure of inflation? It is one major part of anyone's outgoings? Ok, I agree 'inflation' is difficult to measure but any imbalance will return to an equilibrium, hence Boom & Bust!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classics quotes:

"our whole monetary system is dishonest, as it is debt-based... We did not vote for it. It grew upon us gradually but markedly since 1971 when the commodity-based system was abandoned.” The Earl of Caithness, in a speech to the House of Lords, 1997.

“The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” William Paterson, founder of the Bank of England in 1694, then a privately owned bank.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had to add this to the debate from kam's sig:

"The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight-of-hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. .........But if you want to continue to be slaves of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit."

Sir Josiah Stamp. (1880-1941) President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain.

That quote is everywhere on the gold-bug sites on the internet. I'd be really surprised if you could find he definitely said that.

Especially as there is no such thing as president of the bank of England. The main man is the governor, and he certainly wasn't one of those.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Engla...Bank_of_England

Not to mention he was chairman of the largest private company in Britain. You think he would have better things to do that run the BoE.

Here is another list of the Governors of the BoE. Stamp isn't there either.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/pdfs/governors.pdf

Please find proof that Stamp ever worked for the BoE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest horace

Quote

"They don't offer 10% savings accounts and 1% mortgages because the less they have to pay out in interest the more profit they get to keep for themselves ...and the more they charge for mortgages, the more profit they get to keep for themselves. See a pattern ?"

Unquote.

Which brings us neatly to the Vatican Bank. Does anyone hold a Vatican Bank account?

The Vatican Bank exists, of course, to look after Rome and to screw the world`s poor.

horace :)

Edited by horace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like there never was any boom and bust when banks had big gold reserves?

Its quite funny everyone here blaming the fiat system when there is no alternative. If the gold reserve was so great why don't countries change to it? Oh I forgot because of the secret society of facist overlords who run the banks and make all the profits.

My (less than well educated) understanding was that runs only occurred if the

paper money became so debauched by profligacy that the saner amongst

us decided we prefered gold to paper - since gold retains its value better.

Surely the question should be why did governments ever step away from the gold standard?

ABB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please find proof that Stamp ever worked for the BoE.

He was a Director of the bank of England and he lived 5min around the corner from me in Bromley. south london

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 302 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.