Sunday, June 10, 2012

Blondie's View



I thought Blondie's excellent comment was just about good enough to be a post. And when RJ called it Sermon on the Mount material, that tipped the scale. But be careful not to miss the forest for the trees, or the fractal for the chaos, because Blondie pretty much nails it. It's all in the view—the perspective. And even though you may not be a giant, you can still learn to view the world as a giant with a little practice. It's easier than you might think. All you have to do is gently set your shrimp baggage on the ground and walk away.

Blondie on the Mount

Another said:
"Gold! It is the only medium that currencies do not "move thru". It is the only Money that cannot be valued by currencies. It is gold that denominates currency. It is to say "gold moves thru paper currencies"

If this statement appears the least bit cryptic, if it does not make 100% crystal clear sense, then little else written on this blog by either the contributors or the scant few commenters who do understand it will make complete sense to you, despite your best efforts.

You see, my friend, in this world there are two types of people: those who PRODUCE, and those who consume. YOU consume.

Those who PRODUCE, and there is perfectly good reason why it is written in caps, are giants. Everyone else, including YOU, is a shrimp.

Another’s statement above is the perspective of the giants, not the shrimps. So don’t feel bad if its inherent truth is not self-evident, you have simply never directly experienced life as a giant. No shame in that! That in itself means nothing at all.

Except that you don’t have the perspective from which to understand gold. So you'll have to build it from scratch.

In this case actually understanding gold means firstly having to discard an awful lot of fundamental beliefs about the way things work. This is also the single biggest barrier to discussing gold with anyone else… they will never understand without ditching some of what they hold as fundamental beliefs, so you may as well not bother. If you win anyone over it is ultimately only because of their faith in you and your perceptions, not their own understanding. But I digress.

You may appreciate that we need gold to fix our monetary system, but that does not mean you actually understand how gold really functions.

Gold functions as the ultimate store of value. Nice words, nice idea, but you are a shrimp. You’ve never had value in a quantity that needed storing. Sure you may have “savings”, but you’ve never personally experienced diminishing marginal utility to the degree that gold’s function becomes apparent, so it remains a theory. There is a monumental difference between mere theory and theory corroborated by experience. The latter has graduated from theory to fact.

This is the basis of my previous comment about ‘new money’ and the fact that it does not necessarily understand gold. New money for the most part believes it has its surplus value securely stored in various financial instruments. Old money (real giants) knows better. This perspective is also why the idea that Oil would not require physical gold for their surplus is preposterous.

Another told you that you could follow in the footsteps of giants, and you can, but if you want to see their perspective there’s a bit more involved.

Newsflash: $US HI already happened. That’s what the ‘structural support’ since the early ‘80s has been in aid of, to avoid the conclusion of this process. As FOFOA has pointed out so clearly, as long as the marginal flow of excess dollars emitted by the US is absorbed into the market the dollar can continue to function. The devaluation of the currency is a market driven event, the final stage of every HI, but it does not occur as long as the excess currency is absorbed. Some entities have not wanted it to occur until they were better prepared, so they have, at no small cost, supplied the structural support to delay the denouement. Obviously they felt the costs were outweighed by the benefits.

The revaluation of gold is a distinctly separate though concurrent event.

If you understand how gold works you will appreciate that the giants have no incentive to directly trigger either of these separate but simultaneous events… they already have their gold, and they already know its value (and who wants to be blamed for something that was completely unavoidable?). If you don’t need to access the value you have stored in gold, then it is really irrelevant to you what the market currently values gold at. They don’t need the shrimps to tell them anything; rather it is the shrimps who need to wise up. Shrimps are the same ones objecting to “austerity” aka living within one’s means. Doesn’t occur to them that the fantasy may have been the time when they lived over and above their means, does it?

I got a good laugh from this article, particularly the opening paragraphs:

"So what is it about money that the leaders of the eurozone don't get?

Money has been around for a while, and it's not terribly complicated.

The key element is trust. That was true when money was a piece of metal that you could bite or bounce. Now that money is just a piece of paper, it's even truer. Today's money is nothing but trust.

That's why the euro crisis is so bizarre. The euro is, in theory, one of the world's great currencies. And yet, as this crisis has demonstrated, nobody actually stands behind it. There is no lender of last resort. There is no "full faith and credit." There's nobody on the other end of the promise.

And it's as if the leaders of the eurozone wanted to go out of their way to prove it. They've taken us up to the velvet curtain and then themselves, with a self-satisfied smile, pulled it aside to show us that there is no Great Oz.

