by Micki » Thu 08 May 2008, 01:56:14
If you still believe CB's will chose deflation over inflation then read this entertaining (and scary) article in safehaven.com
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he first quarter monetary policy update from Dr. G. Gono, the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe COMMENDS his peers, the world over. Referring to the United States and the United Kingdom.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')1.14 Equally also, our thrust has been founded on our unwavering belief that extraordinary circumstances must be confronted through extraordinary interventions and not through half baked or even wholesale 16th century economic dogmas that have been long discarded in their founding countries.
1.15 As Monetary Authorities, we have been humbled and have taken heart in the realization that some leading Central Banks, including those in the USA and the UK, are now not just talking of, but also actually implementing flexible and pragmatic central bank support programmes where these are deemed necessary in their National interests.
1.16 That is precisely the path that we began over 4 years ago in pursuit of our national interest and we have not wavered on that critical path despite the untold misunderstanding, vilification, and demonization we have endured from across the political divide.
[url=Safehaven]http://www.safehaven.com/article-10185.htm[/url]
Got gold yet?
by evilgenius » Thu 08 May 2008, 11:23:44
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') guess what I was really mad about was being compared to some little blue guy.
If you back up your statements with a bit more analysis or substance to WHY you think a certain move / price target is valid, you shouldn't get the same treatment.
That would at least invite some constructive dialogue.
That kind of stuff is a little too involved for a place like this. I think it is sufficient to say that I believe the cost of production will be the floor and that peak oil has taken that cost up by a certain amount and that labor availablility has taken it up by a certain amount more. So, whereas the cost of production floor might have averaged $300 at the beginning of the current gold bull market I can see those two things adding about $200, which is why I said my estimate was a little high. At $575 an ounce I am actually giving you a high number. That is my bias in this situation, because I do believe in a bull market turnaround which will prevent the kind of total gold collapse which came after the last bull run. If you want more than that then you had better start posting more than pie in the sky estimates about $1500 an ounce without any skepticism attached. Or gold is the only answer without considering what deflation can do to a position loaded unevenly in gold. I have advocated gold, but as part of a diversified portfolio. I doubt everything I say, that is part of personal vetting. If I didn't I wouldn't post it. Nothing is a sure thing. Some things, unthought of or even unlikely, do bear thinking about if only because in the absence thereof there exists the kind of vulnerability that can be very destructive. Yeah, sure I was gloating a little too much about being right, why does that give someone the right to make me out to be a little blue dude?
When it comes down to it, the people will always shout, "Free Barabbas." They love Barabbas. He's one of them. He has the same dreams. He does what they wish they could do. That other guy is more removed, more inscrutable. He makes them think. "Crucify him."
by Micki » Thu 08 May 2008, 20:57:32
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat kind of stuff is a little too involved for a place like this.
Boy, you just like to take a superior tone and make unsubstantiated claims don't you.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think it is sufficient to say that I believe the cost of production will be the floor and that peak oil has taken that cost up by a certain amount and that labor availablility has taken it up by a certain amount more.
If production costs are the floor you would probably be looking at $600. You are assuming production costs are somewhere round $300 on average for all mines globally which might have applied back in 04-05. Since then there has been runaway increases in energy and labour and equipment costs.
You are also assuming the bull run is over.
Now bull runs can be short, medium or long term.
The type of price crash you have in mind seems to indicate long term.
Technically the long term trend remains, so there is nothing there to support that price target, yet anyway.
Inflation adjusted we are a loooong way from what would be equal top to 1980.
Fundamentally, we have slowing economy and potential recession/depression on one side and on the other side we have inflation/stagflation risks, increasing geopolitical risks, energy supply contraints (which of course could change if demand drops enough), massive short positions built up over years, reallignement of global economies favoring East which has a gold friendlier attitude, counterparty risk (and I think this is an important one as it will support gold in deflationary scenario when derivatives dominoes start. Furthermore historically there is no clear link between deflation and lower gold price). I am sure I still missed some major factors.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f you want more than that then you had better start posting more than pie in the sky estimates about $1500 an ounce without any skepticism attached.
You are the one who is categorically saying gold price is heading down and suggesting we should act on your advice even if you treat us like imbecils (i.e. stating That kind of stuff is a little too involved for a place like this. )
Not only that you are saying we are imbecils thinking 1500 is a pie in the sky but you are obviously much smarter than for instance Faber, Schiff, Rogers etc.
Every trader with any experience for instance knows that in the short/medium term anything is possible and you act according to your trading system and/or beliefs. Your attitude of poopooing any potential scenario except your own suggest that you have very limited experience and either 1) just finished of some economics 101 course or 2) subscribed to some "insider secrets - get rich quick" newsletter and are voicing that. opinion
Now in the end of your last post you are trying to save yourself from critizism for previously taken attitude (including the attitude of the same post) and open for possibility of being wrong in your call.
Maybe you should have included similar disclaimers earlier rather than getting red in the face from frustration that noone took your unsubstantiated claims seriously.
I suggest you have a good think about whether you really want to post anything more here because if you thing the topic is a bit "too involved" for this audience, you might be better of to keep the trap shut.
Should you however be willing to actually discuss your opinions, then this forum is the right place.
by Micki » Fri 09 May 2008, 12:43:35
I admit I didn't read throught the $300 bit carefully.
On the other hand I did not just cite inflation as being the only bullish factor. And yes, I freqently do tend to repeat reasoning for my position at least to some extent as I don't expect everyone to dig through my old posts. And I certainly don't mind repeating if someone asks.
What I don't get is your arrogant tone and the fact that you seem to contradict yourself.
You say for instance $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Go ahead, buy as much gold as you can since you seem to want to lose everything anyway."
and you say that $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')OG $1500 is a pie in the sky
.
First of all I wonder how we are going to lose it all. Are you assuming everyone uses margin and will be forced to sell to cover margin calls?????
Then you go ahead and say;
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')I reckon that price is somewhere around $575 an ounce. Start to buy in there and keep buying because at those levels there is some kind of floor based on reasonable equilibrium. When the next invasion happens (the Hillary Chronicles) you will be in the perfect position to double, perhaps triple your money."
So if you tripple from $575 you get $1725. Yet you call $1500 a pie in the sky.
If you are just trying to advise that there will be better entry times coming up, then why are you saying we'll lose it all and $1500 is pie in sky?
Then top it off with this funny statement;
"I have always stated my opinion on gold as part of diversification, with the knowledge that I could be wrong. I have been getting more forceful only because the likes of you seem to me to be yelling and screaming about gold going in one direction. I have been telling people that might not happen and maybe gold will go down and what my reasons are. "
So should we be diversified into gold althought we will lose it all?
Then we should we sell it all becasue the bullish scenario MIGHT not happen?
Reasoning for my bullish view on gold has been explained. So far you haven't given much reasoning to why I should abandon this.
And if I sold out, where should I put my money. What is a safehaven as the economy burns? You are saying that US$ is the place to be and that a massive recession/depression is good for US$. (And forget about all the counter party risks that it is sets off as derivaties start setting off.)
Investing and trading is never a certain play. You need to weigh the factors. The scale so far tips in gold (and silvers) favor.
Finally, I did not ask you to stop posting because of disagreement.
It was your arrogant attitude that this was too involved to be discussed with the simple minded posters of PO and we should just go ahead and act on your advice with further debate or quesitoning.
PS, now I got it. You have been reading Mahendra Prophecy, haven't you?