This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Perhaps it is time for Doug Kass to reevaluate his "gold to triple digits" thesis?
- advertisements -
Soon enough, he'll be screaming from the rafters that gold will soon return to four digits.
"Then you'll be sorry, ALL of you will be VERY, VERY SORRY!"
tee to the motherfluckin' hee
G to the mutherfukin Sky
it's on.....like the Kong of the Donkey, infidel
here comes Bennie Boy's black flag operation to allow the market to go down.....
without anything being HIS FAULT.
Remember- MUST. CLOSE. GREEN. (even if WWIII breaks out!)
I have one question... it maybe a noob type question, but I am more interested in the replies.
People I don't like nor believe everything they (eg alex jones, max keiser, many more) say buy gold and silver. I have a large hold of gold and silver but now I am wondering if these people are tooting a larger plan and people that buy will lose in the end.
I can't see how this is possible, but still max is a moron that spreads the insanity of AGW, and alex spreads fear and is just a religious moron with a large following (of lemmings).
Am I missing something of importance? Or are these people (max and alex) ditributing a little truth and a lot of sh*t?
Who do you like more, those guys, or Ben Bernanke and Co?
That is your only choice, I'm afraid. Unless you want to just go full survivalist.
But seriously, think for yourself. Examine the evidence. Don't be swayed by ad hominem. There are plenty of people who are smart in some areas, but dumb in others.
Then forget about them, and put yourself in the company of GIANTS, like the Central Banks of the world. Ever ask yourself the question why the ECB marks their gold to market and the US doesn't?
"The insanity of AGW"? Oh, that's right, I forgot. The earth's average temperature is not rising, and science is all just bullsh*t.
I guess you missed the "A" in AGW.
Climate changes. Get over it.
Yes, god forbid that our overconsumption of resources has a negative impact on the planet.
1. What resources exactly are we overconsuming which are directly responsible for 'man-made' global warming?
2. Where is the proof directly supporting the answer(s) to #1?
Oh brother, all the answers to these questions are readily available. Stop playing dumb; unless you aren't actually playing, of course.
Buddy - you are just plain silly.
Variations in solar output account for 99% of all global climate change.
The remaining 1% is mostly caused by variations (wobble) in the earth's rotation which changes the impact of the solar radiation.
Some space dust which travels in clouds occassionally dims solar putput, but very little.
El Nino, etc. doesn't change global aggregate temperature - if it cools off here, it warms up there.
The amount of heat retained on earth is a direct function of the mass of earth and it's distance from the sun.
Stop being such a nancy-boy. The world is not going to end because of AGW. At best, man causes some heat spots around major cities, but those heat spots change the wind currents and those wind currents bring in cool air from elsewhere.
If the world were to heat up locally (not from solar change), the excess heat would radiate to space. In fact the earth is constantly radiating heat into the upper atmosphere and into space.
The only reason we don't cool down to a block of ice is solar radiation.
That you don't know this, puzzles me.
The AGW hysteria is like saying if you stand near a roaring fireplace with a lit cigarette in your mouth, the cigarette adds heat to the room.
It's the fireplace (not the cigarette) which is tossing off the heat. Snuffing out the butt (man's carbon activities) won't cool the room (earth). Only a change in the fire (the sun) can do that.
You're succumbing to the allure of what you deem 'well said' bullshit, unfortunately.
Double Well Said!!!
"Variations in solar output account for 99% of all global climate change."
If only the scientists knew this! You must write to them and tell them! How could they be so wrong? *sigh*
No no no no no, David Suzuki is only in it for the money, dontcha know.
Tangwyn did not come cheap don't ya know.
Look, show me someone who says he has zero irony in his life and I'll show you a bald faced liar.
Are you trying to imply where he has chosen to live proves he was only in it for the money? Or that he has propagated lies? If so: Fail.
"When we purchased Tangwyn, the agent took great pains to inform us it could be subdivided into three pieces. "You could sell two and pay for all of it," he said, as if that were an incentive and option. It wasn't. We are privileged to claim to own what was once First Nations land and would like to see it become a part of a larger entity, the forest. Subdividing it into smaller parcels that would be sold off to be developed further will not do that. Somehow we have to find a way to maintain the integrity of wild areas."
