Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
Modern Day Tea Leaf Reading
I have been actively speculating in the stock market for a few years now. I call it speculating as opposed to investing since investing in my mind involves long term goals based on fundamentals as well as possible usability of what is purchased. Speculating to me is simply trying to make a short-term profit without regard to fundamentals. Therefore, I am more interested in current public sentiment than I am long-term fundamentals.
The way to determine public sentiment is by the use of historical charts. For a long time chart-reading was considered akin to divination. There are still some who don't put so much importance on it but I am for whatever works. The thing about reading charts is they are open to interpretation. It is definitely not an exact science but we are dealing here with decisions and actions of a large bunch of people. When you're dealing with herd mentality you can get surprised at times but the charts show that a herd's major moves can be predicted with a good degree of certainty.
I remember when I first started looking at charts. I couldn't get much useful information out of them because I didn't know what I was looking at. I eventually learned about "indicators" which are mathematical formulas derived from the charts which show which way the herd is favoring. "The trend is your friend" is a common and useful saying.
My favorite indicator is named the MACD, short for Moving Average Convergence/Divergence. The MACD has only been around since the 1970s! Here is a wikipedia link explaining it. The chart below is from the article.
For the example above this means:
What this tells me is when the moving lines goes south of the zero line, sentiment is more negative than positive, and when it goes north it is more negative. But the real fun starts when the blue MACD line crosses the red MACD signal line. Keep in mind that the MACD is a "lagging indicator," so we are not trying to find an exact bottom or top. If you want the exact bottom or top I say good luck. I am only interested in trends. I will let the herd change course before I put my money to work. There is still plenty of money to be made without picking the bottom or top. (There is some debate how dependable the MACD is. I have found that it is very dependable in precious metals and mining stocks but not as dependable elsewhere. That's fine with me as I concentrate on precious metals).
So let's see how this works in the real world. Here is a 1-year daily chart of Silver Wheaton, or SLW. I recommend opening another browser showing this blog so you can look at the chart on one side of the screen while you read the comments below.
The top chart are "candlesticks" which show the daily price action, volume is numbers of shares traded, then we have our MACD with the RSI below it, the Relative Strength Indicator. We won't talk about that one today.
We see that this stock went from under $20 to $47, came back down some, and is now at $36.53. Of course it didn't go in a straight line because that isn't how sentiment works, but if you followed the MACD you would have done well. Again, we are looking for when the blue line crosses the red line. You can see the MACD turned north early in August when the price was under $20, but let's call it $20. It then went up to about $27 by early October and flattened out while the MACD turned south slightly saying to sell. It then turned up again at the first of November at $28 and shot up to $35 in a little over a week. The MACD wanted to turn down but didn't quite cross. It finally crossed down hard in December at say $38, went down until $30, then turned up and went all the way to $45 and turned down and said to get out. Even though it went down to $38 and back up to $47, the MACD said "be wary." It then ripped down hard to the $33 area and has now turned back up again.
What we can see here is the zero line is quite important in reading sentiment. The MACD was only below the zero line three times in the last year. The farther the line goes below the zero line the worse sentiment is, and the farther the line goes above the zero line the higher sentiment is. The way you use this is, to buy cheap, you have to buy when sentiment is too bad and sell when sentiment is too good. This is what the MACD does for me in the precious metals arena.
Secondly, the severity of the crossing of the line usually involves more volatility. People are throwing in the towel at lows and piling in with buying at the top. People jump on the bandwagon en masse near tops and sell like it's 1929 at lows, it's just how people are.
Here is a 6-month chart of the same stock. (Move your other browser down to the 6-month chart). How would you have liked a nice little 50% profit in 5 weeks, $30 to $45?
By using the daily chart we see that you could have sold in December, waited until the first of February to buy in at $30, sold out at say $44 only 5 weeks later, and bought back in last week at $34. Notice how the MACD tried to move north at the end of March but it was above the zero line. These moves are not as strong because sentiment is already positive, or above the zero line. Yes, the price WAS going up, but we were running out of buyers. The up-turn last week was way below the zero line and indicates another very profitable and playable move. Also, the angle of crossing and its ascent is sharp which is very good. I got in at $34.50 and am already up $2/share and will hold on for a nice ride. When the MACD turns up like this below the zero line then in my opinion this is where there is the least risk. You just can't let the first down day scare you out.
