Posts by vividgull10

If you ask me, this whole thing boils down to a few basic fallacies:

- If inflation were just a simple equation where Federal Reserve printing > inflation = sky-high prices — everyone would be rich.
- If precious metals worked on the logic that inflation spikes > gold must moon — everyone would be rich.
- (Combining 1 and 2) If metals followed the logic that Federal Reserve prints > gold must moon — everyone would be rich.

Obviously, not everyone is rich. There’s a pretty clear correlation between what you know, how informed you are, solid risk management, and your actual bank balance.

The point is... the internet is flooded with characters who take things people study for years and reduce them to oversimplified sentences. I’m no trained economist, but I know enough to realize that any complex system is called "complex" for a reason. Consequently, there’s a reason anyone can start a YouTube channel, but not everyone gets a PhD.

The point being > it means nothing to me if someone happens to be right once in an indefinite period of time. That’s useless. It’s useless because it ignores the most elementary postulates of risk management. More specifically, it ignores risk management itself.

None of this is meant to imply I have all the answers. All I have is a pile of questions and a few stray ideas. For me, that's plenty. I learned long ago that staying disciplined is key—if you don't chase the hype, the profit usually finds you.

Robert Vaughn10 said:That's incorrect. I watched Ben. Ben was perfectly clear: if they hold onto that paper instead of selling it, then yes, it becomes monetization.
So, it is monetization until they sell. And it's unlimited because the criteria for stopping purchases are incredibly shaky. We'll see the reality reflected in the CPI in a year or two. It couldn't be clearer.
And who exactly is going to buy that much paper?
The claim that they aren't doing it isn't true either. He explicitly stated they are expanding the Balance sheet; he said it plainly. They aren't going to walk out and tell everyone, "Listen, we're destroying your currency," and then hide behind the word "somewhat." What does "somewhat" even mean? Is that supposed to be an argument to calm the masses?
Anyway, go ahead and explain which money is actually entering the system... We are looking at $500 billion + $500 billion, whereas the Federal Reserve's Balance sheet back in 2008 was only about $800 billion. So, it's either the money printed since 2008 or the money they are about to print.

Let’s keep it simple: take a hypothetical scenario where the Federal Reserve's Balance sheet hits $10^{100} today.
Can you actually prove a correlation between that event and the resulting inflation? (Measure it however you want)

PS.
Disclaimer: I don't have a bias toward anything—from dollars to gold. I think like a trader; I just want to see things move. To me, this is all just about picking the best entry and exit points.
I'm saying this just so there's no misunderstanding—I'm not rooting for a rally or a crash.

analogharbor44 said:This is exactly how things would've looked back in 2013, whether you loved it or not!

http://watch.bnn.ca/the-street/decem...12/#clip825093

The guy sounds pretty realistic. 👍

I'm not getting into whether his forecasts are spot on or not, but he sounds cautious and level-headed. That's enough for me to take him seriously.

Robert Vaughn10 said:I’ll say it again: Ben Bernanke admitted this is monetization. It couldn't be any clearer. New money is being injected into the system. Honestly, whether the balance sheet expands or not is secondary. Maybe it’s just old money they printed years ago, lent to banks, and is now flowing back to the Federal Reserve—who knows what kind of alchemy they’re performing. Regardless, it’s money conjured out of thin air. It’s entering the system.So, it isn't just sitting in bank vaults. Half a trillion is being pumped directly into the system, and that is a massive amount of liquidity.
This is going to hit the CPI by at least a few percentage points. If inflation is officially sitting around 2% right now, expect it to climb to at least 5% within a year or two—assuming they don't start masking deflation. If you look at the unofficial numbers using the Federal Reserve's 1980 methodology, we’re looking at closer to 10%. All that, while the economic structure itself continues to deteriorate.

Schiff claims Ben admitted it was monetization.
But wait—are we actually talking about what Schiff *claims* Bernanke said, or what he actually said?
Because Bernanke's take was different. He argued that while constantly buying and holding bonds would constitute monetization, they aren't actually doing that.

At the same time, he set clear boundaries based on inflation and unemployment thresholds.

Look, we can definitely debate what happens when the Federal Reserve eventually has to offload everything they've bought so far. That's a valid discussion.

But saying "Ben admitted it's monetization" is a total misquote. It might be an accurate reflection of what Schiff said, but it isn't what Ben said. It makes me think you haven't actually watched Bernanke's statements and are just watching Schiff's YouTube videos.

quiettrucker12 said:Good question. I think the answer is partially baked into the post above; the chart itself basically pointed out those three WMAs, and the 100 DMA fits the pattern perfectly. You can learn a ton from the last major wave, but keep in mind the rules of the game can change. A different indicator might take center stage next time.

