Gold: Past, Present, and Future

lonehawk5 said:Long gold at $701.40... I'm still staying mobile on this one.

Buying more at $691, silver long at $32.7
4

Patrick Moore3 said:Totally wrong, man... once again, your predictions are way off. Didn't learn a thing after QE3, huh?

Reading your forecasts, it's pretty obvious who's trolling here...

My prediction came in 100% accurate: QE, just as Ben announced😍.......As for the daily price fluctuations of gold and silver, I don't owe anyone an explanation—least of all you.🤣

In fact, I am entirely indifferent to what the price of gold will be on December 14, 2012, at 11:43 AM or even fifteen seconds from now😂.......truly, completely indifferent.......
I couldn't care less if metallurgical prices hit a decent level within a few days or not—that’s it. For instance, I cashed out my positions in SLW, TLH, AVL, and a few others earlier this year...... I haven't moved on AGQ yet, but with an entry point at $41, I can move whenever I feel like it.

I have yet to see you or anyone else like you post about making anything substantial, intelligent, or profitable on the market... 🤣

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.

Sorry for breaking your post down into pieces, I was just trying to grab the meat of it:
1. Keeping interest rates low is basically just a way to protect the system and all the big players.
2. You're talking about:
a) how the import-export ratio drives domestic currency inflation.
b) global commodity prices versus the strength of a nation's currency, which leads to inflation or higher costs.
3. Yeah... there's always money floating around, but the real issue is that you can't find products at the old prices, or honestly, just finding any product at all.

A line from Wikipedia:
"People know a ton about inflation, but still not enough to actually 'cure' it."

But if you ask me, they can totally dose it out and exploit it whenever they need to keep the system running.
Just sell off some Euros, pull in some Dollars—create an artificial shortage of Clementines or whatever.

If I completely missed the mark here...😍

Anyone...🙂

lonehawk5 said:Buying more at $691, silver long at $32.7
4

Doubling down on gold at $699.10

dustyheron5 said:My prediction came in 100% accurate: QE, just as Ben announced😍.......As for the daily price fluctuations of gold and silver, I don't owe anyone an explanation—least of all you.🤣

In fact, I am entirely indifferent to what the price of gold will be on December 14, 2012, at 11:43 AM or even fifteen seconds from now😂.......truly, completely indifferent.......
I couldn't care less if metallurgical prices hit a decent level within a few days or not—that’s it. For instance, I cashed out my positions in SLW, TLH, AVL, and a few others earlier this year...... I haven't moved on AGQ yet, but with an entry point at $41, I can move whenever I feel like it.

I have yet to see you or anyone else like you post about making anything substantial, intelligent, or profitable on the market... 🤣

🙂

It'll all work out fine. Cheers to you! ☕

quiettrucker12 said:Why on earth would you think I’d doubt it? What gave you that idea? Come on, you're a rational guy. I called the bottom at 75 WMA and the floor at 1686 in real time—fine, we hit 1685 the next day, whatever. It was a gutsy call considering the FOMC meeting was only a couple of days away. Of course I left a tiny bit of room for error in case Ben Bernanke decided to shake things up.

1870–1800... if we actually hit those numbers, we aren't just talking about short-term fluctuations anymore. With all due respect, after today's FOMC meeting, there’s zero room left for this "maybe" nonsense. 😉.

That logic just doesn't hold up. Markets aren't rational—they never have been. I can't believe that with news like this, you're still seeing this much skepticism on the forum, and now I'm seeing it from you too. It takes time for the moving averages to actually trend upward. We need to see at least the 10-day moving average shift before we talk.

----------------------------

I’m not even going to bother writing a whole new post. Honestly, I couldn't care less where gold heads over the next few days. If it dips a bit, it’s going to hit some serious resistance at the 100 DMA—it's sitting at 1705 right now, but the trend is up. There's a huge chance we'll see it testing that level pretty soon.

The 100-day moving average.

And now we’re looking at 75 bps. I really hope we don't have to put that theory to the test before February or March, but hey, anything can happen.

75-week price average.

I respect your forecasts; you clearly know how to read the charts. But honestly, all that expertise won't save you now. You're standing there without any cover. This is a once-in-a-lifetime scenario. Every major fiat currency on the planet is essentially unbacked right now, and we’re looking at a global crisis. Whatever market rules worked during previous downturns simply don't apply anymore.
Maybe you should sit with that fact for a moment and recalibrate. You asked why I’m skeptical? Perhaps I misread you, but I remember quite clearly that just a few months ago, you were bullish on a massive gold surge. You were convinced it would hit $3,000 within a year or two, with at least a 60% chance of clearing $2,000. Your target was January. Now, you've pushed it to March and lowered the forecast to $1,880—that’s a $150 drop. Correct me if I'm wrong. You also mentioned that if certain conditions aren't met, you wouldn't necessarily claim "there won't be another big wave." In short, you've softened your stance. One more thing. I noticed your take on ZeroHedge. Personally, if I have to choose between mainstream media and ZeroHedge, I’ll take the latter, flaws and all—even with their penchant for hyperbole and drama. The way the mainstream press handles the news regarding Quantitative Easing is frankly absurd. The Federal Reserve announces they are printing a trillion dollars, and CNN runs a tiny headline like "Fed is easing" buried in the business section. Yahoo barely mentions it at all.
Take USA Today, for instance. I couldn't find a single coherent word in their coverage, even though the news itself was top-tier. It’s just another prime example of how mainstream media helped fuel this entire crisis.

If we hit that 1870–1800 range, we aren't just talking about short-term fluctuations anymore. With all due respect, following today's FOMC meeting, there’s simply no room left for this "maybe" nonsense. 😉.