So when you play the daily chart the moves are normally a few weeks to a month or two, sometimes longer. Of course it doesn't go in a straight line and shorter-term traders are buying and selling the whole time. You have to figure out what kind of trader you are, in other words, what time frame you are comfortable with. I prefer the daily charts. You can play shorter or longer time frames, but the shorter time frames are probably less reliable because they are smaller herds.
These charts can be found at bigcharts.marketwatch.com. Enter SLW and click on Advanced Chart. You can then select indicators as well as time frame and chart style. I also use a 9-day SMA or Simple Moving Average which is embedded on the top chart. The candles tend to stay above the line on up moves and below the line on down moves if you want intermediate plays.
To quote the Mogambu Guru, this investing stuff is easy!
The way to determine public sentiment is by the use of historical charts. For a long time chart-reading was considered akin to divination. There are still some who don't put so much importance on it but I am for whatever works. The thing about reading charts is they are open to interpretation. It is definitely not an exact science but we are dealing here with decisions and actions of a large bunch of people. When you're dealing with herd mentality you can get surprised at times but the charts show that a herd's major moves can be predicted with a good degree of certainty.
I remember when I first started looking at charts. I couldn't get much useful information out of them because I didn't know what I was looking at. I eventually learned about "indicators" which are mathematical formulas derived from the charts which show which way the herd is favoring. "The trend is your friend" is a common and useful saying.
My favorite indicator is named the MACD, short for Moving Average Convergence/Divergence. The MACD has only been around since the 1970s! Here is a wikipedia link explaining it. The chart below is from the article.
For the example above this means:
- MACD line (blue line): difference between the 12 and 26 days EMAs
- signal (red line): 9 day EMA of the blue line
- histogram (bar graph): difference between the blue and red lines
What this tells me is when the moving lines goes south of the zero line, sentiment is more negative than positive, and when it goes north it is more negative. But the real fun starts when the blue MACD line crosses the red MACD signal line. Keep in mind that the MACD is a "lagging indicator," so we are not trying to find an exact bottom or top. If you want the exact bottom or top I say good luck. I am only interested in trends. I will let the herd change course before I put my money to work. There is still plenty of money to be made without picking the bottom or top. (There is some debate how dependable the MACD is. I have found that it is very dependable in precious metals and mining stocks but not as dependable elsewhere. That's fine with me as I concentrate on precious metals).
So let's see how this works in the real world. Here is a 1-year daily chart of Silver Wheaton, or SLW. I recommend opening another browser showing this blog so you can look at the chart on one side of the screen while you read the comments below.
The top chart are "candlesticks" which show the daily price action, volume is numbers of shares traded, then we have our MACD with the RSI below it, the Relative Strength Indicator. We won't talk about that one today.
We see that this stock went from under $20 to $47, came back down some, and is now at $36.53. Of course it didn't go in a straight line because that isn't how sentiment works, but if you followed the MACD you would have done well. Again, we are looking for when the blue line crosses the red line. You can see the MACD turned north early in August when the price was under $20, but let's call it $20. It then went up to about $27 by early October and flattened out while the MACD turned south slightly saying to sell. It then turned up again at the first of November at $28 and shot up to $35 in a little over a week. The MACD wanted to turn down but didn't quite cross. It finally crossed down hard in December at say $38, went down until $30, then turned up and went all the way to $45 and turned down and said to get out. Even though it went down to $38 and back up to $47, the MACD said "be wary." It then ripped down hard to the $33 area and has now turned back up again.
What we can see here is the zero line is quite important in reading sentiment. The MACD was only below the zero line three times in the last year. The farther the line goes below the zero line the worse sentiment is, and the farther the line goes above the zero line the higher sentiment is. The way you use this is, to buy cheap, you have to buy when sentiment is too bad and sell when sentiment is too good. This is what the MACD does for me in the precious metals arena.
Secondly, the severity of the crossing of the line usually involves more volatility. People are throwing in the towel at lows and piling in with buying at the top. People jump on the bandwagon en masse near tops and sell like it's 1929 at lows, it's just how people are.
Here is a 6-month chart of the same stock. (Move your other browser down to the 6-month chart). How would you have liked a nice little 50% profit in 5 weeks, $30 to $45?
By using the daily chart we see that you could have sold in December, waited until the first of February to buy in at $30, sold out at say $44 only 5 weeks later, and bought back in last week at $34. Notice how the MACD tried to move north at the end of March but it was above the zero line. These moves are not as strong because sentiment is already positive, or above the zero line. Yes, the price WAS going up, but we were running out of buyers. The up-turn last week was way below the zero line and indicates another very profitable and playable move. Also, the angle of crossing and its ascent is sharp which is very good. I got in at $34.50 and am already up $2/share and will hold on for a nice ride. When the MACD turns up like this below the zero line then in my opinion this is where there is the least risk. You just can't let the first down day scare you out.