That's exactly why I'm asking, obviously.

Just a quick technical question here...

What’s your logic for deciding which MA to actually watch? Are you looking at it purely from an empirical standpoint—basically picking one that’s historically hit the mark so you expect it to hold up down the road? Or are you playing by a different set of rules?

quiettrucker12 said:Look, Robert Vaughn10, there’s obviously occasional manipulation happening. For instance, what happened overnight and what we saw today looks more like blatant manipulation than anything else yet. Or look at oil prices lately right before the new Quantitative Easing announcement. Even that Goldman Sachs report dropped just before the FOMC meeting. It makes you wonder whose side ZeroHedge is actually on. I heard—this is unverified since I don't obsessively read ZH, but I caught a headline or a comment—that they once dropped negative news about gold at a critical moment when the sentiment needed a boost, and it supposedly wasn't the first time. That info comes from trader circles, so it carries some weight with me. I never really viewed CNN as an alternative to ZH; maybe the only real alternative is 😉. As for manipulation, it happens in everything. Honestly, I find it hard to believe the Federal Reserve is running some massive scheme against gold for several reasons: first, the bull market seems to be moving quite naturally so far; second, gold prices have skyrocketed over the last decade; and third, China is a massive buyer, and I can't see why the Federal Reserve would let the Chinese get their hands on cheap gold. The issue with "manipulation" claims is that analysts cry foul the second things don't go their way. Add to that the fact that questioning the manipulation narrative is a total taboo in gold bug circles, and you've got the perfect excuse. Last night, I mentioned we might test the 100 DMA or even the 75 WMA, but I didn't expect it to happen this fast. Overall, gold's reaction to this Quantitative Easing announcement (4/beskonačno2) is a bit weird, but what happened overnight and today is the strangest thing I've seen yet. And one more thing: whenever someone tries to move an asset through manipulation, the market always snaps back with interest.

Also, how is it that nobody calls out someone like Jim Sinclair for his massive misses? Not just on gold price predictions—which aren't off by $100, by the way—but on all his other claims, like predicting major banks would collapse within days of him saying they would. Or ZeroHedge—how many fake news stories have they pushed?

I post a prediction here, and then people ask, "do you doubt it or not?" whether it's up or down a couple of dollars... it feels weird. It's like logic doesn't apply anymore. It's still not even certain if we've collectively "agreed" that Ben Bernanke is printing trillions...

Exactly. That’s the whole issue. If the world was certain the money printer was running, gold would have been way higher yesterday than it is now. And I doubt any manipulation could hold it back.

It’s starting to feel like everyone uses the term 'printing' really loosely; everybody just has their own little definition of what that actually means. IMHO, the only part of 'printing' that matters for this discussion is the kind that drives up inflation. We're talking about the type of printing found on the Federal Reserve's balance sheet that actually reaches the average Joe, who then spends it on something. I haven't seen that specific kind of printing yet.

Also, when discussing 'printing,' people always focus on the Federal Reserve and the ECB... but does anyone consider how much more aggressive the printing is elsewhere? Compared to them, Ben and Mario are basically toddlers. What happens when their version of 'printing'—which didn't fuel a housing bubble, but rather a bubble of ghost towns—finally pops? You can't hold the line forever. What's the endgame? The dollar becoming a double-strength reserve currency?

A lot of this is just hanging in the air and remains totally unclear... despite the massive scale of the printing and the endless flood of YouTube gurus. Lately, the charts reflect that uncertainty perfectly.

Anthony Evans78 said:Wrong metaphor, buddy.
Just to set the record straight: I’m one of those people who tells everyone to buy their winter gear in the middle of summer, simply because that's when you can actually find a deal. Why pay full price when you don't have to? 😉
Shortam? You think I should just shave a little off the Wiener or the Eagle? Cut the lever in half? I don't get it. 🙂

analogharbor44, still don't get that the market hasn't actually functioned for years? You basically just described manipulation yourself. 😁

If you haven't realized summer doesn't last all year, you're kidding yourself.😬

Anthony Evans78 said:Wrong metaphor, buddy.
Just to set the record straight: I’m one of those people who tells everyone to buy their winter gear in the middle of summer, simply because that's when you can actually find a deal. Why pay full price when you don't have to? 😉
Shortam? You think I should just shave a little off the Wiener or the Eagle? Cut the lever in half? I don't get it. 🙂

analogharbor44, still don't get that the market hasn't actually functioned for years? You basically just described manipulation yourself. 😁

Yeah, yeah, you don't get it... that's why you're reading zerohedge 😍

Anthony Evans78 said:It seems like you're struggling to think past whatever narrative is being spoon-fed to you.
I bet you were one of those people back in 2005 who thought the housing bubble would never burst.
Or maybe in 2003, you thought mutual funds would just climb forever.
Perhaps you even think spring will never come again. Why? Is the winter and ice around us so intense that you think this is all there is?