And in the process they've done major, and perhaps irretrievable, damage to their own currency and to the very idea of money in our time. If you can't trust the euro, what paper can you trust?"


Looks to me like the “leaders of the eurozone” get it fine… the author is simply under the presumption he understands money. Doesn’t seem to have occurred to him that he may not.
He’s definitely not alone.

FOFOA:
"It's just a shift in the perception of savers. Can't change that."

“Savers”: those producers who currently do not understand gold.
Consumers (shrimps) are just along for the ride.

As I said at the top, if Another’s statement is not crystal clear you don’t understand gold, so don’t delude yourself that you do, and bear this in mind when you compose a comment.

I've no doubt my comments will upset some people. That doesn't mean they're not correct, just that some people don't like them. A bit like "austerity" perhaps.
__________

milamber said:

"... to this western shrimp’s mind, there is a whole lot of unlearning that I have had/am having to do!"

I appreciate that, having been there too. To be honest, it's not as difficult as it appears. Like many others, it became clear to me a few years ago that big things were going down. I felt compelled to find out what. It wasn't a big step to see that this was entirely a monetary issue. When I thought about it, I couldn't produce a really good definition of money, so ... I had some work to do. Build yourself a good definition and Another's perspective, not to mention the world at large, start making a lot more sense.
__________

637 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   601 – 637 of 637
FOFOA said...

Aquilus, you asked for it, which planted the idea. It's all because of you that I took on the impossible task of recreating the magic of that post and failed miserably. But like I said, I'm trying to clean it up. Soon, maybe late tonight or tomorrow. ;)

Piripi said...

Victor,

I hear what you are saying about 71 being a political decision, but I don’t see how that conflicts with this:

”Credit denominated in SoV eventually created the situation that required artificial support of the dollar which in turn created dollar credibility inflation.“

Credit denominated in gold got us to the point where something had to be done in ’71, admittedly they had an option at that time to free gold, but was it really a viable option from the US point of view? In any case, they didn't take it. Would such a decision have been required at all had there not been credit denominated in gold to begin with?

I’m just looking for a simple answer for ”Why is it that we are in the present mess?“ that we can both agree on. If credit had never been denominated in gold then I fail to see how the present mess could have occurred at all, so I think it must be a necessary part of the answer. The way I see it, 1971 was all about credit denominated in gold (the dollar) and the default thereof. This then made structural support of the dollar necessary from the early '80s, and it was in turn this continuous support that inflated the dollar's credibility, leading to the 'financialisation' of almost everything.

What do you mean when you say ”I think I like the other order better“?

I am going somewhere with this. I think it would be useful if there was a generally agreed basic description of ”Why is it that we are in the present mess?“, just to serve as a reference point for discussion for the wider community. We talk a lot of detail, but never really try to sum it up. Would anyone else care to have some input?

Aquilus said...

FOFOA,

Wow, I don't know what to say.. That was many months ago, and I really did mean it, but I had no idea...Thank you!

It is true that the perspective of a completely different "class struggle" than the one we're indoctrinated with in school changes one's point of view radically. I have made more than one person understand this concept. Much easier than understanding the whole freegold concept, from my experience, and a good start to get people thinking.

Thanks again for all your hard work, FOFOA!

FOFOA said...

It was only May 2nd that you asked, but you're welcome! :)

"From my reading, one thing that i suggest you come back to more often is the clash of the centers and the savers. That it's such a key concept"

Who could forget The centers and the savers? ;)

"Oops, I just realized I wrote "the centers and the savers" instead "the debtors and the savers"."

Woland said...

Just read the 2 part FT series. Like a slice of Swiss cheese, if
you try to take a shot at it, you'll probably just pass thru one
of the many holes. Yikes! Wonder who commissioned it?

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

FOFOA,
"Gold’s Anti-Social Behaviour Order" by Izabella Kaminska

Oh boy, reading that, makes me wanna beat the living s**t out of that collectivist statist b**ch. That article was a real adrenalin pusher for me.
I hope you dont use too much from that article, much too easy to beat down that strawwoman ;) But I guess I know what you want to point out: FG as a "peace-offering" to collectivists like her. Forget it, that's not what communists like her are looking for.
Greets, AD

Peter said...

AD,

Yes!

Aquilus said...