So when you play the daily chart the moves are normally a few weeks to a month or two, sometimes longer. Of course it doesn't go in a straight line and shorter-term traders are buying and selling the whole time. You have to figure out what kind of trader you are, in other words, what time frame you are comfortable with. I prefer the daily charts. You can play shorter or longer time frames, but the shorter time frames are probably less reliable because they are smaller herds.
These charts can be found at bigcharts.marketwatch.com. Enter SLW and click on Advanced Chart. You can then select indicators as well as time frame and chart style. I also use a 9-day SMA or Simple Moving Average which is embedded on the top chart. The candles tend to stay above the line on up moves and below the line on down moves if you want intermediate plays.
To quote the Mogambu Guru, this investing stuff is easy!
Saturday, May 28, 2011
August 15th, 1971
This is the infamous video clip of Richard Nixon welching on the promise to redeem paper Federal Reserve Notes in gold, as was promised to the world in the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944. While Tricky Dick blamed evil speculators for crisis, there remained one reason and one reason only why the United States welched. This is the same reason the printers of paper money have welched since the creation of paper money...they always print and print until the bluff is called. Come on, it isn't rocket science!
Friday, May 20, 2011
In Honor of The End of the World
Here is a video of a great local band I used to go see in Tempe, AZ ten years ago called Bit O Jane. The song is about an end of the world prediction. These guys were over the top talented. I just inserted a picture of a place a couple of miles away so it is crude, but dig the song!
The title is Another Song, written and sung by Andy Langlois. It is 9 minutes long, a jam song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf38HexW-Vk
The title is Another Song, written and sung by Andy Langlois. It is 9 minutes long, a jam song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf38HexW-Vk
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Another Outstanding Article by Peter Schiff
http://www.europac.net/commentaries/raising_roof_debt
Monday, May 16, 2011
The ceiling was first imposed in 1917 as part of a deal that passed the Liberty Bond Act that funded America’s entry into the First World War. To make it easy for the Treasury to sell those bonds, Congress also amended the Federal Reserve Act to allow the Fed to hold government bonds as collateral. But given the potential for unchecked Federal deficits, Congress sought to limit taxpayer exposure to $11.5 billion.
The problem was that Congress never passed a law to prevent future Congresses from raising the ceiling. And even if it had, that law could have been rewritten by future legislation. Sure enough, when the Second World War rolled around the debt limit was raised frantically, leaving it at $300 billion by 1945. But believe it or not, after the War ended, the limit was actually reduced to $275 billion.
Despite the costs associated with the Korean War, the next increase did not come until 1954. And over the ensuing eight years, the ceiling was raised seven times and reduced twice, finally getting back to $300 billion in 1962. Since then, Congress has voted to raise the ceiling 74 times without a single reduction.
Practically speaking, a ceiling that is raised automatically is no ceiling at all. Given that, why not dispense with the pretense? The reason is politics. No Congressman wants to be on the record voting for unlimited debt, yet most are willing to rail against fiscal recklessness while raising the ceiling every time it’s reached. Any Congressman who gives lip service to a balanced budget Amendment but votes to raise the debt ceiling is a hypocrite. No one needs constitutional help to hold the line on the debt right now!
But epic levels of Federal red ink and the approach of the 2012 elections have raised the stakes. Despite the newfound urgency, nearly all Democrats and a very large chunk of Republicans argue that failure to raise the ceiling will be tantamount to economic suicide. They argue that such a rash move will cause the U.S. to default on outstanding debt obligations, thereby sending interest rates sharply higher across the board. Higher interest rates they argue would cripple the economy and permanently increase debt service costs. As a result, they predict capping debt now will precipitate a far deeper economic contraction than what we have already seen in the last few years.
Few see the inherent absurdity in the notion that taking on more debt improves the economic health and creditworthiness of the United States. I would argue for the much simpler idea that more debt weakens a nation’s financial position. More importantly, capping U.S. debt at current levels means bringing a future crisis into the present where it can be dealt with in practical terms. This is something that nobody in Washington actually wants.
If we do today what we have failed to do in the past, we very may well default on a portion of our debt. No doubt our creditors will suffer. But such near term pain will lead to a quicker and healthier recovery. Out of control Federal spending will have to be dealt with now. A downgraded credit rating will make it harder for the United States to continue borrowing, and as a result should be viewed as a blessing in disguise.
