| Author |
Replies: 5,649 / Views: 461,487 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
324 Posts |
Gothic and Ceylon both make points to ponder but leave out so much for lack of balance... Recently, the budget deficit has been shrinking under Obama. Good for him. It started out big and grew with Obama because that's what happens in a super recession as the government spends more to make up for consumers not spending. It is to keep the economy from getting even worse and it was recommended by both Bush and Obama's top economists. Allowing the banks to be more risky like selling insurance, offer derivatives, and credit default swaps is problematic if not regulated properly. Can a government regulate that has been influenced and entertained through campaign donations? Without campaign finance and lobbying reform they will not be able to put the countries' interest ahead of the donors. The conservatives are most against campaign spending reform. Liberals need to understand the government can't fix everything. So pick and choose.
Reagan certainly raised the deficit and taxes but gets a pass because he is "conservative" in so many other ways, like charming talk and perception. I voted for him once!
There needs be a different playbook for each investment bankers and traditional main street bankers. But the rulebook has been blended due to outside influence.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
As for budget deficits shrinking, it matters what numbers you look at. Total off balance sheet USA gov't. liabilities were over $70 trillion in 2012 and that includes social security, medicare and other often overlooked items (conveniently).
Now the bankers have loaded another $30 trillion of their derivative gambles on the backs of the US taxpayers, courtesy of CONgress.
Its OK to seek comfort in charts and other measures of the past--I find it mildly amusing. It is also relevant to look at other factors, too. But hey, the trend is your friend (until the end of the trend). No harm meant.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
276 Posts |
Gothic, Ceylon, et al.,
Interesting viewpoints on current and historical political influences on the economy. Since this thread is intended to aim at gold and silver, though, and many of us aren't able to stick with you at that depth level, would any of you like to translate your comments into what you think it may mean for current or future gold and silver prices?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
849 Posts |
Plus I thought it said "This is NOT a political forum and purely political discussions will be locked".
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
Well it's Fed Reserve meeting week, so that often does not bode well for the relics, short term.
Both USA political parties have had a hand in the current state of gov't. finance. At some point monetizing debt and the level of debt may turn investors away from t-bonds and the US dollar and toward alternatives. So far not, though. Effects of hot money creation are being felt in the periphery--BRICS, etc. As I've mentioned in the past, the proliferation of ETFs exacerbate market moves. This is easily seen in precious metals and their producers. It works both ways.
Since 2008 many investors have shunned stocks and invested in bond funds of all kinds, because they think they are "safe", or they are reaching for yield, or both. If the creation attributes of bond ETF's (demand creates more ETF shares thus forcing ETF's to buy more bonds) turn into destruction (redemption that destroys ETF shares and forces underlying asset sales) , it could get very interesting at some point with investors jammed into these supposedly liquid funds.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3789 Posts |
Staff note: You have the ability to post your information without personal attacks. I suggest you do so instead of continuing your current trend.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
No prob Yup--have a nice rest of your week off.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3789 Posts |
seeing the pits have closed for today, this is how I see gold and silver for today.
With gold for today, it clearly had a nasty gap down, taking it out of this upper range and its sitting at the lower end of the range, in fact its moving back closer to the 12/1 overnight gap it had. Again, if that 12/1 is given up, that would be a big negative for gold, watch and see what happens in the coming days.
Silver also had a nasty gap down, it also is following gold into the lower range.
In one swift move today, a big chunk of progress has been wiped out. This volatility should be no surprise however, as we have seen it now for a long time in gold and silver.
Resident goldbugs here on the forum (u know who you are LOL)are counting with the upcoming FOMC meetings release that gold will be lower. In actuality, no one knows how gold will react to the FOMC meetings minutes. What matter is the reaction, and there is no way of knowing what the reaction will be.
To me, until the overnight futures move in gold and silver is given up, it still remains valid and a focal point. A retracement or coming into it would not be a shocker.
Be patient and watch the price action, it is the only important thing that matters.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3789 Posts |
Staff Edit
I know you have your opinion and thats fine, I have no issue with that. You can believe in whatever floats your boat.