Honestly, you sound like some guy in October telling people to pack their swimsuits because "obviously" next summer is going to be a heatwave.😬

And if someone actually dies from pneumonia, who cares? I'm sure Anthony Evans78 will step in to explain that even though they're dead, their life still holds plenty of value. 🙂It's like watching a bad episode of Seinfeld, seriously.😍

ps.
Are you shorting silver today or what? 😍

Anthony Evans78 said:Your colleague put it pretty clearly, but your issue is just refusing to admit when you're wrong or acting like a troll.
Sometimes both sides 🙂
Besides, if you actually trust the Federal Reserve and their press releases, you're already lost. It doesn't matter what they say; it matters what they do.
I've been saying for years that the Federal Reserve has no choice but to print money. You can call it Quantitative Easing, TARP, Operation Twist... whatever... it's all just printing cash. Honestly, it hasn't even fully hit the economy yet—they're still busy propping up zombie banks—but once they turn off the tap, everyone holding paper assets is going to feel it. 🙂
Anyway, back to Operation Twist. It's over. And you know why? Because there aren't enough short-term US Treasuries left to swap for the long-term ones.
A year ago, it was "discovered" that during the first round of Quantitative Easing—which was officially $800 billion—they quietly dumped an extra $15 trillion on the side to bail out certain banks and firms, not just in the US, but globally.
And all this time, the "market" has been reacting to Federal Reserve statements like it's supply and demand or some other nonsense...
Believing official Federal Reserve and US government data is a joke. Who actually believes inflation is at 2%, unemployment is at 7.7%, and the US economy is recovering?
Bottom line: they'll print until they die.

Regarding the bold part: yeah, like I said—we're just waiting to see what actually happens in reality (instead of clinging to religious mantras—whether they're Fedov or yours).

As for the rest: ☕

dustyheron5 said:Look, I think you're missing the fundamental distinction between Operation Twist and actual Quantitative Easing.......
In Operation Twist, they sell short-term bonds to buy long-term ones—but in Quantitative Easing, they are buying bonds newly issued by the Treasury.......😉

Following this new round of Quantitative Easing, the Federal Reserve's balance sheet is expected to expand by $1 trillion over the next year.

Now *that* is true Quantitative Easing 3.......and it’s going to drive up commodity prices significantly.......The real question is whether gold will break $1,790/oz immediately—within the next few days—or if it takes a drugi attempt.......

Who actually expects that?

All we've got are vague hints about potential moves based on CPI and unemployment thresholds, which they’ll be watching like hawks. 🤷

dustyheron5 said:Look, I think you're missing the fundamental distinction between Operation Twist and actual Quantitative Easing.......
In Operation Twist, they sell short-term bonds to buy long-term ones—but in Quantitative Easing, they are buying bonds newly issued by the Treasury.......😉

Following this new round of Quantitative Easing, the Federal Reserve's balance sheet is expected to expand by $1 trillion over the next year.

Now *that* is true Quantitative Easing 3.......and it’s going to drive up commodity prices significantly.......The real question is whether gold will break $1,790/oz immediately—within the next few days—or if it takes a drugi attempt.......

Anthony Evans78, is that you? 🙂
God, it feels like everyone here thinks they're some kind of damn guru, truth-teller, or mind reader. 😍

dustyheron5 said:Look, I think you're missing the fundamental distinction between Operation Twist and actual Quantitative Easing.......
In Operation Twist, they sell short-term bonds to buy long-term ones—but in Quantitative Easing, they are buying bonds newly issued by the Treasury.......😉

Following this new round of Quantitative Easing, the Federal Reserve's balance sheet is expected to expand by $1 trillion over the next year.

Now *that* is true Quantitative Easing 3.......and it’s going to drive up commodity prices significantly.......The real question is whether gold will break $1,790/oz immediately—within the next few days—or if it takes a drugi attempt.......

So, what you're saying is that just because Operation Twist is wrapping up (which is basically neutral for the balance sheet) and they've announced what we might call QE4, that everything automatically starts trending up or down?
That's how I'm reading your take. Correct me if I'm wrong.