FOFOA,

Yes, "the centers and the savers" is definitely virgin ground (and destined to remain so)

May 2nd eh? My life feels like it's lived in dog years nowadays as I'm working crazy hours on my newest venture... Keeping up with concepts at your site is a great way for me to think of something completely different from the daily, yet very complex and interesting.. A great way to take a break.

Thanks again and I look forward to it.

KnallGold said...

Btw, did anyone take notice of Ben Bernanke's wonderful tie yesterday?

Well, to be honest, this is just an old timer passing by, drowning in nostalgia (on the trail since 1998), wanting to say hello and thanking all the Knights and Ladies on this Mighty Oaken Table of Yore for all the endless efforts done for mankind (and this little shrimp)!

Best Regards,
KnallGold

Jeff said...

Blondie,

Can we say that the world gave the US (debtors) an advantage in 1922 that they have been pressing ever since? This deal overvalued the US currency and allowed them to cut a sweet deal with the most important super producer? That the superproducer received their preferred SoV at a discount, allowing both superproducer and debtor to gain at the expense of everyone else who was saving in USD as reserve? That when the deal was blown, the US used derivatives and the reluctant cooperation of the victims of this scheme to extend the failing USD timeline? That now, with a backup system available to the rest of the world, even reluctant cooperation is not forthcoming? That HI is the last card to play, screwing the unwary savers and terminating the US free lunch at the same time?

Is that how we got here?

Woland said...

Just read a great quote, which to my mind applies to the work
done by FOFOA et al, as it pertains to the skeptics as well as the
drive by shooters.

"You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find
it within himself."
Galileo Galilei

I guess if it isn't within your constitutional make up to see what is
presented here, it's just best to move on.

JR said...

Hi Victor,

"I don't think it is the key that the dollar used to be paper gold. As of 1971, the dollar could have been like the Euro, i.e. they could have raised the official gold price and then let it float."

The dollar's credibility inflation was enabled by the adoption of the "gold exchange standard" in the
1922 Genoa Conference whose stated purpose was "the stabilization of the general price level." It did it by:

What the 1922 Genoa Conference did was to institutionalize the "sterilization" of gold for the rest of the world through the reserve structure of the international banking system. And this bit of genius was decided by a "committee of experts" from 34 different countries. They did this by introducing paper gold—or paper promises of gold—into the international banking system as reserves equal to the gold itself. This wasn't the first paper gold, but it was the first time that specific paper gold (that from New York and London) was used as an equal reserve upon which credit can be expanded. What is acceptable as international reserves is critical because trade settlement is a function of the reserves. This conference was the birth of the $IMFS.

So what happened in 1971 when the dollar pulled the plug - that's right, it fell apart, only held together by political support. Flow Addendum

So in 1971, while the Texas price of oil was $3.45, OPEC re-priced their Middle Eastern oil up from $1.80 to $2.20 (such audacity, don't you think?) only to see the market price due to demand in 1973 overtake the official posted price, at which point OPEC saw the writing on the wall, and in October raised the price per barrel to $5.12 while curbing production. By December, the Shah of Iran called a press conference to announce the official price would now be $11.65. Well, why not? It's only paper to you if you are not in NEED of this currency through a debt to someone else. And so began the First Oil Crisis of the 1970's.

[...]

The important concept to grasp here is this: as long as the petrodollars stayed in the banking system, the banking system would survive.

In fact, that is how the world weathered the storm of the First Oil Crisis.

[...]

Remember Jelle Zijlstra with the "moon" comment earlier? As head of the BIS in 1980, he confidently predicted that the Second Oil Crisis could be worked through, slowly, but that the System (international financial system) could not survive a Third Oil Crisis--the inflation would make it impossible to recycle the petrodollars to the oil importing countries with any hope of repayment, trade would crumble, and the System would be brought to its knees. On that grim note, we need to take a quick look at how the world reacted to the Second Oil Crisis. It opens the door to everything that follows.

[...]

Any student of history will also recall that the explosion in Gold prices also occurred in 1979 to early 1980, showing us Gold priced at $850 per ounce.

So what exactly has changed in the world since 1980? There haven't been any similar blowups in the pricing of important assets...so how was this wild tiger tamed? Is the money better than it once was? Or are the OPEC nations now suddenly and truly beggars upon the West's doorstep? What happened? Are the multinational banks (once scrambling to hold together the System) now calling the shots with nary a care in the world?


cont.

JR said...

cont.