Sounds like it's more likely to be preserved under the his stewardship rather than turned it into a strip mall and mini golf course, no?
Its just rather close to where I live,and the house is not modest by any means.No chance of a strip mall there,which is here.
Still, just because he has a bigger house than you hardly proves that he is only in it for the money, or propagated lies for that matter; which needs to be repeated, apparently.
"..Don't tell me that your universe is altered, when you find out how he gets paid..."
I heard me the first time...
Allow me to use this duplicate post to take the opportunity to offer my appy polly logies for being deeply involved in redirecting this thread onto an almost entirely unrelated subject.
I'll try harder to just let the blather all pass by next time and stay focussed on the post.
The science seems clear that man is now having a disernable effect on the environment. Even if this alternative solar explanation was a credible one that fact that we need not feel guilty about squandering our hydrocarbon inheritance is of no relevance when faced with climate change from whhatever cause and all that that entails - Food production population displacement. etc. Incidentally when in doubt about who to beleive on an issue I tend to side with those whose ratio of (vociferousness+personal vilifiction) over monetary gain is the highest. Since the boffins are poorly paid and roundly abused for bringing this up I tend to side with them over the board of Exxon Mobil, but thats just me.
Far more pressing than climate change is population. At this stage in the Kondriatev cycle isnt it likely that someone will already planning to massive decrease the population. Whereas a nice big war would have proved useful in the past with the threat of things getting out of hand and eventual nuclear annihilation I suspect that the next winnowing of the world population will be by more exotic means. Perhaps in a bunker some levels below the one that was responsible for STUXNET there are a team of boffins working on the doozey; A genetically coded virus that infect all foreign holders of US treasury bills.
I'm not a scientist but I can readily see that the sun heats the earth 20 - 30 degrees F everyday and then we cool off as we spin around - very cool. Seems like pretty good evidence to me that the sun is the windshield and we are a bug.
Good point: We are behaving like insects!
Eric Idle has a way of putting it all into perspective:
"...And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space because there's bugger-all down here on earth."
99% of that heat also escapes Earth through the atmosphere, and this is the effect greenhouse gases influence. Add co2 to increase this blockage by 1% and there you have AGW.
No no no no. Bringing up facts like that will get you junked, you 'death eater' you. Haven't you learned anything from the all-being-master-of-time-space-and-dimension 'scientist' TMOS yet?
Of course, the fact that average surface temperatures on Venus are higher than that of Mercury don't concern you! Even though Mercury receives a much higher intensity of the suns heat radiation due to proximity. The atmosphere, in fact, plays an enourmous part in the ambient temperature of a planet.
... but hey you might be right, you might be wrong. Personally I think anything we can do to limit polution to the atmosphere, seas or deforestation is likely to leave the planet with more of its inbuilt stabilisers and recovery mechanisms - but hey! I'm just an Eco nut..
..only I'm not... i own a car and fly at least twice a year.... See I don't need to justify my actions with by having an opinion that matches - i guess you feel better about yourself because you do but deep down you must know that you can't be 100% certain you're correct. Go on, admit it.
Ultimately, on a long enough timeline, we're all dead anyway so is it an issue at all?
untrue...increased atmospheric albedo due to aerosol pollutant contamination causes a measurable and significant cooling effect and disruption of rainfall cycles, causing droughts and disrupting weather patterns on intercontinental scales
he'd rather channel Billo and ask about the tides going in and out... can't explain that...
1. Fossil fuels mainly.
2. Tons of peer reviewed articles and studies performed by credible scientists all over the world. I'm sure you've already been exposed to some of the proof and have chosen to ignore it so that you don't have to feel guilty about being a materialistic consumer whore.
This has nothing to do with consumption, and everything to do with production. Specifically of CO2.
You sound like a death worshipper.
Really? "Nothing" to do with it? So that massive turd you produced last night had nothing to do with all the crap you CONSUMED!!!!
Do you EVER think before you open your mouth?
Guess the cavemen from 15,000 years ago caused the melting of the mile thick glaciers in north america, clear down to the Ohio vally. Flintmobil must have had some really serious exhaust.
You are looking at it the wrong way, death worshipper, like reading a book upside down. It makes you look like you don't know what you are doing.
By framing it as a matter of what is consumed, you imply that we should consume less. That argument extends out to demand the extinction of the human race.
