What Happened The Last Time Gold And Central Banks Were So Far Apart?

Tyler Durden's picture

From 9/11 on, Gold and the world's central bank balance sheets were as correlated as over-consumption and a hangover (and linked just as causally we suggest). Then a funny thing happened in 2008 - gold slid as the central banks went extreme. Of course, as this divergence occurred, the world's stock markets imploded almost as if the central banks knew their status quo was about to go entirely pear-shaped. From 2008 until November of 2011 (when the world's central banks began their coordinated ease-fest) the correlation went limit up once again. Since then, Gold and CB largesse once again decoupled as liquidity is flushed around the world's markets to suspend reality just a little longer. While this divergence is not as extreme as in 2008, something is afoot.

Then...

 

and now...

 

Charts: Bloomberg

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mr. Magniloquent's picture

Even easier still to warp definitions and contort them to whatever one desires. The sole purpose of language is to communicate. Spouting off that others are fools for using a definition proven in theory, logic, and pratice over the course of centuries rather than your bogus and provably incorrect assertions is no way to get a point across; ergo, communicate.

The United States of America is undeniably Fascist in practice if not title. Private corporations seemlessly and synergistically cooperate for mutual benefit of those two groups. That they do not do this openly, does not differntiate the actual practices from Fascism.

You will not attain victory by attempting to reprogram accepted definitions within a place such as this. If you hope to effectively communicate anything to anyone here, I suggest you alter your approach.

Landotfree's picture

Humans have choice, attaching definitions to rules and then saying that is the Truth does not make it the Truth.   There is no fair, there is no equal, there is no safe.... all just made up words.  

The only solution is to be as equal and fair to each as possible, people don't like that solution.   Oh well, not my problem.   This system will collapse like all the rest, most probably it will be rinsed and repeated until Man no longer exists on this floating rock.... maybe I am wrong and they will try a different path.

Well, I am going for the night... I'll let you guys talk about how the we'll make the next system fair, and equal... sorry guys it has never happened and never will... those words do not exist.

monkeyshine's picture

You are missing the point. Fair and Equal do exist. If I have 2 grams of gold and decide to give each of my children 1 gram of gold, then I have been fair and equal in my example, in my action wrt my 2 kids. Those definitions of fair and equal exist. They are understandable. One kid may think he/she deserved a larger share or even needed a larger share but that is immaterrial to the definition. An outsider would say with respect to the division of gold to my 2 kids I was fair and equal. I say it was fair and equal and by using those words everyone understands what I mean. That is what the other poster meant about communication.

I don't have to be fair. They are not equal, but I did treat them equally.  These terms exist, they are real, they have meaning that we all understand in the context. But that does't mean the world is fair, or that people or entities or systems are fair and equal. 

Nobody ever said the system we have was intended to be fair and equal. It never was and it never will be. There are natural inequalities such as strength, height, weight and possibly even capacity to learn and inteligence. There are environmental inequalities - nobody chooses to whom they are born, or where they are raised.  We can build a system with the goal of being fair and equal and it will fail. All Capitalists know this.  Our schools are built to be fair and equal, each school gets the same number of dollars per student, same number of teachers per student, same food, same textbooks.  But the teachers are not equal The neighborhoods are not equal. The children are not equal. The outcomes will never be equal. Is it fair?  We tried to be fair, but life itself is not fair or equal.  Those who can rise above their situation, their natural handicap are given recognition for it - scholarships, money, jobs, fame even.  Those are the motivators to both help equalize an unfair situation.  We can't do much more that this. By the same token, those who have what appear to be all the advantages and screw it up are shamed, ridiculed, shunned. They have the motivation to retain and utlize any advantage they are given or have earned and that continues throughout their life. 

 

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

No, for fact & truth which includes all definitions there is NO choice.

What’s real is not debatable.

Debate is for what may yet happen, and for fiction. Nothing else.