A reduction in debt levels is good economics. Remember, taxpayers will have to repay with interest anything the government borrows now. The more the government borrows, the larger it grows, and the larger it grows, the weaker the economy becomes. The less money the government borrows, the more that is available for the private sector to borrow to increase production and create jobs.
Failing to raise the debt ceiling will force Congress and the President to tell the truth to Social Security and Medicare beneficiaries who have been promised more than taxpayers can deliver. They will have to concede that so-called government “trust funds” are mere accounting gimmicks, and that benefits will need to be cut if the programs are to be solvent. They will have to tell the truth to our creditors that the U.S government has borrowed beyond the ability of its citizens to repay. And lastly, the stark reality will force the government to tell the truth to Federal employees whose salaries and benefits are unsupportable given our fiscal weakness.
But, on the other hand, if we raise the debt ceiling, we can postpone the crisis into an indefinite future. All of these tough choices could be avoided. Government pay and benefits will flow unabated, and our creditors will continue to get their interest payments now. But in the future, the value of principal repayments and government benefits and paychecks will lose purchasing power. That’s because if we keep raising the ceiling indefinitely, we risk destroying our currency. But the long slow death of a currency and the ebbing of a nation’s economic vitality doesn’t make for huge headlines.
It is for that reason I am 100% confident that Congress will do the wrong thing and raise the debt ceiling for the 75th time in 50 years. In the end there will be some kind of phony compromise with each side claiming victory. But while the politicians celebrate another dodged bullet, the U.S. economy will continue to be shot full of holes.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Ron Paul Hit Job Update
I apologize 1000 times since I assumed you could fast forward to the 30-minute spot in the Ron Paul interview. I now see it has to buffer the entire file, so I had to go to plan B. I cut out a 3-minute section so you can hear Paul's comments. It is an mp4 file so you might need QuikTime to hear it.
What really gets me is there are 30 minutes jam packed with all kinds of good information with a good interviewer asking good questions and O'Reilly cuts out 6 total seconds and rips Paul to shreds. (I apologize for the music in the last few seconds. I am a partial retard at these things).
Click here for Ron Paul interview
Respect for international law? What's that?
Now compare that to O'Reilly's hit job:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wp8-QS-x3I
Fair and balanced? No Spin Zone? You decide.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Three Hit Jobs On Ron Paul In One Day
You know, I didn't like O'Reilly for a long time, then thought I understood him better and just viewed it as light entertainment, until he started blaming the evil speculators for the rise in oil recently. Blaming the speculators has been going on for a long time, including when Nixon defaulted on the gold standard in 1971. I started wondering if O'Reilly was a shill.
Then I heard O'Reilly going after Ron Paul while listening to Fox Radio by satellite. The segment seemed suspicious right off the bat. I was amazed that this was even newsworthy. Is there nothing better to report than that? Seriously?
Here is a link to the O'Reilly hit job.
Listen on the lead in how they all chuckle about how "out there" he is. Then they show Paul for 2 seconds in one clip and 4 seconds in another clip, then proceed to assassinate him.
So I decided to check out the original interview to hear what was said in context. Here is the link for the entire radio interview. It is long but you can skip down to the 30-minute mark. It will take a minute or so to get to the beef. Keep in mind, this interview was over 30 minutes covering all kinds of territory, yet O'Reilly ignores all of it except for 6 seconds.
http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com/2011/05/11/dr-ron-paul-on-whos-simon-conway-show-5102011/
Whether you agree with him or not, you have to agree that his entire, logical argument was completely ignored.
This is a blatant hit job.
Here are two more links for hit jobs on Paul on the same day. One is MSNBC and the other is CNN. At least they give him the courtesy of responding to the attacks. Is the news this slow, is Ron Paul's logic that bad, or is there a concerted effort to bury him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-EaOqA9akc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riLe9Uf9t4M&NR=1
Then I heard O'Reilly going after Ron Paul while listening to Fox Radio by satellite. The segment seemed suspicious right off the bat. I was amazed that this was even newsworthy. Is there nothing better to report than that? Seriously?
Here is a link to the O'Reilly hit job.
Listen on the lead in how they all chuckle about how "out there" he is. Then they show Paul for 2 seconds in one clip and 4 seconds in another clip, then proceed to assassinate him.
