Gregor.us

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

Were oil to assume the status you suggest, would it not be subject, in extremis, to the same confiscation risk that gold was in the 30s?

Indeed, might not the risk be greater? Unlike gold, after all , oil, like water in the desert, physically keeps the modern economy — manufacturing, agriculture, transport, etc. — “alive”. Furthermore, domestic oil is increasingly scarce, as you regularly point out.

Could the State afford to allow private hoarding of oil — ie., an intensification of the oil supply problems likely to occur in the Treasury “meltdown” scenario — if that was the result of oil assuming a strong store-of-value role?

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

That's exactly right. So oil futures trading would flee to oil trading exchanges that were outside of government control. Perhaps the DME at Dubai, or perhaps start-up exchanges in offshore locations. Also, this is why I personally focus on Canadian supply. While imperfect, provincial autonomy in Canada is unique and there are constitutional safeguards which stiplulate Provincial control over resources.

The US is unlucky to have peaked in oil production such a long time ago. 1971.

However the US is fortunate to have such a large supply of NG. Of course, it can be brought on in great quantities–but only at higher prices.

G

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

In light of Hostetter's points, oil ETF's look a pretty vulnerable, even risible shelter.

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

As you well know, futures are financial instruments, barely any of them end up in physical delivery. It wouldn't matter where they were traded if the underlying commodity sector was seized and placed under government control–which was done in WWII, for example. Oman is an interesting contract, to be sure, but all that oil is already government oil, which is why it is so important that Saudi Aramco switch over to the exchange, which is why there is a post settlement … settlement.

Some numbers would help me understand why you make this argument: “While assets can certainly continue to deflate across the globe, my question is as follows: Can the US Dollar and US Treasuries bear that load without breaking? My answer is no.”

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

We've kinda known since 2004 that eventually oil would come under greater govt control, once depletion became more widely accepted. I generally do not make picks for investment vehicles. That said, I am confident the world will find a way to create free markets in oil should control get heavy handed, say, in OECD markets. In fact, I would regard it as an entrepreneurial business opportunity.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

Thanks to NYTimes Opinionator for picking up this post today.

G

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

A barrel of oil is as useful to me as an ounce of gold. I'd much prefer regular gasoline or diesel fuel. I can easily barter gallons of gasoline for necessities because gas is one.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

concern…

How could we have inflation if there is an utter bond collapse? wouldn't that itself be highly deflationary? credit would be destroyed at a rate unimaginable.

In other words and hear me out, maybe my thinking is incorrect.
Dollar is a hegemony and we are the engine of the world economy, as producing nations need to produce so consuming nations can consume. They can't consume efficiently as with out government subsidy they can't afford the products.

Eventually risk will be perceived with government bonds/notes/bills. Is this inflationary? If velocity is still very, slow because of lack of job growth and an excess capacity/over extension of production, would that be defined as inflationary?
inflationary in my eyes is the confidence to sign promissory notes and those notes will be paid back, which is trust. Current state of affairs we don't have either as we over spent and over borrowed as the misallocation of capital and global imbalance has helped fuel our problem.
Back to government debt, eventually as tax receipts go down, investors will want to be compensated for their risk. In that compensation they will shun the massive supply of debt until rates go up (not inflationary in my definition) as this will be the reward for the perceived risk. As government bonds down in price (up in rate) and new issues are issued at a higher rate, it will start to crowd out more private investment in debt markets.
No real change here…. eventually when the government rates get to extremely high rates this could and should lead to an utter bond collapse. While that bond collapse is happening, think about what will happen to the dollar? Would investors seek the USD because of the higher rates?
Short term rates would still remain lower for liquidity but the long end would have to go up. If the dollar gets strong due to de-leveraging and if you could buy a intermediate long term bond at a high rate that would seem attractive. Think about the ripple effects.
As we progress through this mess, companies are barely profitable but how will they be able to issue new debt when corporate spreads are 800-1600 bps above USA debt? Investors will flee those bonds, even municipals to seek a save haven of USA bonds even-though the rates are higher, rolling over debt for the corps and munis will be very difficult.
If we had an utter bond collapse, I would believe that commodities will not be a safe haven, even oil. it does have a store of value but the demand may not be there. Who is gonna buy if credit creation does not really exist? Especially if the government is the real true debt market?

I wish i could have explained my theory better but I would love to hear the other side of the coin on that…. I believe we can't get to attached to what could happen as we really don't know how but this mess could be and deflation happens 1 in three generations on this scale. Sometimes the history books don't articulate the trends correctly.

thanks.

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Your points are quite good and very legitimate. It's entirely possible that a relentless worldwide deflation would produce nothing but spare capacity and greater amounts of spare capacity in everything from automobile to furniture, to wheat, corn, and fruit production.