You are busy arguing a fiction, applying incorrect names to incorrect situations.

The situation itself that you describe is firmly, factually, immovably attached to the FASCISM definition. Nothing else.

What you are attempting to do is call the situation by a name which means its precise opposite.

You can no more succeed as if you argued down was up, blue was polka-dot neon or that bricks fly like airplanes.

In short, you’re either a fraud or a moron. One of the two must be true. The one thing we can expect NOT for you to provide is fact.

akak's picture

Landotfree, your use of the words "capitalism" and "capitalist" is about as logical, insightful and accurate as AnAnonymous' use of the word 'american'.  Apparently, for you, the words "capitalism" and "capitalist" are merely just synonyms for "that which I do not like" and "those whom I do not like (and/or those whom I envy)".

MachoMan's picture

Kind of...  look at it this way...  if "capitalism" performs the same way each time it gets implemented in the real world and this way is different than the textbook definition would have you believe, then should you follow the textbook, or the real world example?  The simple fact is that characterizing an economic system is largely a micro process simply because it merely describes a single point on a continuum...  mako is drawing back another step and characterizing the entire continuum...

It's not that either of you is incorrect, per se...  it's that you're describing different things.

Temporalist's picture

The argument is much simpler than all this.  It would be easier just to say:  Humans are selfish, violent, greedy, jealous, power hungry and shortsighted no matter the "system" they participate in.

Native Americans had all the space they could ever want without needing to come into contact with one another for violent purposes but they still had tribal wars (they didn't even have horses until Europeans brought them so they had limited mobility as well).  They did not have cities, no universal currency, no industry, no banking, no "government" but still found ways to war with one another. 

Not knocking the natives but the point is it will never be perfect no matter the name as long as humans are the operators of the "system" (unless they evolve but since so many don't believe in evolution that may never happen).

shovelhead's picture

Interesting theory.

Did single cells have to believe in evolution to become multi-cellular?

Evolution as an act of faith?

This is new.

Being Free's picture

"As you can tell by my ID, I have never been identified previously as a lefty"

wtf, are you serious???  This is just too funny.

 

NoDebt's picture

Landotfree is a troll, guys.  I'd recognize that language and intentionally distorted logic anywhere (notice the BS smattering of "God's law" references in his post?  He doesn't believe that, doubtful he really believes much of anything he's posting).  Coupled with the small gang of up/down arrow monkeys he's brought along he's getting exactly the rise out of you he expected.

He's not here to debate or even express an opinion.  He's here to disrupt.  He's an online "community organizer."

I pray this is actually the same guy on Twitter:

https://mobile.twitter.com/LandOTfree

That would be hysterical.  I'll always remember him as that guy from ZH who said "I may be out of cash, but I've been grindin since 1776 so ima be alright."  Hah! 

 

Harbanger's picture

"As you can tell by my ID, I have never been identified previously as a lefty."

-LMAO!! Thanks, I loved that..."As you can tell by my ID"... That's the funniest sht I've heard in a long time. 

WmMcK's picture

In the real world reprogramming the simulator (if you could get past the security) would get you time in the pen.
Think Bradley Manning ...

Vendetta's picture

I agree as well, USA has become fascist with smattering of socialism just enough to keep most from seeing the truth.  I disagree with a comment someone else made in another ZH article that Mussolini was lying when he characterized fascism as corporate control of the state.  Dictators' do not lie all the time otherwise people will get wise to it and the brainwashing won't achieve its desired ends.

ie:"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power' -Benito Mussolini

"As soon as by one's own propaganda even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one's own right is laid." -Adolf Hitler

 


 

Clint Liquor's picture

I guess History wasn't your best subject.

auric1234's picture

He's clearly not a student of the Great Depression

 

TWSceptic's picture

Any system build on the premise of taking out what you did not put in has a limited shelf life. 

 

That's not capitalism, that's politics.