Sorry I don't worship at the altar of "science". Rather, I AM a scientist. Science is not a religion. It does not have dogma. Any scientist who attempts to obfuscate his research the way the climate "scientists" have would be laughed out of the room by real scientists (chemists, physicists, biologists, etc).
Christ, you guys are a regular cargo cult in here.
What is your field again Tmos? Toothpaste?
Yap, when it comes to the environment the guys that come outta that discipline sure know their shit from a potato in their pants <sark>
Speaking entirely for myself: I don't worship 'death'. I just hate stupidity, and I can't stand the pig-headed ignorant. Sure, I'd like to see them all suddenly snap awake and take back their respective countries, but hell, who's kidding who? We know that ain't gonna happen anytime soon in the fructose soaked US.
So fuck em.
FWIW: Thanks for helping to lower my cavity count.
And here comes the ad hominem. Par for the course for death worshiping nature-firsters. As it happens, my lab group has developed the most radically advanced antimicrobial technology in the history of humanity, one that will end communicable disease, hospital acquired infection, and cancer. Yes, the first product to hit the market was the CURE FOR CAVITIES (in the form of an antimicrobial sealant), but that doesn't make me a "toothpaste researcher".
You clearly know nothing about science. Climate "science" is funded 100% by grants, 99% of which come from the government. Now, what do you think would happen if the field said that "oh, sorry, it looks like our model was actually flawed, and it was covered up by some members of our field"? They would lose their grant funding. They would lose ALL grant funding.
By scaremongering, they justify their own existence. They have shut down all argument from other fields of science (just like you attempted to do with me with your asinine ad hominem attack), and have corrupted the granting agencies to the point that anyone who comes out against AGW can immediately kiss ANY grant funding they receive goodbye.
You demand that man stop the very process that gives him life in the name of preventing some future calamity. That is death worship. Go fuck yourself and die (it's environmentally friendly!).
lol take it easy sparky, I said " Thanks for cutting down the cavities"... though I am beginning to wonder what your part was in that 'discovery'.
That's not an ad hom by the way: you were the one claiming to be the be all and end all of the scientific community that trumps all other scientists; I was only offering everyone some perspective.
Say, speaking of 'ad homs', almost every post you've called anyone who disagrees with you a 'death eating worship hater' or some such nonsense; hypocrisy much?
So if you 'cure' cavities that entitles you to 'supreme scientist of all forever'? My bad, I was under the impression that was a speciality and it is very insulting and unprofessional for you to comment on fields in which your experience is obviously terribly limited.
That's quite the elaborate worldwide conspiracy you've concocted there, spanning continents, respected universities...; wow if only one could be as omniscient as you...we should get you working on cancer.
But again, industry scientists with a vested interest in keeping the other game going, no conflict there apparently, that 3% MUST be telling the whole truth they're paid not to.... lol.
"You clearly know nothing about science. Climate "science" is funded 100% by grants, 99% of which come from the government. Now, what do you think would happen if the field said that "oh, sorry, it looks like our model was actually flawed, and it was covered up by some members of our field"? They would lose their grant funding. They would lose ALL grant funding."
So? Lots of research gets funded by the same sources, doesn't make their conclusions any less valid. Especially when it is corraborated by other institutions worldwide. Oh wait, I forgot, it's all a big conspiracy to defraud you out of the Humvee you so richly deserve, right?
What a marooon.
Mudflap already addressed your flawed logic so all I'll say is that you sound like some arrogant American desperately trying to rationalize his own materialism and greed.
You, on the other hand, sound like a fool trying to justify mass murder and economic genocide in the name of "the environment".
Yup, because anything that forces people to live less wastefully must be a part of some conspiracy to kill Americans and reduce their "freedoms". I'm glad this shithole country is collapsing, it's what you and all the other partisan hacks deserve.
Have I got some Music for You! (language warning)
You 'death worship eater' you.
Haha, you think it's rich Americans that suffer from global warming legislation. What a maroon.
Yah, just 'get over it'...and pray you live somewhere where the climate change will be 'beneficial'.
Climate change deniers mantra, "3% of scientists can't be wrong!" (even if they were bought and paid for by industry to ignore the big ol' mozza ball hanging in their faces)
BTW, just because you can admit it's happening, and that humans are likely responsible at least in part, doesn't mean that you automatically subscribe to the 'solutions' proposed by those looking to profit from it while doing nothing substantive to arrest its progression... capiche?