So I decided to check out the original interview to hear what was said in context. Here is the link for the entire radio interview. It is long but you can skip down to the 30-minute mark. It will take a minute or so to get to the beef. Keep in mind, this interview was over 30 minutes covering all kinds of territory, yet O'Reilly ignores all of it except for 6 seconds.
http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com/2011/05/11/dr-ron-paul-on-whos-simon-conway-show-5102011/
Whether you agree with him or not, you have to agree that his entire, logical argument was completely ignored.
This is a blatant hit job.
Here are two more links for hit jobs on Paul on the same day. One is MSNBC and the other is CNN. At least they give him the courtesy of responding to the attacks. Is the news this slow, is Ron Paul's logic that bad, or is there a concerted effort to bury him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-EaOqA9akc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riLe9Uf9t4M&NR=1
New Blog
My friend Kevin just started a new blog. Be sure to check it out. He has been in the precious metals business for over twenty years and knows what he's talking about!
http://thoughtcrimes101.blogspot.com/
http://thoughtcrimes101.blogspot.com/
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Best Description of the Mortgage Mess EVER
I thoroughly enjoy Gonzalo Lira's blog.
http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/05/best-description-of-mortgage-mess-ever.html
In case you are interested, this is a 1-hour interview with Bill Black, who I believe was the lead attorney working for the government in prosecuting the criminals in the Savings and Loan scam. I have always been interested as to why there have been no criminal prosecutions in this financial mess although $10 trillion of wealth has been wiped out in the US. Bill Black's team was responsible for getting over 1000 felony convictions in the Savings and Loan debacle. How many have you heard of in this financial mess? He explains very clearly the fraud that was perpetrated and the massive corruption in the Clinton and Bush administrations that not only allowed the crisis to happen but encouraged it from the top down, including Greenspan, and why you aren't going to see any prosecutions even though the crimes were obvious and intentional.
He explains that not only were regulators asleep at the wheel, they actively aided and abetted the fraud that caused the whole charade. None of it happened by accident or ignorance. The final crime was putting the taxpayers on the hook for the mess.
None of this is explained in a partisan fashion. A life long Democrat, Black is a legend in the Savings and Loan story. You might have seen his appearance on Bill Moyer's show a couple of years ago which was also excellent. "Black asserted that the banking crisis in the United States that started in late 2008 is essentially a big Ponzi scheme; that the "liar loans" and other financial tricks were essentially illegal frauds; and that the triple-A ratings given to these loans was part of a criminal cover-up."
"Black was litigation director for the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) from 1984 to 1986, deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) in 1987, and Senior VP and the General Counsel of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco from 1987 to 1989, which regulated some of the largest thrift banks in the U.S.[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_K._Black
If you have an hour to spare, this is fascinating info and told in a simple, logical way that anybody can understand. This is Fraud 101. How to steal trillions and get away with it!
http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/05/best-description-of-mortgage-mess-ever.html
In case you are interested, this is a 1-hour interview with Bill Black, who I believe was the lead attorney working for the government in prosecuting the criminals in the Savings and Loan scam. I have always been interested as to why there have been no criminal prosecutions in this financial mess although $10 trillion of wealth has been wiped out in the US. Bill Black's team was responsible for getting over 1000 felony convictions in the Savings and Loan debacle. How many have you heard of in this financial mess? He explains very clearly the fraud that was perpetrated and the massive corruption in the Clinton and Bush administrations that not only allowed the crisis to happen but encouraged it from the top down, including Greenspan, and why you aren't going to see any prosecutions even though the crimes were obvious and intentional.
He explains that not only were regulators asleep at the wheel, they actively aided and abetted the fraud that caused the whole charade. None of it happened by accident or ignorance. The final crime was putting the taxpayers on the hook for the mess.
None of this is explained in a partisan fashion. A life long Democrat, Black is a legend in the Savings and Loan story. You might have seen his appearance on Bill Moyer's show a couple of years ago which was also excellent. "Black asserted that the banking crisis in the United States that started in late 2008 is essentially a big Ponzi scheme; that the "liar loans" and other financial tricks were essentially illegal frauds; and that the triple-A ratings given to these loans was part of a criminal cover-up."
"Black was litigation director for the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) from 1984 to 1986, deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) in 1987, and Senior VP and the General Counsel of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco from 1987 to 1989, which regulated some of the largest thrift banks in the U.S.[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_K._Black
If you have an hour to spare, this is fascinating info and told in a simple, logical way that anybody can understand. This is Fraud 101. How to steal trillions and get away with it!