Landotfree's picture

To me that is the exact definition of capitalist or more like absolute capitalism.   I am sorry but the word "fair" does not exist, which is what you are looking for.   Any system based on exaction of more than you put in is doom to fail short term... you might get a generation or so.

As far as I am concern, all you nutbags or more like your children's children can rinse and repeat.... same conclusion every time.

Mr. Magniloquent's picture

Within absolute capitalism, all exchanges are equivalent regarding the parties involved.

If the exchange were not equivalent, if the exchange were not mutually benefitial, the exchange would not happen.

The presence of cohersion or fraud disqualifies the exchange as being capitalistic--let alone an exchange, as the process then becomes theft.

MachoMan's picture

Then capitalism dances on the head of a needle...  and has a lifespan of a couple moments.  I'm not sure such a system is worthy of accolade.

Mr. Magniloquent's picture

Dancing on the head of a needle is a good thing when defining terms. That means it has "pin-point accuracy", or precision at least. Regardless, do you prefer a system were cohersion, violence, and fraud are present for an exchange to be valid?

MachoMan's picture

Dancing on the head of a needle is a good thing when defining terms. That means it has "pin-point accuracy", or precision at least.

Possibly, but what it also means is that the crucible of the real world will deny it from ever actually being realized...  thus becoming more akin to a cult.

Regardless, do you prefer a system were cohersion, violence, and fraud are present for an exchange to be valid?

False dilemma (among many others). 

I hate to break the news to you, but cohersion, violence, and fraud are present in every system...  this is what Mako is saying...  whenever your theory actually hits the real world...  that perfect snowman that is capitalism is finally built...  it gets blowtorched by the sun and the only thing left is a dirty puddle in the yard.  You might get a little while out of it, but you're simply idealizing a very, very specific point on the timeline.  Simply put, advocates of capitalism have no answer for the rational actor's desire to avoid the normalization of profits...  It's the paradox of capitalism.  When it finally evolves into its inevitable self, capitalists start calling it socialism or a myriad of other isms.  In the end, it's the same process...  over and over...  and the label matters not (aside from only describing a very specific point on the timeline).

Mr. Magniloquent's picture

Violence will not disappear in a capitalist society, correct. However, I do not see how it would play even a major role within one. At worst, the cohersion and threat of violence would be critically less than it is now. The only cohersion I experience when transacting are taxes. I don't want to pay them. My counter-party does not want to pay them. Merchants don't like to charge it, as it increases the cost of their goods, as well as conducting business.

Without taxes, all of my economic activity, and every person I have every known would be entirely free of cohersion and the threat of violence. Do you turely believe that transactions cannot occur without taxes?

No taxes = no State = no State market intervention = pure Capitalism.

MachoMan's picture

Could you please articulate, from the perspective of the consumer, whether you would rather pay a tax to the government or an inflated price to a monopolistic/colluding enterprise?  Please do not try to pretend that monopolies are somehow avoided after competition takes place... 

Care to talk about the coercion in media?  Advertising?  Prescription medication?  The creation of "needs" for consumers...  imposing panic...  do you think that these things would not happen in capitalist world? 

Again, the only material difference capitalism purports is who the plebs pay directly...  the idealized fantasy that is commonly referred to as capitalism manages to gasp a few short breaths in the world and then dies a miserable failure...  the remainder being the natural and inevitable end game of capitalism.

The point is thus, unless you can articulate a stasis mechanism for capitalism, you cannot seriously advocate it as any sort of practical solution...  in effect, on even a very moderate timeline, it is no different than any other system and, depending on the relative starting positions of the parties when the starting gun fires, it may be over with fairly quickly...

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

“Could you please articulate, from the perspective of the consumer, whether you would rather pay a tax to the government or an inflated price to a monopolistic/colluding enterprise? “

False dilemma. In a capitalistic society there’d be no net consumers, only producers. Such a society would (as history shows) consist of guilds, artisans & engineers, farmers and more, all who produce, who trade for the production of others USING THEIR OWN produce.

