flying Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Another call for a new reserve currency by China at the G8.... http://www.reuters.com/article/usDollarRpt...G00356720090701 G14 to release their own statement on July 9th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datsun240Z Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 notional values on all derivatives lie around approximately $1Quadrillion at the moment. I'm old enough to remember when that used to be a lot of money. Right. A quadrillion here, a quadrillion there, pretty soon your talking real money I wish i could throw with that figures, with money that is actual digital ( not exist ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 it is a well known fact that all Chinese, especially those who run the Chinese Government are extremely stupid and have no idea how to conduct business in a shrewd manner. that's why they inform the public via "lesser officials" about any purchase plans of any commodity to drive up prices. Have notice this & wondered too. Then I saw pointed out on a site yesterday that this is their style. Not as you say but actually saying they are going to do something after they have pretty well completed their task. Of course that cannot be possible in regards to this quantity but it is obvious they have been buying. how much were they buying and what is the percentage of gold of their total reserves? how reliable do you consider the information from a "goldbug site" as is "numismaster.com"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 (edited) it is a well known fact that all Chinese, especially those who run the Chinese Government are extremely stupid and have no idea how to conduct business in a shrewd manner. that's why they inform the public via "lesser officials" about any purchase plans of any commodity to drive up prices. Have notice this & wondered too. Then I saw pointed out on a site yesterday that this is their style. Not as you say but actually saying they are going to do something after they have pretty well completed their task. Of course that cannot be possible in regards to this quantity but it is obvious they have been buying. how much were they buying and what is the percentage of gold of their total reserves? how reliable do you consider the information from a "goldbug site" as is "numismaster.com"? I believe that article said they were looking to invest 80 billion? Which would be 85 million ounces...or more than 1 years worldwide production output which is at about 60 million oz I think it read?? I have no idea what % gold is of their reserves. I would also be interested in what % the USD is of their reserves *now* I only mention things I see written when they seem to have some effect. I have read many times about China's increase in recent years from 4xx tons to over 1000 tons now On other sites such as commodity online http://www.commodityonline.com/news/Dragon...-17196-3-1.html But like I said I just mention them since this is a where is gold going thread & there some went.... Also interesting that when China mentions the need for a new reserve other than the $$ it always has a bump effect on metals. Although this time it is hard to say it is not because of the usual end of quarter drop that occurred yesterday. Edited July 2, 2009 by flying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerbalm Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 it is a well known fact that all Chinese, especially those who run the Chinese Government are extremely stupid and have no idea how to conduct business in a shrewd manner. that's why they inform the public via "lesser officials" about any purchase plans of any commodity to drive up prices. Have notice this & wondered too. Then I saw pointed out on a site yesterday that this is their style. Not as you say but actually saying they are going to do something after they have pretty well completed their task. Of course that cannot be possible in regards to this quantity but it is obvious they have been buying. There does seem some thing a little odd about it , i have read that the Chinese hold a little over 1000 tons of gold and if one was to believe the article that they are buying another 85.000000 oz that would equate to some thing roughly in the region of 2371 Tons (UK) of the stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 (edited) There does seem some thing a little odd about it , i have read that the Chinese hold a little over 1000 tons of gold and if one was to believe the article that they are buying another 85.000000 oz that would equate to some thing roughly in the region of 2371 Tons (UK) of the stuff. Yes it is a lot of gold at over 2000 ton but.... That plus what they have is still a total of less than half of what the US *supposedly* holds. But would put them on par with the IMF & Germany at over 3000 tons Edited July 2, 2009 by flying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchill Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 More dollar deliberations http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/07/01...-deliberations/ and http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/07/pete...ar-on-gold.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 More dollar deliberationshttp://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/07/01...