Friday, May 6, 2011
One Million Apply for 62,000 Jobs…with McDonald’s
There has been so much talk in Washington and in the news about the national debt, terrorism, wars and healthcare that one might think th
ese are the issues that most concern Americans in 2011. But opinion polls consistently show that none of these issues is as important to most Americans as the Big Issue: unemployment and the economy.
ese are the issues that most concern Americans in 2011. But opinion polls consistently show that none of these issues is as important to most Americans as the Big Issue: unemployment and the economy.An unusually vivid example occurred on April 19, which McDonald’s declared National Hiring Day, encouraging people across the country to apply for a job.
The world’s biggest restaurant chain reported that it received one million applicants for open positions, which resulted in 62,000 people gaining employment. Another 900,000 plus were turned down.
A McDonald’s spokeswoman said the company had planned to hire only 50,000 new employees. But the intense demand prompted it to take on an additional 24% in staff.
Throughout the country, the dearth of job opportunities prompted huge numbers of people to ask Ronald McDonald for employment. In Florida, for example, 100,000 applications were submitted for about 4,300 positions. In Chicago, more than 75,000 job-seekers vied for 2,000 openings.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Why I Sincerely Believe That I Am The True Champion Of The Poor
When you get a chance, please take a look at the last century of the prices of silver and copper. minerals.usgs.gov/ds/2005/140/ You will have to click on the link for each metal. They cover 1900-2009. Look at the difference just since 2009. I note a big jump following WWII and the resulting inflation. (Inflation always follows wars because of massive borrowing/printing of money). It's been pretty much a steady rise ever since, except now the rate is accelerating, of course. No wonder they had to clip the coins in 1965, but I didn't realize how severe it was until I did the math. Here is a breakdown on what happened to the Silver Quarter I used to carry around as a kid:
Silver Quarter
Silver has gone from $19,600 per ton in 1913 to $472,000 in 2009, plus much higher now by 3 to 4 times. Copper went from $342 per ton in 1913 to $5320 in 2009 but now is $8480. MASSIVE inflation when you look at it in those terms.
But look at the production! In 1900 world production of copper was 493,000 tons, yet by 2009 we were up to 15,900,000 tons, a 32x increase! So even though the annual output increased by a factor of 32, the price still went up 15 times because of inflation in spite of the huge supply.
The reason is simple. When we had silver in the money you would commonly get 5%-6% interest on a bank savings account. The bank would loan out the money for 7% or 10% or whatever they could get to housing and more importantly to business. The economy grew and companies sprang up that employed hundreds of thousands of people. Anybody who wanted a good job like at Motorola could get one, with good pay and beautiful benefits, all for just sitting on your ass and pushing a button. You might have to work nights for awhile. Wow. With a 2-year degree you could be a tech and with a bachelors you could be an engineer. Of course there were abuses, but if you didn't have a good job or a small business it was because you were too lazy. Hell, I could have mowed as many lawns as I wanted as a kid even and I am the world's worst businessman.
Savers were also rewarded because things naturally go down in price over time because of technology advancement as long as the money stays at one value. So the longer you saved money you could get things cheaper later, for the most part. Plus you were getting interest at the bank.
But in a paper money environment, especially since we dropped the gold backing completely in 1971, savers get punished. We are now down to .6% for a 13-month CD, and I am afraid to ask what you get for just a plain savings account because it would obviously have to be less than .6%.
So now who benefits in this new debt based environment? Now that you have to be an idiot to save paper dollars, the bank can no longer rely on savings anymore for their supply of money to lend. And a bank that doesn't lend money goes out of business. That is how banks make a profit, they loan money.
So the bank must borrow their money that they in turn loan out at a higher rate of interest. So now the soundness of a bank is no longer based on its amount held in savings. Your guess is as good as mine what they base it on now. My guess is it would be based on the soundness of whoever they borrowed the money from, no?
Anyway, it is obvious by now who benefits under the debt based, non-gold and silver environment. It is the uber-rich, the banksters, giant corporations, wall street, and the government. The jobs are gone, so the little guy is fucked. Good luck getting hired at Wal-Mart, the largest employer in the State of Arizona, where you will get paid shit with even shittier benefits. Unless you work in banking, the government, or are collecting food stamps and unemployment, you are probably in a dead-end job with no benefits. Welcome to the new world.
So this is in graphic terms why I believe I am the true champion of the poor. The system I advocate is already a proven system that provided the best standard of living in the history of the world, while the debt based system is entering its old age with the biggest debt in the history of the world and no hope of ever balancing the budget let alone paying off the debt since the economy is still in the early part of the Greater Depression, which will crush the poor and the old worse than anybody.