From where I'm sitting, all we have is talk—just an announcement. We saw after Quantitative Easing 3 that an announcement can mean absolutely nothing. I'm not saying nothing will happen, I'm just saying I'm waiting for actual moves to be made.

Basically, he said the same thing he did regarding Quantitative Easing 3, and the balance sheet hasn't really moved much.

So, for now—I don't see any major news here.
The announcement fell flat, so now we just wait to see if they actually follow through with anything concrete.

Andrew Barrett4 said:The bombshell Goldman Sachs just dropped isn't actually anything new; it’s just a more dramatic way of presenting the scenarios we've already been dissecting in this thread. I guess the theatrical delivery is just a nudge to get us questioning their underlying motives.

Down the road, odysseyinspace20?? suggests that if interest rates do eventually climb, it'll be a dead giveaway that velocity hasn't just picked up, but is basically screaming toward the other extreme.😁.

We just haven't pinned down the small detail: which year. 😁

One shouldn't overlook the long-standing policy of keeping rates low to prop up the economy. Maybe the only thing capable of breaking that trend is a worrying spike in inflation, where hiking rates becomes a necessary countermeasure.

When prices start climbing, it usually means there's money floating around. A lot of it. You can see it in how much industrial activity, retail, and general consumer spending have been picking up lately.

A question for Twitter/X: Is something like that even on the horizon? If not, why would they bother raising rates at all?

The answer pretty much tells you exactly what your move should be regarding gold.

Maybe the more important question—if not the most important—is this: are we looking at another slowdown in 'a, b, c, d, and everything else' similar to what happened back in 2008?
In other words—where are we currently headed: toward a collapse or a recovery?

If we don't see a further slowdown, there are two scenarios:

1) Whoever already owns gold knows what to do with it.
2) Whoever still doesn't own it knows what to do with it.

If we do see a slowdown, the choice is crystal clear.

Technically, this borders on trading talk, focusing on entry/exit strategies and targets. Personally, I think we're sitting in no man's land right now. Neither buying nor selling. Just sit tight and wait (whether you're in or out).

PS.
I'm using negative logic here on purpose, given how precious metals work: they're our hedge for when everything else doesn't work out.

quiettrucker12 said:True enough. But you seem to have this weird compulsion to nitpick how I write, while I don't bother touching yours (honestly, the only thing I consistently call out here is the constant "zero-effort" posts).

Fair point. My bad on that one.
I'll watch it going forward.

(Not gonna dig into the reasons why, just so I don't dilute the apology)

quiettrucker12 said:For instance, nobody talks about the miners, even though they’re easily the most interesting part of this whole thing. You could write something about them, but why bother? It's much easier to just drop a critical post without adding anything useful to the conversation.

By the way, those 2014/2015 figures aren't mid-range forecasts; everything is relative, so even those can turn into short-term data before you know it. Lately, looking at comments like these, I'm starting to feel like posting here is just a massive waste of time, especially once you factor in the input from Silver Argentum and M. Kovac.🙄

No need for all that, man.
Look, your posts can get a bit pretentious sometimes—trying to map out every single price movement or acting like the dollar's slow decline is some sudden apocalypse rather than a long-term grind. But even so, I still find your takes valuable. Even if we don't agree, having a different perspective serves as a solid reality check for our own ideas. 👍

Besides, that’s not really why people use forums anyway—to hunt for "the" idea or "the" solution. At least I hope nobody is actually pulling the trigger on trades based on what we say here. 😉

ironstag8 said:Let me try to step in here and give you a different perspective. There are people in this world who simply aren't interested in gambling with precious metals. Personally, I buy exclusively physical bullion, and I have no intention of ever selling it. Why wouldn't I sell? Well, I have a career and a steady enough stream of paper income to live quite comfortably within the current system. My impression of this group is that there isn't really anyone here who sold off their positions during the market swings just to pivot back into gold or silver—people who are now sitting there trembling because they're worried about what happens next with these manipulated prices.

Fair enough.👍
I've got nothing against that approach... personally, I'm just waiting for the right moment to grab some physical metals and bury them out in the backyard.

PS.
I really hope there isn't a group of people here who sold everything for something else and are now sweating bullets.

Anthony Evans78 said:Either you’ve got me confused with someone else, you're lying, or you've lost it.

sapienti sat 🙂

Anthony Evans78 said:What does shorting on the NYSE have to do with your shallow little jabs at me?
If you didn't catch it: I don't trade paper assets like some of the people on this board.
If you did catch it and were trying to be funny: it was a pretty pathetic attempt at trolling.

I mean, come on. You're shorting silver... acting like a silver shorter... shorting the paper version... then you get pissed when someone shorts the actual silver. 😍