Posts by Anthony Evans78

Sure, but let's be honest, it's way less 🙂

mistyhawk17 said:Sure, you could possess mountains of gold, but that isn't going to help you generate a single kilowatt of power.🙂
At least paper burns reasonably well.🙂

By the way, nuclear energy boasts an EROI of 75:1🙂—and that’s assuming we ignore waste disposal, whereas with oil, the byproduct just goes straight into the atmosphere.

Nope. Even the most optimistic estimates put it at 60:1; realistically, it’s closer to 20-30:1.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3877

If you actually know how to use Google, try searching for this:
"EROI", "thermodynamics", "entropy"
After digging through enough papers, you'll realize we've already burned through—or are right on the edge of exhausting—the cheap, easy, energy-dense resources.
Our entire way of life is built on that foundation.
No amount of tech is going to save us because there simply isn't an energy SOURCE capable of replacing oil, gas, or coal.
All these hype cycles around fusion or thorium reactors look great on paper, but they’re energetically inefficient, not to mention the massive infrastructure overhaul required just to make them economically viable.
Regarding Musk... if it weren't for government subsidies and constantly sucking capital from investors, he would have gone bust long ago. After all these years, he hasn't even turned a real profit from selling cars or his tech.
This whole 250-degree thing is pure nonsense. Thirty years ago, I was sitting there listening to doomsday prophets claim we'd all be underwater by 2010 due to global warming.
Money isn't the issue; energy is. You can sit on trillions of dollars, but it doesn't matter if the energy system itself is unstable or inefficient.
To maintain our current standard of living, we need an EROI of 30:1—meaning one unit of energy invested yields thirty. We're pushing that limit because fields like Ghawar still offer an EROI higher than that.
Meanwhile, American and Canadian shale sits at a measly 5-10:1. That’s unsustainable for a system where we expect to stroll into Walmart for everything we need, or click a button on Amazon and have stuff magically arrive from China in a week.
Going back to the crashes... history repeats itself this way constantly. Everything looks perfect and prosperous until, suddenly, bam!
Suddenly, everyone who missed the warning signs of a collapse acts shocked—just like in 1929, 1987, or 2006.
Do you really think people in the spring of 1939 saw the war coming just a few months later? Of course not. It's always easier to bury your head in the sand and ignore reality than to pause, think, and see where things are actually headed.
Nobody has a crystal ball to tell you the exact date and time everything falls apart. But the signs are there. And they've never been clearer.
Once the dust settles and Mother Nature puts us back in our place, everyone is going to ask themselves, "How did we miss this?" and "What were we thinking?"

Michael Morgan5 said:1. This is just the beginning. Back in the day, we were basically using oil to grease the wheels of our wagons.
2. When you look at infrastructure, cobblestones paved the way for everything we see today, much like how oil is laying the groundwork for whatever comes next.

You can't fall into the trap of thinking oil represents some kind of final peak or the ultimate endgame for humanity.
It’ll become obsolete, just like every other major energy source before it.

No, it isn't the beginning.
Do you even get what EROI actually means?
Of course I see it as a peak—there isn't another energy source out there that offers this kind of density and efficiency.
If we could build that new infrastructure, we would have done it already. The problem is, we can't. 🙂

1. What’s the EROI on this?
2. What kind of infrastructure actually made this possible?

Nathan Morris3 said:I'm not saying I disagree with the analysis, it's just that I feel like the main point is that the floor is tied to production costs, which ties back to energy. I don't see anything wrong with that, but I did notice he didn't mention that less than 2% of all gold enters the market annually. Maybe that's because most of the existing supply isn't even out there on the market anymore.

As for energy, it used to be oil and manual labor, but I wonder what the big drivers will be in 20 years... maybe solar power or robotics.

Exactly.
Unfortunately, solar panels and robots aren't going to save us. There simply isn't an energy SOURCE capable of replacing oil, coal, and natural gas. All this hype about wind, solar, biodiesel, algae, and whatnot? It's just a distraction. Technology can't bail us out, at least not if we want to keep living the way we do right now.
Even if we somehow built a massive solar and electric infrastructure overnight, we'd still be tethered to oil and gas for a thousand other things. And even if we ignore those, the energy return on investment for these alternative generators is just too low to sustain our current standard of living.