However, when you are wrong and you enter my area where I am experienced and deal with everyday,specifically financial markets, I am going to call you out and point where you are wrong... and I trust you know I am doing that not to put you down but to make sure that you aren't spreading misinformation :)
As you know, it is totally fine to disagree. It is also totally fine to point out where someone may be incorrect and to try to help them find correct information. However, this is borderline becoming an obsessive wierd trolling of another member and that part needs to stop here. Help educate, help with correct info, but do not put down another member doing so. The above is how I would expect a reply; the other post I removed and the part of this one need to be re-worded with the above in mind. Thank you very much.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5857 Posts |
Political aside based on actual reality I for one made good in stocks after the drop in 08, buying in when I loss money, made a turn around while most were getting out. (It even out my 401k's) I was into gold around late 90's - early 2000, stop buying in mid 2004. I am only into semi-numis items for now, but holding back lately after Yup numerous posts here.  A tip of the hat to you Yup, as I still haven't buy chunks of silver even when price drop into the lower $16. Holding still. 
Edited by macmercury 12/15/2014 5:31 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
589 Posts |
Gold is forecast to go down (taking silver, platinum, and possibly palladium) with it during the first half of the new year. Then it's thought the value will increase to silver selling at the >$18 mark by year's end. Waiting to rock bottom prices...hope I didn't miss out 15 days ago. (Bought a little too high the last time, need to lower my average price per ounce)
|
|
New Member
United States
11 Posts |
I nibbled a bit at $15.50- Pamp Suisse 10oz bar. I am not going to make a large buy until we find out if the price continues downward trend or becomes stable.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...-record.htmlhttp://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/teren...pay-old-debtThe Lew here is US Treasury secretary: The Daily Treasury Statement that was released Wednesday afternoon as Americans were preparing to celebrate Thanksgiving revealed that the U.S. Treasury has been forced to issue $1,040,965,000,000 in new debt since fiscal 2015 started just eight weeks ago in order to raise the money to pay off Treasury securities that were maturing and to cover new deficit spending by the government. During those eight weeks, Treasury took in $341,591,000,000 in revenues. That was a record for the period between Oct. 1 and Nov. 25. But that record $341,591,000,000 in revenues was not enough to finance ongoing government spending let alone pay off old debt that matured. Record Revenue through Nov. 25, 2014 The Treasury also drew down its cash balance by $45.057 billion during the period, starting with $126,568,000,000 in cash and ending with $81,511,000,000. The only way the Treasury could handle the $942,103,000,000 in old debt that matured during the period plus finance the new deficit spending the government engaged in was to roll over the old debt into new debt and issue enough additional new debt to cover the new deficit spending... In testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in October 2013, Lew explained why he wanted the Congress to agree to increase the federal debt limitâ€"and why the Treasury has no choice but to constantly issue new debt. "Every week we roll over approximately $100 billion in U.S. bills," Lew told the committee. "If U.S. bondholders decided that they wanted to be repaid rather than continuing to roll over their investments, we could unexpectedly dissipate our entire cash balance." "There is no plan other than raising the debt limit that permits us to meet all of our obligations," Lew said. "Let me remind everyone," Lew said, "principal on the debt is not something we pay out of our cash flow of revenues. Principal on the debt is something that is a function of the markets rolling over." Just some reading on the bond market operations over the past year, some very recent. Relates to gold and PM related investments directly if there is some interruption in repayment or "rolling over" as Lew says.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
576 Posts |
A thought: 1st off I hope not to step on anyones toes, this is not my intention. This is one of my favorite threads, I try to visit it a couple of times a week. I an grateful for the information and entertainment at times that I've found here. I am all for lively debate, it keeps us all sharp and let's those of us that hope to learn something have an oportunity to see many different points of view.
I am finding that it is difficult lately to follow this thread because of the external links form external sources: bloomberg, motherjones, jessecrosroad, actingman and so on and so on. I could easily filter that out but once other form members start responding to these posts I find any message or content of value from all posters involved gets muddled. I for one just don't have time to visit all of these sites and the ones that I have visited are, in my opinion, a little bit Area 51.
Once again, I enjoy the dabate and I think that all of the posters here bring something of value to the table but I wonder, if it would be possible to have a seperate new thread for these links and copy and pastes from theses outside sources. I come to this site to learn what is on the minds of the form members, not to view outside sources. I am aware of those sources and, If I like, I can go to those sites if I choose.
THanks to all for taking the time to read this, respect to all, Liverpool
|
|
Valued Member
United States
300 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 5,649 / Views: 461,487 |