There’d be little room for middle-men marketers, no room for oligarchs, corporations & kings.

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

utter nonsense. I participate in this dance many times & it is not momentary nor is it on the head of a pin.

Free moments & personal skills are real. Physical materials & real ownership is actual reality. That’s all we need to participate in actual capitalism even if at times we are forced to do other things. Only some people in some parts of the world are actually forced to never participate in capitalism. No one posting here on zerohedge is one of those people.

TWSceptic's picture

Wait, are you actually saying that we need to ban profits? If so I got an entertaining video for everyone to see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07fTsF5BiSM

Manthong's picture

Last time I looked, the goal of real capitalism is to accumulate CAPITAL, not debt.


Collectivism (which is the what the present system is becoming) confiscates capital from the productive through a variety of financial and physical means and distributes a bunch, enriches a few and ultimately leads to tyranny

The problem needs to be defined accurately if it is ever going to be fixed.

 

MachoMan's picture

The process you describe happens in every economic system...  it isn't unique to socialism.  You can identify the problem correctly, but we have yet to devise the mechanism to prevent it.

Manthong's picture

The American Experiment presented the best mechanism in history, but the founding elements got modified, perverted or ignored over time until we have the Godless, unprincipled, synthetic finance dominated collectivist dilemma that is the US today.

What we have today is not the Constitutional United States of America and it deserves to fail.  

MachoMan's picture

I can't say whether it was the best to date, but I think we can agree that it was a better system than the present (in its basic functioning; clearly some glaring deficiencies exist with, for example, race relations).  I think the bigger picture issue though is how do we maintain stasis?  How do we keep from partaking in these boom/bust cycles?  How do we ensure that a select group of sociopaths doesn't cash in on the basic human nature that most humans choose to deny that they follow?

The other issue is practicality of regime change...  please articulate the method by which this new system gets put into place...  how the current regime gets cast aside for the reversion?  (please remember you're being monitored when you discuss this; as if you didn't alredy know).

[I'll posit that we're in the inevitable conclusion of the founding fathers' experiment...] 

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

we don’t stop, nor need to stop, boom-bust cycles. Those come right from nature & all we can do is echo them, deal with them, shift them, soften them or make them worse. They will never go away nor should they. They are NATURE.

What we can stop & should stop is the criminal WAR & FRAUD.

That’s easy: find the guilty parties (not a mystery) and STOP them, generally with those "gun" things and on occasion putting them in those "gallows" things if not the "cage" place we call jail.

Reptil's picture

you're confusing corporatism with capitalism
capitalism needs a functioning system of exchnge of goods

look up the definitions yourself. of course one of the traits of a fascist state is that meaning of language is "adapted" to "fit" the paradigm, regardless of it's original meaning.

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

You write total madness. Any system of taking out what you can’t afford & will never exist is NOT capitalism.

Capitalism is based on actual production, actual ownership & actual trade.

What doesn’t exist & can’t exist CAN’T BE OWNED so it isn’t a part of capitalism.

Even with debt-trading on what POSSIBLY can be produced, it is due diligence for the buyer to PREDICT what can be produced by the SELLER of the debt, and on the SELLER to predict what kind of deal can be had up-front for whatever (if anything) will be produced later. IN THE END, what’s physically real will prevail, be it full payment or a ‘haircut’ or default.

All perfectly well-self-regulated in a capitalistic market system since everyone has every reason to do research to ensure repayment & no one is FORCED to partake in the transaction.

 

Sounds to me that you don’t understand what is “capitalism” and you don’t understand that what is unsustainable today is a massive systemic fraud of the most absolute anti-capitalism ever to exist.

 

Others should not be doing your homework for you.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/capitalism-socialism-or-fascism

 

Hedgerow-'s picture

Fuck you all banksters, politicians and other shits! This shit is destoying my fine plans for life. At the moment I don't want to buy a house, don't want to open a business and don't want to reproduce.