-deliberations/ and http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/07/pete...ar-on-gold.html Thanks those were good From the 1st link.... Which was a good article.. This is the question isn't it? The question though remains, what possible alternatives exist? I thought it was very interesting what Roubini said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abrak Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Yes it is a lot of gold at over 2000 ton but....That plus what they have is still a total of less than half of what the US *supposedly* holds. But would put them on par with the IMF & Germany at over 3000 tons Such demand would be almost impossible to supply unless a massive hoarder was willing to sell. If you look at annual world demand it is less than 4000 tons and I suspect supply is even lower as CBs are generally net sellers of 400 tons or so. Gold demand is relatively inelastic in that if the price goes up jewellry demand goes down but not by much and often investment demand actually goes UP (its called momentum investing.) So to the extent that China 'wants' 2000 tons, it can only get it off one of the big holders (say by buying IMF stock for a starter.) Btw if you look at the demand stats, I feel that it is not a great argument that CBs have been stupid in selling gold just because the price has gone up. If you look at it the other way round and CBs had been selling 1000 tons a year (which would have given them a 20 year exit strategy as opposed to a 50 year one) I suspect the price would still be at US$400. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abrak Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I thought it was very interesting what Roubini said I thought it was extremely ODD what Roubini said. In that, I dont happen to know Roubini's work well but I generally associate him with the deflationary argument for the economy. I find it extremely ODD that he is now just seeing the inflationists side of the argument. In fact I dont really believe it. If you have a debt problem and you are the reserve currency the obvious way out of it is through inflation. To the extent it brings costs so does any other solution it is simply that the costs are generally less under inflation. To the extent he has only just worked this out it is beyond belief - the usual deflationist argument is that monetary policy is ineffective at creating an inflationary environment when interest rates reach zero. I really dont get his argument. When you put an inflationist in charge of the Fed you should assume his policies will be inflationary. To suddenly admit such an out come is increasingly valid would just seem odd - and maybe his words are being taken out of context. Bernanke is extremely clear about how he wishes to cure deflation and why - he doesnt advocate double digit inflation but he readily admits that this is a 'risk' of his policy stance. As I say I dont know much about Roubini but he is generally regarded as a deflationist and I cant believe he has simply 'woken up' to the view that inflation might be the possible end result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchill Posted July 3, 2009 Author Share Posted July 3, 2009 Fiscal patriotism Perhaps what’s needed in this time of state fiscal crisis is a bit of war mentality — patriotism, solidarity and all that. continued at http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/07/03...cal-patriotism/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 looking back a year: the Russians are buying... the Chinese are buying... fiat money is going to be worthless... everybody hoards coins in whatever drawers are empty... goldshops are sold out... riots worldwide because the crisis deepens... bakeries will be sold for a single Krüger or Maple... thousands of dollars for one grain envisioned... gold scarcity obvious, Fort Knox empty because never audited... the goldbug sites shout "BUY BUY BUY!" result? a picture is more than a thousand words: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) "BUY BUY BUY!" I shoulda....I coulda....I woulda..... Edited July 3, 2009 by flying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I shoulda....I coulda....I woulda..... why didn't ya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 (edited) I shoulda....I coulda....I woulda..... why didn't ya? Well......actually...... Edited July 4, 2009 by flying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 I shoulda....I coulda....I woulda..... why didn't ya? Well......actually...... same same me Flying. and that in a zillion of cases and opportunities. other people (i don't want to state names) have all the luck and the gift of prophecy because they are the ones "that know". you and me will always be poor boys because we lack that capability. it must be karma and the sins we committed in our former lives p.s. and i think it's unfair that karma let's you live on a beautiful island which belongs to "The Greatest Nation on Earth™", enjoy all the benefits the democrats under the rule of the irish immigrant O'Bama will dole out and i am forced to live in an uncivilised area which borders the jungle where one can dream only of a 16mbit internet connection and DirectTV with 400+ TV-channels. LIFE IS DIFFICULT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 p.s. and i think it's unfair that karma let's you live on a beautiful island which belongs to "The Greatest Nation on Earth™", enjoy all the benefits the democrats under the rule of the irish immigrant O'Bama will dole out and i am forced to live in an uncivilised area which borders the jungle where one can dream only of a 16mbit internet connection and DirectTV with 400+ TV-channels.LIFE IS DIFFICULT! Well you are a very lucky man today my friend!......... We are extending this offer to you for a very limited time. I am going to be the noble man & offer you a straight up swap.... My place here very well described by you....For your place there. But wait there is more............ If you act fast I am going to throw in a very nice Pickup Truck how is that for lucky? But wait we are not done yet Because it is Independence day tomorrow we are going to offer you alone the right while living here to secede from the greatest nation on earth anytime you like within the next year with no exit tax imposed. fine print (Of course there may be a few small fee's levied.....) So act fast as I said this offer is for a very limited time.....Unless you need more? As for this Mr Bama guy...Yes I have heard that too & just saw a picture of it earlier today........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 believe me Flying... if there had not been a texan village idiot in charge, no patriot act, no paranoid department of homeland security (and the like) my wife and me would still live happily ever after with our puertorican maid in the southwest of the Greatest Nation on Earth™. i'd go twice a year huntin' with mah Ah-lah-bah-ma redneck friends and havin a good time, mah wife would drive her car all over Floreeda all the way too Meeamee where they'd address her in español- widhout needin' some thai drivah- cos all them peeple down south be retired ones who drive slowly and carefully unlike them brain amputees here. 'course we'd forgo all them german goodies available in the Pattaya area, bitch about the foam rubber them 'mericans call bread, crave for german sausages and mix our own mustard. alas, as ah sez... ah must've been a big sinner in mah former lives that karma punishes me as it does nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 Sad but true Naam Many here plan their escape or their survival. It is not like the Texas idiot was replaced by anything better. Sounds like you have a good gig there & your place is very nice looking. The economic crisis will in fact make your existence only better there. Prices will drop on goods & services. Maybe you have finally worked off the bad karma ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexLah Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 It sure does........he he he! Not mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datsun240Z Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 It sure does........he he he! Not mine Holy Shit! At first I thought that was your garage, that would be one expensive fort knox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naam Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 Sad but true Naam Many here plan their escape or their survival.It is not like the Texas idiot was replaced by anything better. Sounds like you have a good gig there & your place is very nice looking. The economic crisis will in fact make your existence only better there. Prices will drop on goods & services. Maybe you have finally worked off the bad karma ? all irrelevant Flying! spending less money when your savings rate is already skyhigh does not enhance the quality of your lifestyle. no amount of money can change the climate, will give you seasons and a few beautiful months when neither heating nor airconditioning is required or changes the infrastructure. and money does not translate the gibberish of the natives into one of the languages you master the real BIG advantage is that people like me live in Thailand without spending a single penny of their own dough but pay for all expenses with the cash that was not grabbed by the taxman's claws and... they don't have to fear any of his raids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 (edited) I take back all the bad things I have muttered about Bernanke..... I did not realize he said this in 2002 He makes a very good case for not having Fiat backed by nothing. Today an ounce of gold sells for $300, more or less. Now suppose that a modern alchemist solves his subject's oldest problem by finding a way to produce unlimited amounts of new gold at essentially no cost. Moreover, his invention is widely publicized and scientifically verified, and he announces his intention to begin massive production of gold within days. What would happen to the price of gold? Presumably, the potentially unlimited supply of cheap gold would cause the market price of gold to plummet. Indeed, if the market for gold is to any degree efficient, the price of gold would collapse immediately after the announcement of the invention, before the alchemist had produced and marketed a single ounce of yellow metal. What has this got to do with monetary policy? Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. Bernanke. November 21, 2002 Edited July 4, 2009 by flying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchill Posted July 5, 2009 Author Share Posted July 5, 2009 For those that like charts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 For those that like charts Thanks I liked that What he calls energy fields I have been calling coiling I liken it to a spring getting ready to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teletiger Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 I take back all the bad things I have muttered about Bernanke.....I did not realize he said this in 2002 He makes a very good case for not having Fiat backed by nothing. Today an ounce of gold sells for $300, more or less. Now suppose that a modern alchemist solves his subject's oldest problem by finding a way to produce unlimited amounts of new gold at essentially no cost. Moreover, his invention is widely publicized and scientifically verified, and he announces his intention to begin massive production of gold within days. What would happen to the price of gold? Presumably, the potentially unlimited supply of cheap gold would cause the market price of gold to plummet. Indeed, if the market for gold is to any degree efficient, the price of gold would collapse immediately after the announcement of the invention, before the alchemist had produced and marketed a single ounce of yellow metal. What has this got to do with monetary policy? Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. Bernanke. November 21, 2002 Something else he said in a 2002 Washington speech. "“Deflation: Making Sure ‘It’ Doesn’t Happen Here.” Dr. Bernanke stated that the Fed would not be “out of ammunition” to counteract deflation just because the federal funds rate had fallen to 0 percent. Lowering interest rates was not the only way to get new money into the economy. He said, “the U.S. government ( )has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost.” He added, “One important concern in practice is that calibrating the economic effects of nonstandard means of injecting money may be difficult, given our relative lack of experience with such policies.”" If the government was inexperienced with the policies, they were not the usual “open market operations,” in which the government prints bonds, the Fed prints dollars, and they swap stacks, leaving the government in debt for money created by the Fed. Dr. Bernanke said that the government could print money, and that it could do this at essentially no cost. The implication was that the government could create money without paying interest, and without having to pay it back to the Fed or the banks. Was he really referring to going back to the pre 1913 (old American system) of "greenbacks"? It would sure help if the inflation (and it must come eventually) genie proved difficult to get back in the bottle. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 For those that like charts Thanks I liked that What he calls energy fields I have been calling coiling I liken it to a spring getting ready to go The technical anlyst may indeed be correct, but IMO the jury is still out. I suppose energy fields can be either positively or negatively charged. A look at mid '93 to late '95 $GOLD chart illustrates the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 (edited) I take back all the bad things I have muttered about Bernanke.....I did not realize he said this in 2002 He makes a very good case for not having Fiat backed by nothing. Today an ounce of gold sells for $300, more or less. Now suppose that a modern alchemist solves his subject's oldest problem by finding a way to produce unlimited amounts of new gold at essentially no cost. Moreover, his invention is widely publicized and scientifically verified, and he announces his intention to begin massive production of gold within days. What would happen to the price of gold? Presumably, the potentially unlimited supply of cheap gold would cause the market price of gold to plummet. Indeed, if the market for gold is to any degree efficient, the price of gold would collapse immediately after the announcement of the invention, before the alchemist had produced and marketed a single ounce of yellow metal. What has this got to do with monetary policy? Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. Bernanke. November 21, 2002 Something else he said in a 2002 Washington speech. ""Deflation: Making Sure 'It' Doesn't Happen Here." Dr. Bernanke stated that the Fed would not be "out of ammunition" to counteract deflation just because the federal funds rate had fallen to 0 percent. Lowering interest rates was not the only way to get new money into the economy. He said, "the U.S. government ( )has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost." He added, "One important concern in practice is that calibrating the economic effects of nonstandard means of injecting money may be difficult, given our relative lack of experience with such policies."" If the government was inexperienced with the policies, they were not the usual "open market operations," in which the government prints bonds, the Fed prints dollars, and they swap stacks, leaving the government in debt for money created by the Fed. Dr. Bernanke said that the government could print money, and that it could do this at essentially no cost. The implication was that the government could create money without paying interest, and without having to pay it back to the Fed or the banks. Was he really referring to going back to the pre 1913 (old American system) of "greenbacks"? It would sure help if the inflation (and it must come eventually) genie proved difficult to get back in the bottle. Regards. Referring to the highlighted sentence, who or what would it surely help if inflation could not be contained? I realize there are winners and perhaps,losers, but is anyone really helped? Edited July 5, 2009 by lannarebirth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flying Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 I suppose energy fields can be either positively or negatively charged. Definitely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 I recently read the following on one of the blogs I follow; essentially - It is easier to buy assets (like PM) with cash on the way up (in the event of an hyper/inflationary outcome) than selling assets for cash (in the event of a deflationary/burst outcome). This makes sense to me and might be of interest to those (like me) who perceive some value in the holding of PM but also think (like I do), that a deflationary outcome is more likely, at least in the near term, and perceive some value in holding physical currency as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now