As 1980 arrived, the Saudis naturally still wanted Money (Gold) for their oil, and the rest of the world was struggling with liquidity. Much currency "wealth" had already been transferred to OPEC, leaving many countries toiling to service their own debts--much of their credit existing as recycled petrodollars. Let the lending continue! Bullion banks would facilitate these deals, and central banks (CB's) would act in the same capacity as with the GSE Fannie Mae, guaranteeing ultimate repayment in the event of a borrower's default.

[...]

With the simple but vital central bank guarantee against the default of these Money (Gold) loans, the House of Saud, for example, would have no qualms about supplying the cash side, effectively buying not the Gold metal immediately, but rather the rights to receive the borrower's Gold repayments over a span of time. Just like buying a home loan on the secondary market. And the Money (Gold) of the central bank need not ever move or change ownership unless the borrower defaults on the loan, and the CB is obligated to deliver on its guarantee for the full repayment in Money(Gold).

There is nothing sinister in all of this. The price of Gold has fallen simply because anti-gold sentiment has been fostered throughout the common investment markets while the principle buyer at the Golden "Rotterdam market" had found another avenue in which to obtain the Money (Gold) desired in exchange for oil profits.


cont.

milamber said...

Texan said,

“The main issue i have always had with FG is that it is too valuable to ever be traded - in size - for fiat.”

Texan,

If I may, I think that you are missing a key element of Freegold. Think about the following items in the context of your main issue:

June 16, 2012 1:02 AM FOFOA said…

“Imagine barter trade at the Giant scale if you can. "I like that Renoir, or priceless ancient artifact, or diamond, or anything that doesn't have to be registered for tax purposes like real estate and cars, what will you take for it? One pallet (one tonne)? Deal. I'll have it delivered to your vault tomorrow."

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2012/06/blondies-view.html?commentPage=2

Also, remember gold is simply a battery that never decays, is not needed by industry and can store unlimited amounts of *ANY* transactional currency.

So how much transactional currency (Fiat is such a loaded word these days!) can gold absorb?

FOFOA (with help from Moldbug) lays that out in the bit coin posts.

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2011/06/bitcoin-open-forum-part-3.html

FOFOA quotes Moldbug here,

"One metaphor for monetization is that of a storage vessel, like a battery for electricity or a tank for compressed gas. When people buy into the currency, they are charging the battery and compressing the tank. When they sell out, they are discharging the battery. When new currency is created (perhaps by alchemists) without a buy-in, the tank has sprung a leak. Etc. The charge, or the pressure, is simply the market capitalization of the entire present (and discounted future) monetary good. […]

Thus a correct, second-order strategy to pick a winner has to consider the monetary pressures across the whole path to complete monetization. If the leak will reverse direction halfway through the process, the process cannot complete and should never start. If large price increases in a commodity would cause a stockpile blowout, the walls of the tank are too thin. The whole premise of monetary restandardization is that the new currency will be stable and permanent. […]

However, because silver was fully demonetized in the 20th century and gold was not, the market capitalization of the gold stockpile is 60 times the capitalization of the silver stockpile [FOFOA: and 73,000 times the capitalization of Bitcoin]. Thus, comparable volumes of gas are pressing in to the gold tank and the silver tank, but the silver tank is 60 times smaller [FOFOA: and the Bitcoin tank is 73,000 times smaller].. It is actually surprising that silver has not risen faster and harder.

But this present advantage is also silver's long-term Achilles heel. The silver tank, being so much smaller, cannot take this kind of pressure. It will almost certainly explode. I have personal advice for those playing the silver market: bring your steel balls. If you buy into a bubble when it's small, and get out before it pops, you can do quite well. […]

Here is the problem with Bitcoin: the tank, I think, will pop…"

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2011/04/on-monetary-restandardization.html

FOFOA speaking…

“Gold is the only super-tank. It can absorb any flow the world throws at it without popping. It is stronger than all the pressure that is possible because of its uniquely large stock to flow ratio. And also the fact that the large stock is held in extremely strong hands that I like to call Giants and CBs. These Giants are the real-world producers and titans of today and yesterday, including a lot of real old-money Giants.”

So taking just those two points in mind, I think that gold is traded in size for whatever amount of fiat (or a Renoir) that the holder of the gold demands.

And in the Freegold future (spur & brake) the amount will be directly related to however much the printer of a particular currency debases such.

Milamber

milamber said...

JR,

Thanks for publishing those posts about Rothbard. I can not express how tremendously helpful that has been reading them.

