What Happens To Gold And Silver Next? Look Out Below?

@pocket change 50-

Yes you are spot on, first off all, unlike what is portrayed to the public, trading is a very quiet, boring profession that can bring stress and it has stress. Whats key is to manage it and minimize it by accepting certain factors and having a set plan from the beginning to end of a trade.

It isn't for everyone; it has great financial rewards and offers one also independence that isn't available or all that common.

Which leads me into another point- any good experienced trader will not make excuses why he was stopped out. Most stops are already SET before a trade is put in place. Why? Because everyone goes into a trade with a set trigger point and an exit point in case the trade doesn't work. Therefore, this notion that "oh they ran my stops".. when I hear that, even from fellow traders, its because they really didnt know what they had set.

Stops are part of a traders day to day "life". Everyone for the most part has one, and they are in different forms, but successful, long term traders ALL have something in place, and they get hit more than one would think. So again, because a stop was hit, does not mean "someone" did it. I have stops that are hit all the time and I do not say "oh they wanted me out of that". Thats nothing but silly talk. EVERYONE has to have stops and at some point they will be hit because if you dont have stops, you WONT have any capital to trade with, doesn't matter how big or small you are.

Finally- HD had a flash crash 2 weeks ago. Are we to suppose that "they" or the "banks" are holding it down? If so, why would they, when HD stock is in a long term uptrend. What theories could we devise to say that someone wanted it cheap... or wait, why would they want it cheap when its going higher; wouldn't "they" want the stock higher instead of going higher?

Or how about AAPL? Its also an in uptrend. Yet it has a flash crash last week. Should we suppose that the "banks" wanted to keep the price of aapl lower? Or wait, would it fit better that they wanted it lower, when in fact they are ALREADY in the stock and its ALREADY been going higher?

It is silly nonsense to make up things that happen in the market regularly to fit ones narrative, without knowing really whos doing what, and then not explaining what has happened.

I assure you I see this sort of wild silly nonsense from fellow traders but those are the ones that are usually losing money because they choose to ignore price action and spend time forming opinions on the hows and whys which are usually wrong anyways.

The clown posse on CNBC jumped all over the AAPL dump--but nothing is said about the regular PM ones that occur on the COMEX. Banks that make markets have lots of information about where stops are and they can use that to create volume which pays them--but hey I don't have the answers to what is happening in all markets, any better than yup--like I said, I was looking for clues at the scene of the crime, as the song goes--everything is open to interpretation and argument--if it wasn't there wouldn't be markets, no matter how insane they sometimes seem.

Fine, fine--I got thick skin. Your big money center bank featured eminently:

http://goldsilverworlds.com/price/t...e-different/

Have a great evening!!

Abenomics â€" Statements from Hamada
In the interview, Hamada noted that raising the sales tax had blunted the impact of Abenomics' "three arrows" of monetary easing, fiscal stimulus and structural reforms designed to break out of deflation, boost growth and help Japan recover from what he called as a "Ponzi game situation", specifically calling it a "mild ponzi game", but noting that Japan's large foreign reserves made the game feasible, Hamada further stated:


"In a Ponzi game you exhaust the lenders eventually, and of course Japanese taxpayers may revolt. But otherwise there are always new taxpayers, so this is a feasible Ponzi game, though I'm not saying it's good."

http://www.valuewalk.com/2014/11/ab...onzi-scheme/

Happy unenjoyment day!! A rare instance of a crook confessing above :)

Doug Noland:"There are reasons why central bankers and central banks have a long history of conservatism. Risks are much too great for experimentation - experiments in "money," loose Credit and aggressive stimulus. History has shown unequivocally that you don't want to monkey with money and Credit. Central banks monkey with securities and asset markets at all of our peril.
We now see all the world's major central banks trapped in a monetary experiment run amuck. Not surprisingly, especially considering the length and results from prolonged monetary stimulus, deep divisions have developed within the central banker ranks. This week saw more public policy criticism from past and present members of the Bank of Japan. There is also this deepening rift between Draghi and the Germans. Draghi continues to talk tough and assure the markets he's ready for QE with our without German consent, surely believing they will have no choice but to come around. The Germans believe "monetary financing" is illegal. Draghi counters that it would be "illegal" if the ECB did not pursue its 2% inflation mandate. How this plays out has major ramifications for the global Bubble...
I worry a lot about global Credit risk. I worry more about illiquidity. Financial Sphere inflation, heavy risk intermediation and the "Moneyness of Risk Assets" combine to nurture historic market liquidity risks. To be sure, six years of zero rates (along with repeated market interventions) ensured that Trillions flowed into various funds and products perceived as highly liquid stores of wealth ("money-like"). Wall Street - and especially the ETF complex - has fashioned scores of perceived liquid low-risk products that invest in illiquid underlying instruments (stocks, corporate debt, municipal debt, EM, etc.). "Money" continues to flood into stock index funds and products, with the perception that these types of vehicles are low-risk and highly liquid (courtesy of the Fed)."
SJ Kaplan:"The main problem with any exchange-traded fund is that as prices rise, these funds are legally obligated to create new shares in direct proportion to the percentage of the price increase. As these new shares are created, the fund has a mandate to purchase the underlying securities with those shares, thereby causing prices to rise further--and thus obligating the fund to create even more shares, and so on. In this way, assets which in prior decades would have gained perhaps 40% or 50% in a bull market end up rising by 200% or 300%. Since the fundamentals are no different today from what they had been in prior centuries, the only way the market can adjust to such a huge price increase is via a subsequent dramatic price collapse. As the assets of an exchange-traded fund decline in price, the fund is obligated to destroy shares in direct proportion to the percentage pullback in its asset base. As these shares are destroyed, the assets of the fund must be sold into the open market--thereby causing prices to fall further, thereby obligating the fund to destroy more shares, and so on. In the second half of 2008, a substantial percentage of the plunge for assets ranging from coal-mining shares (KOL) to silver bullion (SLV) could be directly attributed to the influence of exchange-traded funds in these subsectors. In the first half of 2008, virtually the entire rally and subsequent collapse of agricultural-commodity prices was engineered by a single fund in that sector (DBA), which at one point owned more than 70% of all soybean contracts and more than 60% of all wheat contracts traded in the United States."

http://www.etf.com/DBA

Hey gothic,
Take it for FWIW, supply and demand

I travel for work to the same city for work.
Normally the hotel rooms including tax are around 140 to 150 per night and it's the norm.

A month ago room rates were running around 500 per night due to various reasons.
I know folks who could have got me into that hotel and they said
"no we cannot accommodate you for that night and I am so sorry about this"

I stayed a hour away for around 160.

Ask your self this ...did the bankstas on that day decide they were going to overcharge or was it the hoteliers?

You know that there is an oversupply of oil that's bringing down prices right? OR is this another sinister force at work here as well?

Thanks for reading thus far / happy trading / be hedged / stay current with future trends / most commodities are in over supply (hint here).

swiss trying to change their laws about the gold standard please<<

Politicians don't want restraints on their largess--ever!

What happened to the price of silver in this forum? is there not an investment forum out there on the world wide web? Not to be rude in any way, but I don't buy food commodities.
I am just trying to understand where this discussion is going.
Please explain, since I am not understanding.