Not only are good jobs gone but even shitty jobs aren't so easy to come by. Every month sets a new record in the unrelenting rise of food stamp users. Yet what do the "experts" keep saying? "We need to spend more! Spend more!" They are either still duped by Keynesianism or they are liars. They are nothing more than carnival barkers. Economies are strong because of savings, not spending.
I am the true champion of the poor because I want an environment where the poor can thrive. This can only be accomplished through savings, not debt, food stamps, and welfare. I was lucky enough to be raised by someone who was born in 1912. My dad took me down to the bank when I was 6 years old and I opened a "Passport" savings account and got a little blue savings book with $5 stamped in it. I was officially a saver. Our parents back then were savers because they got rewarded in their early days from savings, and now savers get punished, and I mean severely.
As long as paper money is endorsed the poor will continue to be punished. The best they can hope for will be more food stamps, free health care, free housing, and more handouts, because there are no jobs now even if they want them. The poor are fucked under this system. Soon the old will be too when their pensions become worthless.
The paper system only exists for debt and because of debt. The banksters are rewarded big time as well as the government which grows huge. It works until people lose CONfidence in the money, which is by definition a CON game, as they have lost CONfidence in the 599 currencies that have already failed in the history of the world. Gold and silver require no confidence since they have served as money for at least four millenia. Whatever value you want to ascribe to them, they do not come into existence through debt. They are mined and then coined. Their price measured in ever-increasing dollars has gone up enormously especially since the end of World War II. This only happened for one reason, because the amount of paper dollars grew enormously in percentage terms compared to the amount of gold or silver mined. It is that simple. This is the inflation you've come to know and love, and to think of as the only way of life. You have never experienced the other way so think the religion (paper) you were raised in must be right, because really, how dumb could your parents really be? I was raised in another religion and I had silver in my pocket, so to you I probably look like a heretic. But at any rate, if you save paper dollars you must really be an idiot. This is a debt game, baby, get with the program. Borrow more and spend more! Spend more! We have to spend more or we'll go bankrupt!--Joe Biden haha What a buffoon.
Gold and silver equals savings, paper money equals debt. The charts don't lie. The final bubble is not gold, it is in US Treasury Bonds, the biggest cesspool of debt in the history of the world. The only thing it requires to stay alive is BELIEF in the system. If only you will have FAITH and BELIEVE! Otherwise, it's FIRE AND BRIMSTONE! HELL AND DAMNATION FOR ETERNITY IF WE EVER GO OFF THE PAPER!
Admission is free, you pay to get out.
Silver Quarter
.2 oz 90% silver and 10% copper
Current Quarter
.2 oz 75% copper and 25% nickel
Prices as of 4/29/2011:
copper $4.24 per pound = 26.5 cents/oz
Nickel $12.16 per pound = 76 cents/oz
Silver $48 per troy ounce (One troy ounce is equivalent to 1.09714 avoirdupois ounces).
(14.583 troy ounces in an Avoirdupois pound)
Silver is therefore 48 x 14.583 = $700 per AV pound
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
16 oz in 1 AV lb. Therefore = $43.75 per ounce in AV Pound = 700 / 16 ounces
silver quarter = .18 oz silver and .02 oz copper
Which amounts to (in paper dollars):
Silver Quarter = $7.88 silver and .5 cents copper
new quarter = .15 oz copper and .05 oz nickel
new quarter = 4 cents of copper and 3 cents of nickel
$7.88 in the Silver Quarter compared to 7 cents of value in the copper/nickel quarter. 112.5x difference
So the silver quarter is worth 112 times more than the copper quarter as of last Friday's prices. Quite some clipping the government did there in 1965!
Silver has gone from $19,600 per ton in 1913 to $472,000 in 2009, plus much higher now by 3 to 4 times. Copper went from $342 per ton in 1913 to $5320 in 2009 but now is $8480. MASSIVE inflation when you look at it in those terms.
But look at the production! In 1900 world production of copper was 493,000 tons, yet by 2009 we were up to 15,900,000 tons, a 32x increase! So even though the annual output increased by a factor of 32, the price still went up 15 times because of inflation in spite of the huge supply.
The reason is simple. When we had silver in the money you would commonly get 5%-6% interest on a bank savings account. The bank would loan out the money for 7% or 10% or whatever they could get to housing and more importantly to business. The economy grew and companies sprang up that employed hundreds of thousands of people. Anybody who wanted a good job like at Motorola could get one, with good pay and beautiful benefits, all for just sitting on your ass and pushing a button. You might have to work nights for awhile. Wow. With a 2-year degree you could be a tech and with a bachelors you could be an engineer. Of course there were abuses, but if you didn't have a good job or a small business it was because you were too lazy. Hell, I could have mowed as many lawns as I wanted as a kid even and I am the world's worst businessman.