Milamber

JR said...

cont.

So what happened after the world worked through the Second Oil crisis - a huge credibility inflation in the $IMFS:

And thus, in 1980, began the modern era of Credibility Inflation.

Salting the Mine

Most simply stated, credibility inflation is the expanding confidence in the fiat financial system to always deliver a higher payoff tomorrow than today. And through credibility inflation we ultimately destroy the currency structure by believing it can somehow deliver more than reality will allow.

Credibility inflation is the exact antithesis of price inflations like the 1970's. It is why we saw low consumer price inflation for the last 30 years relative to the massive monetary and financial product inflation. It is partly why we saw gold stagnant or falling for 20 years.


Credibility Inflation

See the key

You see, after 1980, "oil" started trusting paper gold again, just like it did in the 1950's, as long as some of it could be exchanged for physical. But having been burned once, in 1971, they weren't about to be burned again. And what the euro CB's figured out was all that mattered to the producer/savers of the world was the guaranteed FLOW of physical gold, NOT the guaranteed price or weight/mass. (And this is why we pull it out of the ground: so it can FLOW!)

It's the Flow, Stupid

see what happened:

"The European plan was to support the $IMFS at least until a new fiat "reserve" currency could be established, one large enough to absorb the shock of a failing reserve currency, to avoid being forced back 100 years into a physical gold-based economy which would have been very traumatic. This effort took 20 years from 1980."

Synthesis

Jeff said...

Milamber, Texan is ignoring the situation in which gold is most valuable.

FOFOA: "Gold would not be valuable if one person owned all of it. It is most valuable in its widest distribution possible, the wealth reserve, which requires a much higher valuation than it has right now. A higher valuation denominated in hard assets, not just fiat currencies!"

Just look at the BIS' own gold actions. Their owned gold hoard has shrunk from 194 tonnes to 120 tonnes over the last 6 years, as has the entire Eurosystem's hoard over the last decade (from 12,576 tonnes down to 10,833 tonnes). Most gold movements in Europe have either been lateral reshuffling or dishoarding and encouraging citizens and other entities to start hoarding physical gold themselves.

I have written this before... if you were King of the World with 35,000 tonnes of gold in a world of 160,000 tonnes, you would gladly - happily - reduce your "stash" to 10,000 tonnes if that reduction came with a 50x revaluation. Trying to get ALL the gold into your hoard is a fool's strategy."

Jeff said...

Awesome linkage, JR. It seems we are in agreement.

JR said...

Yes Jeff, as always.

To tie it back to another angle Victor was looking at, one way "This deal overvalued the US currency" is via the resultant credibility inflation, or "the expanding confidence in the fiat financial system to always deliver a higher payoff tomorrow than today" that was enabled because "after 1980, "oil" started trusting paper gold again" as it was at this time, following the Second Oil Crisis, that "The European plan was to support the $IMFS at least until a new fiat "reserve" currency could be established."

KindofBlue said...

FOFOA

Looking forward to what commentary you may provide on Izabella Kaminska's articles cited. She seems to me as in a barnyard and sets about 'stepping in it' wherever she turns.

She opens up far more avenues than she's competent to accurately address and chooses the fat target -- "goldbugs" (HMS) -- as representative of the 'gold as savings' community.

We are literally inundated nowadays with those who hold strong opinions on that which they know little or nothing about.

Dante_Eu said...

Oh man, every time I buy 1 ounce, gold tanks 50$ - 100$. Funny! :-)

Michael dV said...

Timing
I'll take a stab at the timing issue: soon! 6 mos or less.
Here, we assume the Euro must not fail. I has to be there for the world as a savior reserve currency when the dollar fails. Most are looking to the dollar failure to precipitate a calamity. That seems to be a very nebulous event and looks as it could hold on forever (at least at times it seems that way.)
But the world really does need a reserve currency and the Euro is having serious issues. By that of course I mean various EZ countries are in trouble, the Euro currency itself is fine. But politics do prevail at some level. Merkel may have trouble keeping her party in power unless she does things that will cause great pain in...other EZ countries.
I think that a precipitating cause for collapse could be the Euro difficulties and that efforts to support the Euro more than some net risk from derivatives could bring about the changes the whole world by now seems to see coming. It may not be as simple as pushing a large yellow button (as has been suggested in these pages) but if the EZ really starts feeling pain and decides it must do something to preserve the Euro, that could set things in motion while the derivative pile stays neatly balanced.