Right now, markets are fueled by irrationality and fear, just like you said. And that’s not even half of it.
If we miss this target, would you be open to considering the possibility of market manipulation—across various levels and methods—and factoring that into your projections for the short, medium, and long term?

In this instance, that kind of logic just creates problems. The market is inherently irrational. I can’t believe that with news like this circulating on this forum—and now seeing even your level of skepticism regarding the actual state of affairs—we're stuck here. It’s going to take time for the moving averages to trend upward, starting with at least the 10-day.

There is zero doubt regarding the long-term reality of the situation—I’ve made that clear before. The real question is how much of that will actually translate to this irrational market. I wouldn't dream of underestimating the possibility that the market remains irrational far longer than anyone dares to imagine. That's why the link I shared about the French President potentially nationalizing a steel mill is so critical. If things don't go his way, he moves. To me, that says everything about the current political mindset. And logically, it all connects; politicians, bankers, and central bankers are all part of the same conversation. Bankers, perhaps even more than politicians, are intoxicated by power and money—or at least they act like they are. It isn't exactly surprising, considering they are being handed freshly printed, essentially "imaginary" money at incredibly low interest rates, only to turn around and charge everyone else much higher rates.
They seem to believe they can fine-tune every single variable to suit their own whims, but they are fundamentally detached from reality. This disconnect will eventually become their undoing; as the standard of living for everyday Americans plummets, there will be vanishingly little room left to squeeze out new profits or rely on politicians to maintain order. To put it bluntly: you can only stretch a pot so far before it bursts.

One more thing. I see some people, especially from the "other side," questioning whether this is actually monetization. Well, Ben Bernanke already admitted it is, so you might as well lay down your arms on that front.

Some pretty solid breakdowns here on how we've moved straight into Quantitative Easing to infinity and beyond...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8Fxn...bTGQRQ&index=1

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...

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.

Sure, but we haven't even reached a consensus on that yet, considering plenty of people were betting that Quantitative Easing 3 wouldn't even happen. I personally expected it this fall, but it showed up a little early.

Check this out, this is interesting:

10 wma, 75 wma, 100 wma

You can clearly see how gold swapped riding the 100-week moving average (back in May, June, and part of July) for riding the 75-week one (which has been the case for about 7 weeks now).

In July, during the 11th week, it finally broke above the 10 wma, but it immediately hit the 75 wma wall. It took another 3-4 weeks to break through that, so we might have about 3 more weeks of crawling along the 75 wma. That said, the gap between the 10 wma and the 75 wma is pretty tight, so things might pick up speed.

After that, just like the 100 wma was replaced by the 75 wma, the 75 wma will eventually be replaced by the 100 dma:

100 dma which is steeper and will ultimately define the "slope" of the entire major wave, much like before:

The 100 dma provides the big picture, showing a segment of the previous major wave that lasted until September 2011.

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?

vividgull10 said: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?

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.

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.

vividgull10 said:That's exactly why I'm asking, obviously.

Look, as long as we're closing above the 75 SMA, nothing changes. These are just the rules of the game for now.

vividgull10 said: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.

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.

The reason they manipulate gold is actually quite simple. It’s the only true yardstick for measuring the value of fiat currency.
Our entire petrodollar-based system relies on people trusting the dollar. When you see fiat losing ground against gold for thirteen straight years, does that not scream manipulation to you?
In military terms, you might call this combat deviation.
Most of those printed dollars just vanish into the black hole of the shadow banking system to bail out worthless assets. At this rate, the Federal Reserve is becoming the largest real estate owner in the history of Space. And what's their plan for all that property? Keep it off the market, much like how banks are currently sitting on 15 million properties to maintain the illusion that the housing sector is actually recovering?
Next year, the Federal Reserve will be buying up 90% of US debt. Why? Because nobody else wants it anymore—both Chinese people and Japanese people realize these bonds are losing value by the day. Besides, it's the only move they have left; no alternative has ever been put on the table. This is a level of socialism that would have been unimaginable even in old-school communist regimes. As Kyle Bass put it: "Capitalism without bankruptcy is like religion without hell." Instead of letting the banks and firms fail in 2008 to clear the slate, they dumped everything onto the taxpayers and started printing dollars like there was no tomorrow. The end is obvious; the only question is when it hits and how ugly it will look.
And we haven't even touched on the MF Global mess, the rigging of LIBOR, the US government refusing to show—let alone return—gold to Germans, the dozens of lawsuits in Switzerland vs banks regarding the mishandling of clients' physical gold (which the media completely ignored), or the MERS scandal that quietly evaporated once people realized how massive the fraud actually was. There are endless examples.
The situation in the European Union goes without saying. The fools who voted to join the European Union are going to get a rude awakening when they realize the endgame is total federalization, the death of sovereign nations, and a level of centralized power that even Stalin could only dream of. What François Hollande is doing in France is reminiscent of the era right before the 18th-century revolutions. Threatening to nationalize the world's largest steel producer? Blocking the European Union budget just to keep subsidizing French farmers? It's madness.
We are literally standing in the eye of the tornado. Once the storm actually hits, we're looking at a collapse I don't even want to think about. You have trillions waiting to shatter the financial system, a shadow banking system so bloated and corrupt it's a miracle it hasn't imploded yet, US unfunded liabilities that the government admits are over $80 trillion (though the real number is north of $200 trillion), the largest bubble in human history (US Treasuries), a derivatives market just waiting for a Black Swan to wipe out the entire global financial structure, and the farce of the so-called fiscal cliff that's just hanging in mid-air like Wile E. Coyote before hitting the canyon floor. Any one of these threats is enough to send everything to hell.

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.

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

Hey Anthony Evans78, Chinese people have been picking up less US debt this year. Instead, Japanese people stepped in to fill that gap! 😍 😉