Savers were also rewarded because things naturally go down in price over time because of technology advancement as long as the money stays at one value. So the longer you saved money you could get things cheaper later, for the most part. Plus you were getting interest at the bank.
But in a paper money environment, especially since we dropped the gold backing completely in 1971, savers get punished. We are now down to .6% for a 13-month CD, and I am afraid to ask what you get for just a plain savings account because it would obviously have to be less than .6%.
So now who benefits in this new debt based environment? Now that you have to be an idiot to save paper dollars, the bank can no longer rely on savings anymore for their supply of money to lend. And a bank that doesn't lend money goes out of business. That is how banks make a profit, they loan money.
So the bank must borrow their money that they in turn loan out at a higher rate of interest. So now the soundness of a bank is no longer based on its amount held in savings. Your guess is as good as mine what they base it on now. My guess is it would be based on the soundness of whoever they borrowed the money from, no?
Anyway, it is obvious by now who benefits under the debt based, non-gold and silver environment. It is the uber-rich, the banksters, giant corporations, wall street, and the government. The jobs are gone, so the little guy is fucked. Good luck getting hired at Wal-Mart, the largest employer in the State of Arizona, where you will get paid shit with even shittier benefits. Unless you work in banking, the government, or are collecting food stamps and unemployment, you are probably in a dead-end job with no benefits. Welcome to the new world.
So this is in graphic terms why I believe I am the true champion of the poor. The system I advocate is already a proven system that provided the best standard of living in the history of the world, while the debt based system is entering its old age with the biggest debt in the history of the world and no hope of ever balancing the budget let alone paying off the debt since the economy is still in the early part of the Greater Depression, which will crush the poor and the old worse than anybody.
Not only are good jobs gone but even shitty jobs aren't so easy to come by. Every month sets a new record in the unrelenting rise of food stamp users. Yet what do the "experts" keep saying? "We need to spend more! Spend more!" They are either still duped by Keynesianism or they are liars. They are nothing more than carnival barkers. Economies are strong because of savings, not spending.
I am the true champion of the poor because I want an environment where the poor can thrive. This can only be accomplished through savings, not debt, food stamps, and welfare. I was lucky enough to be raised by someone who was born in 1912. My dad took me down to the bank when I was 6 years old and I opened a "Passport" savings account and got a little blue savings book with $5 stamped in it. I was officially a saver. Our parents back then were savers because they got rewarded in their early days from savings, and now savers get punished, and I mean severely.
As long as paper money is endorsed the poor will continue to be punished. The best they can hope for will be more food stamps, free health care, free housing, and more handouts, because there are no jobs now even if they want them. The poor are fucked under this system. Soon the old will be too when their pensions become worthless.
The paper system only exists for debt and because of debt. The banksters are rewarded big time as well as the government which grows huge. It works until people lose CONfidence in the money, which is by definition a CON game, as they have lost CONfidence in the 599 currencies that have already failed in the history of the world. Gold and silver require no confidence since they have served as money for at least four millenia. Whatever value you want to ascribe to them, they do not come into existence through debt. They are mined and then coined. Their price measured in ever-increasing dollars has gone up enormously especially since the end of World War II. This only happened for one reason, because the amount of paper dollars grew enormously in percentage terms compared to the amount of gold or silver mined. It is that simple. This is the inflation you've come to know and love, and to think of as the only way of life. You have never experienced the other way so think the religion (paper) you were raised in must be right, because really, how dumb could your parents really be? I was raised in another religion and I had silver in my pocket, so to you I probably look like a heretic. But at any rate, if you save paper dollars you must really be an idiot. This is a debt game, baby, get with the program. Borrow more and spend more! Spend more! We have to spend more or we'll go bankrupt!--Joe Biden haha What a buffoon.
Gold and silver equals savings, paper money equals debt. The charts don't lie. The final bubble is not gold, it is in US Treasury Bonds, the biggest cesspool of debt in the history of the world. The only thing it requires to stay alive is BELIEF in the system. If only you will have FAITH and BELIEVE! Otherwise, it's FIRE AND BRIMSTONE! HELL AND DAMNATION FOR ETERNITY IF WE EVER GO OFF THE PAPER!
Admission is free, you pay to get out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)