The climate will always change. I just disagree that we are causing more than 1% of it. CO2 is not a bad thing. I follow the money, and once al gore started and started making money i knew they were going to push the issue with lies. I have problems with chemical polutions, even the ones we use as cleaning products. The elits will not spread how bad that stuff is, just some CO2 that is actually harmless.
Either way, I like to think for myself, and to me AGW doesn't make sense. Plus there isn't a single entity in existence that can solve it.
The funny thing is they predict 1 or 2 degrees of temp different like 50 years away? Come on people... can you see the bs in that. That can be a rounding error. They couldn't predict anything that far off.
"I follow the money, and once al gore started and started making money i knew they were going to push the issue with lies"
Lies? Ohhh, the infamous 'email lies' that have been completely debunked, you mean?
If so, here's a primer to get you started on your road to epiphany. Assuming, of course, that you are actually still open to new, verifiable, information from credible sources and don't just want your fantasy world to remain 'whole' no matter what the cost- which isn't gonna happen no matter what you decide I am afraid I have to tell ya.
Quote from "debunking global warming contrarians":
"The "trick," which was used in a paper published in 1998 in the science journal Nature, is to combine the older tree ring data with thermometer data.
"Hiding the decline" in this email refers to omitting data from some Siberian trees after 1960. This omission was openly discussed in the latest climate science update in 2007 from the IPCC, so it is not "hidden" at all."
LOL--way too funny!
The "trick" was used and "hidden" in the 1998 paper. However it was openly discussed in 2007 thus making it "not hidden" retroactively. LOL you can't make up this stuff! LOL
These people are sucking at the swollen, perverted teat of Al "internet" Gore. You must be so proud of yourself.
Hear that 'whooshing' sound? That's you, perpetuating your own ignorance by allowing the bleeding obvious to pass way over your head.
"Thick as a plank" is what the Irish call it, I believe. (When they're being nice, anyway)
Suggestion: try reading it again. And this time see if you can make it to the part that shows you how idiotic your last comment was.
Oh, I think I've read enough! Massive back pedaling and spin. Yeah, all that temperature data was fudged, but it was done in the most scientific manner possible.
I'm still laughing, and your still lying.
You're right, I'm not laughing. I don't find your wilful ignorance at all funny.
Typical, unfortunately, but not funny.
I'm sure that you felt you'd 'read enough' the moment you had some insipid misinformed talking point triggered; which is, as I've already pointed out, exactly what your problem is, dupe.
"Claims that the e-mails are evidence of fraud or deceit, however, misrepresent what they actually say. A prime example is a 1999 e-mail from Jones, who wrote: "I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e., from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline." Skeptics claim the words "trick" and "decline" show Jones is using sneaky manipulations to mask a decline in global temperatures. But that’s not the case. Actual temperatures, as measured by scientific instruments such as thermometers, were rising at the time of the writing of this decade-old e-mail, and (as we’ve noted) have continued to rise since then. Jones was referring to the decline in temperatures implied by measurements of the width and density of tree rings. In recent decades, these measures indicate a dip, while more accurate instrument-measured temperatures continue to rise."
Maybe you're not deliberately lying, but you certainly are working hard to cling to your disinformation.
Science is science. Bullshit is bullshit.
Oh I forgot -- we're now in an era of Post-Normal Science.
Re I feel free
I am not surprised that you forgot since it can get very challenging keeping track of all the AGW lies, deceptions, mis directions etc. Remember, also, many members of ZH actually understand computer modeling, and some of us have even perused the read me harry text, the one that describes the computer code. You know, the code from the climate model that shows an upward sloping curve even if you input random numbers. Peddle your BS somewhere else.
"You know, the code from the climate model that shows an upward sloping curve even if you input random numbers"
Interesting, I had a quick look on the interwebs and couldn't find that, could you provide a link please RS?
Pardon me if I don't simply take your word for it.
I remember playing some civ type game as a kid (say 20 years ago) where you had to put CO2 generating plants on planets you were terraforming to raise the temperature, etc. Seeing as all the carbon comes from limited supplies of fuel anyhow i'd rather side with the AGW mob if i had to choose without sound intelligence either way.
