- I am bullish on gold because of the ongoing currency debasement by profligate governments. At some point in time, the world is going to see a currency crisis. This will be the global monetary meltdown I have been warning about. My feeling is that by Q4 2010, it will be obvious to everyone that the world is in trouble! The sheeple will flee to gold, paper assets will collapse, famine is brewing …. world war is on the horizon! In times on extreme distress, a phase change event occurs in the price of gold. It will go parabolic!
Gold to Reach Parabolic Top of $10,000 by 2012 – Yes, $10,000 by 2012!
… As I see it gold and silver’s parabolic rise will coincide with future sovereign debt defaults, currency inflation/devaluations and rampant asset price inflation. This should happen from mid 2011 thru 2012 with gold reaching a parabolic top of $10,000.
1. No History of Consequence
Gold has only been trading unencumbered from backing fiat currencies since Nixon’s 1971 decision to stiff the French, etc. when trying to repatriate their paper dollars for the metal. As such, there is little history of consequence (of value) to measure market action.
2. Market Manipulation
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) recently held a major hearing which blew the doors off the bullion metals trading markets – the “sleeper” which I predict will be viewed retrospectively as the gold price liberation event.
We all knew JP Morgan Chase had been manipulating the metals markets on behalf of the FED and other central banks and this event proved it! The hearing (specifically Jeff Christensen’s statements) inadvertently confirmed that trading has been occurring using naked shorts/no hedging and that there was little bullion (only about one ounce of metal for 100 ounces of a trade) backing up such trades should the holders ask for it rather than cash or roll their futures into other futures paper. This revelation was much worse than even critics, such as the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), had expected.
3. Insufficient Physical Inventories
It seems that the Asian and Mid East buyers and owners of bullion have been removing gold from the “normal” bank and bullion dealers vaults and taking it “home” thus leaving much less than previously thought in the London and New York and Toronto vaults. A case in point is that of a major metals investor in Toronto who finally got to view his stash of metal in the Scotia Macotta vault and noted that there wasn’t nearly enough metal to back up his certificates, even though he was paying storage and all kinds of other fees on his metal.
The above begs the question: “Do these large ETF bullion funds actually have any or much bullion at all?” The answer is clearly that they do not and that, in the near future, when some serious speculators from Asia, Russia and the mid-East get their acts together, they will force the issue.
The revelation that there is insufficient physical inventory to meet this new demand for physical ownership of the actual bullion (i.e. show me the money!) is about to blow the price lid skyward.
$10,000 per ounce by 2012
This should happen from mid 2011 thru 2012 and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a US $10,000 per ounce top during this period!
The 2008/2009 crash originated with the financial institutions which governments bailed out. This time there is no institution – certainly not the IMF – to bail out the governments. Gold and silver metals and mining shares (the new Homestakes) will be the clear winners.
Call me nuts; assume I do too much reading; assume I don’t have access to appropriate reality checks; assume what you want – but I am increasingly confident that the fundamental realities of fragile sovereign debt, market manipulation, insufficient physical supply and the need for a safe haven investment refuge, will drive precious metals particularly, and commodities generally, dramatically higher in the not too distant future. Get yourself positioned to take advantage of this once in a lifetime ride.
- Was last Friday’s jobs report of 441,000 jobs created really genuine? Obviously not. It is another obfuscation nd mis-direction by the PTB. Even in the census jobs created, there is alot of shenanigans. Workers are fired and then rehired to make the jobs created figure look good. Even the ‘Birth and Death’ statistical adjustments are a sham. Brett Arends explains:
The news on jobs isn’t as bad as it seemed on Friday. It’s worse.
President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner were trying to putting on a happy face, but the markets weren’t buying. They have tumbled worldwide since the latest payroll data. But instead of overreacting, the markets may only just be waking up to the real bad news.
1. Look out ahead.
We already know that when you strip out the short-term Census jobs, May’s jobs growth was a pitiful 41,000. But what people haven’t realized is that the leading indicators for June are even worse. TrimTabs Investment Research Inc. tracks the real-time jobs picture by monitoring income tax deposits at the Treasury. And these have suddenly started falling. Based on the latest data, the firm predicts the economy will actually lose up to 200,000 jobs, net, in June. “The big news is that we have a job loss of about 200,000 coming in June,” says Trim Tabs’ Madeline Schnapp, “and the market isn’t ready for it.”
It’s not just the stock market. You can bet that the administration — and the country — isn’t ready either. Remember, we need to create about 100,000 just to keep up with population growth.
2. One and a half million people have ‘disappeared’?
The government says the unemployment rate “edged down” to 9.7% — keeping it below the politically sensitive 10% level. Read more jobs coverage. But that’s only because about one and a half million people have just, miraculously “disappeared” from the official labor force. A million and a half people disappearing? It sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory. But there it is, buried in the fine print of the government’s own data.
From May 2009 to May 2010, the U.S. “civilian non-institutional population” of prime working age — 20 to 64 — expanded by one and a half million, 180.5 million to 182 million. Yet over the same period the official tally of the labor force over age 20 held steady at just 148 million. What happened to those extra people?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics doesn’t have a full explanation. “We don’t have direct questions (in the survey) addressing that fact,” said a spokeswoman. But many of the disappeared are “unemployed who have decided not to look for work any more,” or who haven’t looked for work recently. Anyone who hasn’t actively sought a job in the last four weeks vanishes from the rolls.
People dropping out completely are not a bullish sign — unless, perhaps, one is measuring the unemployment figures for the government.
3. Some of the new “jobs” may not even exist
That’s because they’re being counted by the Federal Department of Guesswork. Ever since 1994, say economists, Uncle Sam has been using some statistical, er, “adjustments” to the core jobs data to come up with the, er, “true” picture. It will surprise no one that these “adjustments” make the data look better, rather than worse. The government makes estimates about new companies being started up as well as jobs being lost.
Those adjustments may be adding as many as half a million extra “jobs” to the core figure, says independent economist John Williams at Shadow Government Statistics.
4. The private sector picture may still be in recession
Some recovery: The number employed in the private sector is still about 900,000 below where it was even a year ago, and about 8 million below where it was in 2007. And remember, it has to keep growing just to stand still, because the population is growing.
“There’s practically no growth in private sector employment,” says Gluskin Sheff strategist David Rosenberg. Jobs growth was anemic even in the parts of the economy allegedly leading the recovery, such as manufacturing. And now, he says, many leading economic indicators have started to turn down again.
The jobs growth is so slow, Rosenberg says, that by his calculations “it is going to take years, probably five to seven years, before we recoup the employment (lost) from the Great Recession,” he says. Five to seven years? “There’s a significant chance,” he adds, “that for the first time ever we will go into the next recession without having seen a new peak in employment.”