Exactly.
Based on his analysis—which I actually agree with—gold prices aren't being driven by supply and demand right now.
More accurately, the Federal Reserve can't push the price below the actual cost of production.
I don't see why everyone is rushing to dump gold... and I’m talking about physical bullion here, not some paper derivative. It’s entirely possible for the exchange price to sit at $500, but good luck actually finding a real ounce of gold at that rate.
At the end of the day, everything comes down to energy. 95% of people just don't get it. They think stuff magically appears on the shelves at Walmart. And even fewer people grasp the whole "store of value" concept.
By the way, you forgot the "thousands" next to those numbers you listed 🙂

https://srsroccoreport.com/who-reall...te-surprising/

Here’s my take on the whole thing.
Think about everything the government has ever tried to ban... did they actually succeed?
They didn't.
And they aren't starting now.
Because once you outlaw something, you just make it more desirable—it's been proven a thousand times over.

I’ve been sounding the alarm on this for years—the end goal is total surveillance over every single transaction you make.
I know how it goes... they treat you like a criminal just because you want some cash in hand and want to stay away from the banks and big institutions.

Melissa Sanchez17 said:Honestly, looking at all these "cake" buyback schemes lately, I’ve started thinking we’re headed straight for a future where the only thing left will be a shady black market for gold and silver—whether you're trying to buy it or offload it.

You really think a fair market can exist without thieves? 🙂

Melissa Sanchez17 said:$1,107 per ounce for buyback?? Is this some kind of sick joke or what... that’s like $100 less per ounce than what you'd get from someone like Chase Bank, for instance.

And then you just wait for them to actually deposit the funds into your account.😁

Just check out otkup.hr over on the corner of Vlach and Drašković.

Like I’ve said a thousand times already—once this whole monetary circus falls apart 🙂

Nancy Gomez26 said:As for me, I have zero interest in chasing some hypothetical "extra" profit born from a broken system. My only objective is to preserve the value of my labor—the sweat equity built up by previous generations—that is currently locked within that ounce. If I achieve nothing more than that preservation, I will consider it a win. Life was worked too hard to let those accumulated efforts simply vanish into the void of historical chaos.

Exactly.
People are going to be absolutely stunned when they realize what you can actually get for an ounce of gold 🙂
It'll buy way more than a car... and I'm talking brand new, not some used junk, I guarantee it.🙂

Michael Morgan5 said:I just don't get it.
How can a national debt be three times larger than the entire world's GDP?
It’s like someone claiming they slept with three times more women than there are actually living on Earth.😛

Still not getting it? 🙂
Still haven't figured out how money is actually made, have you? 🙂
Let’s give this another shot:
So you walk into a bank asking for, say, a $100,000 loan. What happens then?
Get your paperwork in order, wait for the money to hit your account, and then you can finally be happy. Or is that too much to ask?
Do you really think the bank actually put their own cash into an account?
Not even close.
The bank just conjured $100,000 out of thin air. One mouse click and it’s there. Sure, you’ll have to wait a few days if you actually want the cash in hand, but isn't the point that the money was invented from nothing?
Then you actually have to work just to pay it back. Interest included, of course. And whatever value you create counts toward the GDP—you’re essentially investing your own time, expertise, and resources. Is there any other way?
And that’s exactly why the debt outweighs the GDP. It's pretty simple, isn't it?

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/27/massi...an-museum.html
What were they even supposed to bring? 😁

Armstrong is an idiot.
Hopefully, after yesterday’s little circus, it’ll finally be obvious that "common sense" and "the markets" don't belong in the same sentence. 🙂
It's what I've been saying for years—this whole thing isn't rational. Everything is completely backwards.
Keep stacking, enjoy your life, and screw the bankers. 😁
P.S. A bit of good news from the USA in the meantime
https://srsroccoreport.com/it-begins...n-gold-silver/

Interesting "markets," aren't they? 😁

Nancy Gomez26 said:It is entirely irrelevant whether those are the identical bars Germany originally deposited or some other set, provided they meet the required standards. That universality is a fundamental characteristic of gold—as a form of currency. Given the current global landscape, perhaps we should be glad they managed to extract whatever they intended to take before any deadlines hit.

As for Ukraine... knowing how things operated there previously, it would be quite a shock if any state gold were actually found in their vaults. But then again, that might be the least of Ukraine's concerns right now.

Actually, it matters quite a bit.
The Germans sent their gold to the USA for safekeeping.
Period.
When that gold is returned, it should be the exact same bullion that was originally sent. Since it isn't, it suggests the Americans dipped into the reserves and had to plunder gold from places like Iraq, Libya, or Ukraine just to give the Germans "their" gold back.
Doesn't that alone destroy any trust you have in someone tasked with guarding your national wealth?