If you want sound intelligence, look up the heat capacity of CO2, then compare it to the heat capacity of the average atmospheric concentration of gasses (including water). Look at the atmosphere at the extremes of water concentration.
If you do all of that, you will notice that in fact the entire amount of heat forcing from CO2 is FAR less than the noise from the change in water concentration. You will also find that CO2 has a lower than average heat capacity than atmospheric gasses including the average water concentration. As such, adding more CO2 causes cooling (EXTREMELY slight), rather than warming, assuming a constant thickness of the atmosphere (I have yet to see anyone argue that we are increasing the thickness of the atmosphere).
Indeed, if we need to do anything about changing the climate, it's moderating our WATER VAPOR output. When you think about it, it makes sense. Engines put out a lot of water vapor in the exhaust. There are heat islands around cities, where there are lots of engines running, etc.
Don't believe me? Check for yourself. All of the data is available on Google.
lol, looks like the death worshippers don't really know about nor want to discuss real science. They just want to wave their hands around and call people names.
riiight. Unlike the 'real' scientists like you, who just ignore all the facts and focus on the BS.
lol, you think original research and theoretical physics are "BS". You are an anti-intellectual death worshiper. You don't deserve the air you breathe. Your CO2 emissions are killing African children by the thousands. You know what to do.
Ad hom, check.
Vague reference to 'original research and theroetical blah blah blah', check.
Callous indifference to the suffering of others, check.
Yah, you're about as credible on 'climate change' as Ronald Reagan describing the 'horrors' of universal health care.
Stick to killing germs, according to you you're to mouth greeblies what Andrew Jackson was to 'first nations' (sorry Akak) children.
Do your own homework. Best advice anyone can give anyone. Every living person has some bias or agenda they sell in their speech. Hell the people who said to pile into housing in 03 were right, but didn't tell you when to pile out. And I might be the minority but if things play out the way I expect there will definitely be a time to unload gold/silver and maybe the people you mentioned won't share that exit point.
So maybe gold and silver will be a loser, who knows? I'm all in on them because I don't see a lot of options. The markets are a rigged casino and the currencies are all fiat. I'm just trying to get into assets that are hard to devalue or seize (looking at you real estate).
Be your own person and don't just follow anyone's statements as facts, including guys on the Internet using Zimbabwe Ben as an avatar :)
My View also.
I will continue putting 5-10% of my income into hard assets. No matter the price. I will stop doing that when I am dead, or have no more income.
You might feel more comfortable listening to Glenn Beck. I hear he likes gold too and I'm sure his views will be more in line with yours.
He loves it all the way to the fucking bank as he
bought in at around $800 or so!
Except that all he buys is historicals from Goldline, so gold has another 5-600/ounce to go before he breaks even.
You have to get passed the fact that whatever their motives are, they are correct. Sort of like the Christians in Egypt protecting the Muslims from the real evil...
Money is evil. Hell in a handbasket is here.
He's playing a pump and dump strategy but using JPM as the excuse.
What do you think happens when all those people who bought want to take profit? Oh yes, that's right, Max Keiser will have long gone.
I'm not taking a profit. I'll hand it over to my son.
The Bearing has a similar plan, hand it over to our kid.
Even a brainless bearing can figure that one out!
Does anyone truly believe that the printing presses will stop? That is the only valid explanation one can accept for not investing in hard assets such as gold and silver. Paul Volcker had to raise interest rates sky high to contain inflation (they didn't even have QE, POMO then). A 2% rise in interest rates today wipes out our whole ponzi economy. Good luck with FRNs for those who want to hold them.
Exactly... if people think of Gold as investment they should buy ETFs...
If you want Gold as security you buy hard assets.
You dont sell this security when its convenient. Why would you sell out your future?
Only if you are in trouble ...
Can you come up with any way for the US to meet it's financial obligations through any other mechanism than through monetization/money creation?
If the answer is "No" then PM's and other tangibles are the only way to protect yourself.
With you on Aj, but how dare you dis Mad Max... seriously, with Max the crazy is just his shtick... he's a pretty sharp guy, and is always entertaining.
As long as you don't hold paper (maybe some miners), u r "golden!"
No point giving good advice to a half retard!! Let him do whatever he like with his own ass!!