Just waiting and waiting for this system to collapse once again and for all. Its not like my life is infinite like some other things supposedly are.

fightthepower's picture

They don't want you to reproduce either. This is why most elites fund population control. The best way to strike back is to buy silver, stay out of debt and have a bunch of kids.

Bananamerican's picture

 

Alan Greenspan’s comment before a Senate committee on July 30, 1998, “Central banks stand ready to lease gold in increasing quantities should the price rise.”    

And former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, writing of the events of February 12, 1973:

"That day the U.S. announced that the dollar would be devalued by 10 percent. By switching the yen to a floating exchange rate, the Japanese currency appreciated, and a sufficient realignment in exchange rates was realized. Joint intervention in gold sales to prevent a steep rise in the price of gold, however, was not undertaken. That was a mistake."

and that was VOLCKER saying this

 

Karlus's picture

"Just waiting and waiting for this system to collapse once again and for all."

Look for distressed situations to snap up revenue producing assets. Ones that are in high demand and you can change prices to match inflation.

This economy is going to punk plenty of people that are leveraged and on shaky ground. Use this as a shopping spree.

Remember: if the economy is doing super good, it favors the status quo, if its declining, then there is pain and some opportunity to get rich

HurricaneSeason's picture

Get involved. Vote. Study the candidates and join a local campaign. Help the biggest imbecile you can find get elected.  We live in a free country where we can pick people to make our decisions for us, that is their achilles heel and they know it.  It will also put fear in foreign countries and strengthen the dollar.

Albertarocks's picture

The saddest aspect of your comment is that you don't want to reproduce.  That's a horrible state of mind but perfectly understandable.  Sadly my beautiful daughter shares your sentiment.  And it's all due to criminal activities of others.  May they burn in hell for eternity for that. 

May I recommend that you watch this incredible, very well produced 'movie' (actually a series of wonderful interviews) that I recently discovered.  It's VERY upbeat and is a new production as well.  It's all about what the Mayan calendar "really" foretells:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlfYHAV1i8w&feature=em-subs_digest-vrecs

Keep your chin up. 

ChanceIs's picture

I am so sorry that your daughter is of that mind set.  I understand.

I was reading Jim Sinclair the other day.  Now 70+, sitting on a pile of gold, and with a few kid/grandkids, said that if he were a young man today there would be no way he would have kids.  With him I think it is equal parts apprehension about the economy and fear of living under the 21st Century's version of Hitler/Mao/Moussilini and FDR.  Call it Big Brother if you like.

It is sad not having children to look forward and share the future.  By the same token, I read a meditation about the Newtown tragedy which had this nice coping thought:   "This gives rise to the question, what will you do with the time you have?"

I feel strongly about putting my time to productive use.  I then accidentally let my attention shift to Mr. "You Didn't Build That Business, Somebody Else Did,"  and I want to go lay on the couch and think about food stamps.

 

Albertarocks's picture

Perhaps this is just another in their long list of "ways to kill off most of humanity"... make us "want" to not reproduce.

ball-and-chain's picture

The Rothchilds!

We blame those stooges for everything.

I'm just not buying it.

It's tough to grow an economy without a strong middle class.

We sold out labor in favor of capital.

Now we're paying the piper.

http://www.angrysinner.blogspot.kr/2013/01/yesterday-dragon-lady-made-beef-and-egg.html

GOSPLAN HERO's picture

Continue stacking silver and gold coins.

knowless's picture

Means nothing if your kids don't respect it, you can't defend it, drop 2000 in a soda machine at face value.

Bullets.

agent default's picture

Your kids used gold coins at face value?

Karlus's picture

I like the bullet idea too, just concerned that if you buy a couple pallets, you will be able to sell them after new laws...same goes for stripped receivers.

Dont need to be accused of being a dealer

ar01's picture

Well, don't leave us hanging... what did happen?