Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1308. (Read 2032272 times)

not if you have stops set.

nasty ass reversal in gold today rivalling that of just 2d ago.

There we go.... I'm from WV, so we only have about 4-6 months of weather warm enough to grow crops outdoors.  I actually used to be vegetarian as well, then I ate a hamburger and I was not longer cold all the time .  I kid, but not being able to stay warm was a real problem with that diet in this climate.

Point taken. I think the difference in my perspective may simply have to do with my diet and my location. I don't consume meat and I live in a rural area in a tropical climate where food is grown year-round, so guns/ammo for purposes of food production is of no concern to me. In my personal situation, the only reason I'd have a gun is for self-defense. However I'll concede that it is a little short-sighted to present the "economic demand" for guns in that light, considering that there are so many more perspectives other than my own that I was not considering.

Also, for anyone interested: Professor Antal E. Fekete interview regarding gold backwardation, May 5, 2013.
http://professorfekete.com/articles%5CAEFTheDailyBellinterview2013.pdf
A lot of "interesting" foods for thought in there. He has a nice tendency to speak out against the economists that libertarian-types tend to worship, like von Mises, Rothbard, and Friedman.

I understood your argument, and I agree with it, but my comment is tangential to it.  I only took issue with they way you presented guns as only useful for committing crime.  Obviously, there is no one thing that will save you in a SHTF situation besides a hardworking and loving community to live in.  Coming from a rural setting, the shit hitting the fan doesn't really worry me much.  We plant a little more and bump up our livestock numbers.  It's the urban people who freak out when they consider such a situation and then go looking for "saviours".

You misunderstand my argument. I certainly did not argue that guns and ammo are undesirable or do not have value. I own guns myself. I am simply arguing against the black-and-white thinking that is common when people become too attached to the valuable asset of their choice, and create "false choice fallacy" about which 1 currency/asset (and no other) will be useful in the SHTF scenario they have manufactured specifically to serve the argument:
"BTC is great but with no internet when the power goes out for a month, you'll have to use silver and gold!"

"Silver and gold are going to be completely useless when the SHTF - you'll need guns and ammo to defend yourself / kill people / kill animals / whatever."

"Guns and ammo will be completely useless if you don't have any gold and silver to buy more ammo with"

"Relax, we're going to instantly and painlessly transition to a world where PMs  and fiat instantly drop in value, and BTC is everything. We'll have to figure out how to get androids and internet access out to tiny villages in 3rd world countries so they can continue to pay exorbitant amounts for the socialist government/private industry collusion-controlled wells they get their water from. But beyond that, my made-up scenario where you shouldn't even bother with guns, silver, gold, or vegetable seeds/farmland is completely believable and realistic! I swear!"

I think "All of the above" is a better hedge against whatever could and has happened, than dogmatically arguing, as some might do, that one specific currency or asset will be their saviour and all else is whack.

Came across some crazy video,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ubJp6rmUYM
Zimbabwe nowadays uses the US Dollar because the Zimbabwean Dollar has been printed into oblivian

Not where I live... it's often more convenient to buy/sell to dealers in the USA. 

This is an interesting point! If the USD and other major fiat currencies died "today," how many people would jump to BTC rather than gold and silver? A far greater portion of the population is familiar with gold and silver being used as a currencies in the "olden days" compared the portion who is ready to jump right onto Bitcoin.
And coin shops are all over the place. If hyperinflation hit the currency that the Argentinians are using to avoid their own currency's hyperinflation, it would be much easier and faster for folks to make a mad run on coin shops than to patiently research bitcoin for an entire week, start a online wallet account or download blockchain, KYC verify at an exchange, transfer money, figure out how to actually buy bitcoins, and then transfer to wallet.
I'm not saying that'd be the only choice, but there tends to be 3 viewpoints, all equally flawed:
(1) Only bitcoin!
(2) Only PMs!
(3) Only guns and ammo!
It's not as simple as "one currency taking over." Different exchanges of value will meet the needs of different people in different locales.


Thanks, now if only I can figure out how to pull it off in less than a thousand words



It's really a non-issue. It only becomes an issue if traders actually decide to bring their paper certs in and demand physical delivery. Of course there is not enough silver to cover demand in this case. And they're not even obligated to settle in real physical if they have it, since in the "fine print" it is never stated that physical is actually being allocated to you in a vault. More like the same ton is allocated to 15 different people. It hasn't happened and if it does happen, it won't happen anytime soon.
The CBs don't really play into it too much. The point is not that they could settling with "easy money," it's that (1) they usually aren't even asked to settle for physical, (2) they don't have to even if they are asked, and (3) settling with fiat just means that X% of the "silver/gold" on the market is actually just USD. It's just a little easier to do with all the "easy money" floating around. If COMEX and similar institutions defaulted (something the PM bugs keep predicting but trust me, ain't gonna happen anytime soon) you can be sure the "USD Faucet" run by Benny and the Inkjets would help them limp along to see another day with no penalty.

What's the time frame to "cover" a naked short? Since these shorts must be done at a loss, is it simply because CBs control the money supply that they can pull this stunt off?

Yeah its a really strange daily candle.

Surprise this hasn't been bumped yet. Metals having an interesting day.

I suppose defining "backed" as being pegged is different than defining it as being backed by the market


The definition in my head involved the idea that bitcoin was fully transparent and free-market based to allow the market to fully assign its worth:

No, just like gold is backed by gold, Bitcoin is backed by Bitcoin. It doesn't matter Bitcoin isn't physical (in fact that's one of its main differentiators).

isn't bitcoin just kind of backed by everything we trade for it, including gold? Anyone can use Bitcoin to do what you propose with gold, no? At least, it's the only way you can back a cryptocurrency with gold, as far as my reactionary-response to your message can surmise.

Yup, so they will rise and fall together, either the old system prevails or the PMs will fall further.




It's another kind of false belief, like those held by the PM bugs. Nevertheless real estates always have some practical values for nearly anyone, not just industries. And yeah, the land supply in America is far more abundant than that of China.

A free market for currencies where private issuers of digital gold-backed crypto currencies would go a long way towards restoring gold as a useful money.

But the central banks would never allow that right now (think e-Gold, Liberty dollar, etc) and since you need centralised clearing houses to prove gold-backing of digital certificates (blinded gold-cash etc) then they are an easy target. If there was a way to P2P gold-backed crypto-currencies into the market they would give bitcoin a run for its money (pun intended).

Ahh yes, you mean the part where they finally caught up to 75 years of US Dollar inflation
You can only repeat "1.5%" for so many years in a row before people catch on.




Well, if I really cared so much about the top fraction of a percent of my entire portfolio which is invested in a crazy novelty that people only invest in for dogmatic reasons, I guess I'd be pretty unhappy to lose that money.

Truth is, I saw thousands of percents of gain on my BTC and LTC investments and threw a tiny piece of that into precious metals. On the pie chart, it's smaller than that piece of pie you cut for the fat lady that's like "... oh, just a sliver for me, I'm on a diet." It's enough to satisfy the Stacy Herbert in me but not so much that gold at $1344 and silver at $21 makes me stay up all night in front of a calculator tearing my hair out.

It's like when my DEVCOIN investment 'tanks' lol. I have, like what, $87 worth of Devcoin? A non-issue for sure.


It is sad that the young people are so interested in buying real estate that no one will be able to afford due to being in the same spot of the "bubble" of all the middle-aged men in my town that bought $450,000 single family homes a few years ago and are now living in the center of town in tiny apartments, having learned their lesson about real estate bubbles