IMHO, Everybody is a human and has biases, hidden agendas, vanity, fear etc. Listen and read. Your ability to understand the 1 real conspiracy out of 10 theories, could make or break you. Critical thinking required, so bite "the apple". Eat the whole thing and don't apologize.
It should also occur to you that perhaps they are not leading the charge but following the advice of other much more successful people/investors. Many on ZH didn't come to their conclusions about Precious Metals because of AJ and MK. And some who claim they are contrarian - well what is more contrarian than PMs in a world that derides them as barbaric for the past half century?
If you are uncomfortable holding your PMs nobody is stopping you from selling them. What made you buy them in the first place? How do you feel about holding them? There is only one way to know how you will feel for getting rid of them so either sell them or stop posting about your neurosis.
If watching or reading Max and Alex troubles you, just go to Harvey Organ and Jim Sinclair's Mineset. Speaking for myself, I like them best.
Also Clive Maund, he has a good read too.
Don't judge the message by its messenger. They're *all* nuts. And so is everybody here at ZH. In fact some of us aren't even real people -- just cheap AIs with bad attitudes and limited vocabularies. ( Hi, Robo! )
You're the only rational person. You have to judge the arguments based on their strengths and flaws, and on what you smell on the wind.
You have to decide what you are hedging against, before you decide how to hedge.
Fed delenda est.
( p.s. don't bother with gold, it's so valuable it's practically useless. buy silver, in 90% recognizably-old American coins. But first make sure you have enough food. )
Gold being "useless"?....well, I don't know...I know of one settler that bought land (about 200 acres back in the 1850's in Cali) from a local Native American tribe for one $5.00 gold coin, a chicken, a saddle, 2 mules, and a jug of whiskey.
Nowadays, gold will get you the higher-end things such as surgery, dental care, land, freedom in another country....
Yeah, OK. Those were honest Injuns.
It's just that, in the world I am hedging against, an ounce of AU is worth about what a good car costs today. But what I need to buy is chickens and firewood. I am not a prince.
Land with water is more expensive. But on the other hand, you'll have H2o for your chickens.
Land with timber is quite common.
"I have a large hold of gold and silver but now I am wondering..."
One big loudmouth liar!! You would be more than happy for someone else to blow the gold bubble on your behalf if you really own some PM. Your either do not have it or your are on the wrong side of the trade. Anyhow, still a big liar!!
I had that same thought myself.
Well, basically I come to believe that you have to have some PM only when you believe in it. And it is not a shorttime investment. Its not an investment at all, its a security..
We will see in ten years.... who will still buy gold, and who will have dismissed the idea alltogheter...
I am sure the world is going to continue and/or restart again. Its not the end of the world that is coming.
What I find scary about Max Keiser and Alex Jones is that they sometimes really seem to WANT THE WORLD to come to an END....
Reminds me of other religious nuts.... and you have to be a religious nut to long for armageddon!
AGW stands for ANTI-Global warming? Yes, those are some big nuts to...
Thank you. I thought I was the only one who had reservations about those two. I like a lot of what thay say, but not all of it. I guess nobodys perfect. (Except Ron Paul)
I purchase Au and Ag because I hope to preserve wealth from the gangster moves of the international bankers, not because some talking head said so. No matter what happens in the markets, I own a physical thing, in my possession, not a digit in a spreadsheet or a printed piece of paper stating I have a claim on some wealth.
Do you really think Au and Ag will be a 'bad' hedge against FRN failure? Of course, you should limit your investment to 10% or so 'they' say.
Sorry I didn't accumulate more...
This guy, Kass, is a complete and utter fucking moron. Anyone who listens to him or trades/invests off of his advice deserves to be separated from their money.
"Mr. Reynolds has apparently changed his name to ... Turd Ferguson."
"Yeah...that's right. Turd Ferguson. It's a funny name."
Hilariously Hilarious (at 1:01 or so...with big hat around 4:30)
Has been fixed -- no big deal. Flash dash in gold happened but now has been pacified...
Anyone who thinks Gold is not going to triple digits, is not AWARE of the world around us, and overseas.
Don't get caught naked...........10% at least.
You can live like a king for a month with one ounce of gold in any under-developed country. I am talking hotels, food, prostitutes, guns, and drugs.
you sound verminous Q
I have needs.
living in a hotel in the third world with guns, prostitutes and drugs....