Here is how I see it. The world in 1930 had 2 billion people. The world in 2009 has 6.7 billion people. In 1930, carrying capacity of the world was largely framed by the fact that much of the world live in rural areas. In 2007, something historic happened: for the first time in human history, more than half of the world's population lived in urban areas. The implications for food and energy production demand is huge.

My call, in this particular post, is that a deflationary collapse will destroy production of food and energy, causing an eventual crisis. But the time this unfolds, monetary printing of money should be converging. I think you can therefore imagine the result.

Best,

G

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

Thanks for the clarity.

Sent from my Mobile

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

“There was an initial deflation against the Japanese Yen. That has reversed. And rightly so.”

Please can you clarify? The JPY TWI is close to all-time highs, so I wouldn't say yen strength “has reversed”.

Re: ” I liken monetization to a currency defense”. That doesn't make sense to me. Currency defence is presumably buying your currency, i.e. reducing it's supply. Monetisation increases the supply of your currency. In theory, and subject to the usual “ceteris Paribas” caveat, monetisation and currency defence should have the oppposite effects from one another.

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

It's a way of saying that the JPY is off of its highs against other majors. I agree that the JPY is close to its highs when compared to where it began before the crash(es) of 2008. It's my way of saying that I think it has reversed now. Do you think the JPY strength has not reversed? Off the highs? The JPY is off of its highs against the GBP, EUR, USD, AUD, and CAD.

My analogy to a currency defense was to the futility of the operation. Perhaps a better analogy would have been non-financial, as I can see my use of the currency defense has let the door open to a co-mingling of the two operations. Monetization is not a currency operation. Agreed. What I was trying to get across is that the operation goes against where the market naturally wants to go.

FWIW, the JPY reversal off the highs was inevitable imo and will only extend at this point, as the carry-trade unwind moved on to the more important, structural issue which was a collapse in demand for Japanese goods.

HTH.

H

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Good to see you F.B.

Here is an update on our friend Verleger's latest call.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/sulphur+r…

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Test: why is disqus so easily led astray when an edit occurs in WordPress?

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

Before the bond market is allowed to crash, the central bankers will do a simultaneous dumping of gold. It's called killing off the competition. Remember, the bond market is the seat of power that the government sits on.

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

While I don't know how things will play out, my historical study of financial crises suggests that gold will be called upon by the time this crisis ends. My hunch has been that gold will be used to form part of, not all, a recapitalization of the OECD banking system. My undeveloped and hazy thesis is that the IMF will issue SDRs, and that some sort of bargain will take place such that those SDRs are backed, in part, by gold. If OECD banking systems and populations were able to accept non-gold backed paper from the IMF, then perhaps gold will play less of a role.

While I work on how this will play out, I at least know two things: gold will either play a public role as a tool used by financial authorities to recapitalize the banking system. Or, it will continue to play a private role as a defense against the destruction of money, and monetization.

G

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

gregor, through your discourse and responses you have made clear your asymmetrical view towards gold, however I am curious as to the mechanisms you have chosen to implement your bias.

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

That's easy. I have been invested in silver and gold over the past 5-6 years. Though I personally became uncomfortable with individual investment in gold companies because I hate what they do to the environment–particularly in developing countries. I have found that Copper producers, that extract gold along with the Copper are “generally” more favorable to me. Overall, I have felt that direct investment in bullion however would offer fantastic upside in the years ahead and is a better risk-reward than investing in individual gold companies.

All just my opinion of course and not meant to institute “investment advice” as that is something I tend to avoid in my public remarks. Besides, any experienced investor can find their own vehicles to play out my ideas if they think my ideas have any value.

HTH

G

Gold is just another commodity with very little value in the real world of applications. Gold bugs base their opinions on historical times when markets were far less complex than now. Oil on the other hand, is like blood being continually consumed by everyone all the time. Any shock to its system will send its price soaring. I can go 3 days without food. I'm not sure I could go 3 days without light, transport, heating and communications.

Gold is just another commodity with very little value in the real world of applications. Gold bugs base their opinions on historical times when markets were far less complex than now. Oil on the other hand, is like blood being continually consumed by everyone all the time. Any shock to its system will send its price soaring. I can go 3 days without food. I'm not sure I could go 3 days without light, transport, heating and communications.

This is why hard goods such as food, clothing, ammo, etc are better to stockpile than gold, silver, or cash. We are heading toward a barter economy because metals and money have been so manipulated as to be nearly worthless when the SHTF. While gold is useless unless someone is willing to accept it, guns and butter will always have value.

This is why hard goods such as food, clothing, ammo, etc are better to stockpile than gold, silver, or cash. We are heading toward a barter economy because metals and money have been so manipulated as to be nearly worthless when the SHTF. While gold is useless unless someone is willing to accept it, guns and butter will always have value.

This is why hard goods such as food, clothing, ammo, etc are better to stockpile than gold, silver, or cash. We are heading toward a barter economy because metals and money have been so manipulated as to be nearly worthless when the SHTF. While gold is useless unless someone is willing to accept it, guns and butter will always have value.