GOLD SILVER RATIO 10:1 IS COMING

[sixgun]

2 minutes ago, Roy said:

I suggest there is a need for both systems. Gold is an awful currency, fiat is an awful savings mechanism.

As @HawkHybrid has always maintained,

'Trade in currency, save in Gold.'

Two systems always end up with currency being inflated away to nothing - it ALWAYS happens. i have often heard that every fiat currency over history has always collapsed. The US came off the gold standard b/c they were spending too much and the Europeans get fed up with this and started sending dollars back to America for gold. When there is a universal and complete gold standard you can't do that. No-one will take your sh itty unbacked paper. That stops your overspending in a heartbeat.
When people argue against a 'gold standard' those who know do it so they can overspend. The gold standard is not popular with governments. It is not popular with the entities that pull the politicians' strings, not popular with the military industrial complex, the multitude of thieves, liars, parasites, leeches and hangers on sucking on the nipple of limitless cash. For the ordinary man and woman - the gold standard is the best. The gold standard in anything is recognised as the best for a reason. When you follow 'WTF happened in 1971' you can see it really started going wrong after 1971.

[sixgun]

1 hour ago, Martlet said:

Always interesting claims around that level, if this is correct gold has severely failed to keep track with inflation (of any calculation).  Why should it align to inflation now if it hasn't for so long?

Absolutely - some people here have been saying the price of gold has had a knee on its neck for a long time. When the price is fixed twice a day what do you expect? - a fixed price. China and Russia have been vacuuming up 1000's of tonnes of gold b/c they know it is under priced and they have swapped out fiat for real money.
The COMEX is rocky - the LBMA is rocky - when you subtract the ETF gold, the Central Bank gold, the spoken for gold - there is no gold - they are flying on fumes. The LBMA is finished.

The Chinese took over the London Metal Exchange in June 2020. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/chinese-buy-london-metal-exchange-in-14bn-takeover-7855200.html They have built up the Shanghai Gold Exchange to be several times larger than COMEX. The idea the Western banking cabal actually controls the gold market is a deception. They are all bust - their currencies are worthless, their industries are shutdown and dead - game over.

The Chinese could push the button any time - they could announced on Monday the price of gold is $10 000, $20 000, $50 000 equivalent - any number they like. You will never hear this on the BBC but there again i don't listen to the BBC anyway.

[sixgun]

https://www.hardmoneyfilm.com/

Watch the film - then you will understand WTF happened in 1971

[vand]

7 hours ago, HawkHybrid said:

 

the gsr is a 30+ years cycle.

 

HH

Show us your work!

[HawkHybrid]

44 minutes ago, vand said:

Show us your work!

 

1980 peak, 2011 peak.

 

HH

[vand]

19 minutes ago, HawkHybrid said:

 

1980 peak, 2011 peak.

 

HH

Didn;t the 2020 peak just negate that, then?

 

oh.. you mean the bottoms, not the peaks.. could be, although I wouldn't want to put too much weight into that when you have a sample size of 1.

[HawkHybrid]

2 hours ago, vand said:

Didn;t the 2020 peak just negate that, then?

 

oh.. you mean the bottoms, not the peaks.. could be, although I wouldn't want to put too much weight into that when you have a sample size of 1.

 

the sample duration is from 1971 until now. ie all the data from the most recent time when the

world left the gold standard. if we say we are only interested in peaks in the silver price that

coincides with an opportunity to trade silver for gold(playing the gsr), then so far the opportunity

has happened twice in 50 years. with a 30 year gap between the only two data points available

for what we want. if the cycle was shorter it probably would have happened more frequently in

the last 50 years. inconclusive but suggesting that playing the gsr might take a decade or more.

the key take away is that those counting the gsr play in years are more likely than not to be wrong.

 

HH 

[vand]

On 09/08/2020 at 23:07, HawkHybrid said:

 

the sample duration is from 1971 until now. ie all the data from the most recent time when the

world left the gold standard. if we say we are only interested in peaks in the silver price that

coincides with an opportunity to trade silver for gold(playing the gsr), then so far the opportunity

has happened twice in 50 years. with a 30 year gap between the only two data points available

for what we want. if the cycle was shorter it probably would have happened more frequently in

the last 50 years. inconclusive but suggesting that playing the gsr might take a decade or more.

the key take away is that those counting the gsr play in years are more likely than not to be wrong.

 

HH 

If its a 30yr cycle surely we're just seen the top of the cycle (1990 - 2020) and silver is the metal you want most exposure to for the next 20 years to coincide with the next bottom (1980-2010-2040)

 

[HawkHybrid]

2 hours ago, vand said:

If its a 30yr cycle surely we're just seen the top of the cycle (1990 - 2020) and silver is the metal you want most exposure to for the next 20 years to coincide with the next bottom (1980-2010-2040)

 

 

the problem is the meagre 2 data points (1980,2011). if it is a 30 year cycle then we should

expect a high silver price(low gsr) to be around 2040. if however the 2011 gsr of 35 is only an

intermediate gsr(compared to gsr of ~15 in 1980) then the cycle could be a much more

complicated cycle that is both asymmetrical and hasn't completed yet. (also the odds of an

ongoing changing cycle increases significantly). if it is a 30 year cycle then silver is likely to

bottom in about 4 years time.(1993 bottom is 13 years from 1980 top, so 13 years from 2011

is 2024). maybe it has bottomed early? there is still time to collect data as silver did very little

(comparative %) from 1993 until 2002. entering the position 2/3rds into the cycle is probably

giving up a little gain but for a significant reduction in risk(9 years worth of additional data).

 

HH