Well, I suppose you could donate the money to an orphange. But that would be inflationary and you would be subsidizing the orphan creation industry, which happens to be prostitution. Prostitutes need drugs. Pimps need guns. Inflation creates more need for greater quantities of money. I submit, I should enjoy the money because the outcome is the same either way.
Same in Costa Rica...
Hey, that´s where I now!
Hey Do Chen if you are ever in Peurto Viejo, look up my pal Roger at the Tex Mex. I just finished builiding a house in Hone Creek. Now on to the guns!
In Quepos, actually. But, done with the fishing..., NOW I am on vacation.
Nice to see that even in small town Costa Rica they have broadband.
Sounds like my first trip to the Dominican Republic
Sounds like my first trip to Camden, NJ.
A great short life!
It's Iran and Israel.
Cotton up 7.3% (bal) and sugar (sgg) up 3.2% TODAY. God help the 2+ billion desparately poor in the world.
oops. where's blythe?
she's over there in the corner, curled up in a fetal position
That's her in the spot-light, losing her retirement
Trying to keep up with youAnd I don't know if she can short itOh no, I've sold too muchI haven't bought enough
Every minute, of every waking hour, she's shorting her positions...
Consider This. Consider this the hint of the century. Consider this. The Silver...will bring her to her knees...a fail.
That's her in the corner, losing her contango
If that was spontaneous, I'm impressed. You all sing pretty well too. :)
Everybody Hurts - Finally!
She's in line at the FED discount window with her ATM card!!!
I seem to be the only person who has predicted and now observed that gold / silver are now moving EXACTLY INVERSELY to the stock market. As I have said, SHORT DOW / S&P 500 and LONG GOLD / SILVER / PRECIOUS METALS STOCKS is the new trade.
Yes, it was you alone against the herd mighty white buffalo. Thank you for saving my fortune. Welcome to 2008.
HAHAHAHA!!! Brilliant! +1
Your thesis intrigues me. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Markets look like the pattern is changing. In the last few hours, ES is down hard, Yen, CHF, EUR up just as much, and even GBP up. Copper and grains down. Gold and silver up.
....well at least you got junked an equal number of times on your duplicate posts. That shows dedication and committment in this here ZH fight club.
Final stage of a bubble: exponential growth.
I don't see the exponential growth...not in gold, at least.
The funniest part is all the junks you're getting...Hamy
OK, I'm with you... but you forgot to say when it starts.
(Shit... got me again "Hamy"!)
long Gold, short S&P, you've got my number
So that's a 0.8 change that gets the crowd excited?
I'm sure there are more things that have moved >1%. Picture the excitement.
Where the hell is Sack to buy futures to keep things going up? This minor dip is going to break Birinyi's ruler....
I think Kass meant to say 'silver to triple digits'
Never had a doubt.
Nothing on the horizon but bad news and Chinese buying gold hand over fist.
givin' that shiny truth serum...
Here's some undeniable truth serum...
Yet silver is more rare than gold. Anyone think we can hit a 1:1 ratio between the two? or a mean destruction flipping the ratio on its head?
15:1 silver to gold in earth's crust. Put down the skittles or apply for job as cnbc jockey.
I think it's got 10:1 for sure maybe even 8:1.
And just wait until inflation, which the USA has been exporting, get imported back to the USA.
"In the absence of a gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good and thereafter decline to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as claims on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to be able to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."
The above was said by Alan Greenspan, 'Gold and Economic Freedom' in 1966.
I remember that speech all too well and it's implications have been ignored. However he is incorrect-
In the absence of a gold standard, there IS A WAY to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There IS A SAFE store of value- food, water and guns.
Only if you have a secure way of replenishing those things as they are consumed.
All of the goldbugs claim to hate inflation. But they want inflation so their gold goes up in price.
When inflation takes hold, we will just vote to raise taxes on the rich and then we will refund the govt., give it to the workers in the form of tax cuts.
It is social jui-jitsu. Yea, one day we will all do the right thing together. One day, we will all be drinking that free Bubbleup, and eating Rainbow stew....It's gonna be great!!
Gold could go to triple digits...
...as soon as the DOW does too...
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
Notice on Racial Discrimination.