Gary Morgan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
JR said...

I wanna have consensus with you too Gary :)

enough said...

IMHO

this is it for paper gold..........

cash settlement around the corner....

the ultimate physical collateral is about to be unleashed....

nuclear option

Michael dV said...

Gary
I'm a doctor and I deal with the 'salt of the Earth'...no rich, plastic surgery getting, anti aging seeking rich folks round here. Trust me, folks may not be able to figure out the problem but they know things are not right and something has to change. They might not see the size of the change or the nature of the change but when something blows up there will be less surprise than many seem to think....that is what I'm seeing and hearing from 20 to 30 (older than average) folks a day.

JMan1959 said...

Enough,
What is the trigger for your latest prognostication on the nuclear option?

Gary Morgan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
enough said...

paper gold acts like crap while the fundementals of physcial have never been brighter

China imports up 800% in Q1 over last year

Discussion of physical gold used as collateral in "redemption Pact" when debt of a country is greater than 60% of GDP under maastricht treaty

BIS considering tier 1 zero % capital weighting

Spain and italy can only sell bonds to their own dead banks and at unsustainable rates

Subordination of non troika, ESM debt holders make any future purchases by any entity outside this club, suicide.

A revaluation of physical gold is the debt extinguisher and ultimate collateral for future debt issuance. IF the paper gold mkt is leveraged, it needs to burn before that collateral is revalued.

and paper gold acts like crap......it's on brothers and sisters !!!!

Gary Morgan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
enough said...

IMHO

Unless the helicopters are airborn long before Nov. there wont be any lawns to dump on. Just shriveled up tumble weeds blowing acrss the wilderness............

DP said...

25% - thats a nice conversion rate.

You must be doing something right. :)

Piripi said...

An op-ed in yesterday's MarketWatch: Gold’s value is more than just its price. Commentary: A bumpy period for gold may be ahead, by the World Gold Council's managing director for investment no less, appears to be an exquisitely timed primer wouldn't you say?

Piripi said...

Hello KnallGold,

You are of course referring to this. Maybe he's just celebrating the solstice?

Biju said...

FED did not announce QE. EJ from itulip made a short term call 5 days ago to short stocks till previous lows of around S&P 1280. EJ is the best and it is not wise to ignore him. He has been Long Gold and Long Treasuries since 2001.

My assessment is FED will announce QE around Aug 2012 and jawbone that the QE program will start in Nov 2012. Off we go then again.

Victory said...

Ahhhh....thank you...just took another hit of the 'Shoeshine Boy' but I'll try some of that 'Kaminska' tonight!

...new FOFOA cant wait!

Edwardo said...

Another Fed engineered money printing exercise is surely coming. The Wall Street boys are going to do their level best to force a major liquidity event by driving shares into the ground. Of course the stock market may not go straight down, what with the end of quarter coming up, but exogenous events may overwhelm any end of quarter tape painting that the usual suspects generally like to engage in. Moody's is doing their part as well as they downgrade of many of the planet's largest (insolvent) bankster concerns.

And since we are on the subject of "when will the golden button be pushed", I'm going to offer up something for your amusement.

What's below is from an outfit known as "the web bots". Perhaps you've heard of them. Basically the bots are the result of the work of a fellow named Clif (no that's not a typo, he actually spells his first name with one f) High.

He's a strange one for sure, but, setting aside the man's, ahem, idiosyncrasies, the bots have had some major hits with their data. The following is from their most recent report which was released approximately one month ago.

"The data sets are clearly stating that whatever-the-events of late June are, that the pivotal point for [continuation] of [central banks and nwo and global warfare] is breached in these three/3 days. There are very small levels of [visibility] on the [breach of stability (for existence of central banks)], so it is unlikely that the [populace] will be aware of this significant shift. As the [unexpected military events] are going to dominate the consciousness, the data flow suggests that we will only be able to ascertain the shift point in analysis from the near future when the [central banks] have all failed."

My view is that what is meant by "central banks have all failed" is that they have all failed- to the extent they tried to avert failure- to delay, for one second longer, the death of the $IMF system. I hasten to add, FWIW, that the bot's prognosis for gold squares with my interpretation of what is meant by CBs failing. In fact, some number of years ago, about three, if memory serves, their work reported gold would reach the lofty level of 75 thousand dollars an ounce.

«Oldest ‹Older   601 – 637 of 637   Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Comments are set on moderate, so they may or may not get through.