Tuesday, November 30, 2010

650 Years of Silver Prices and what it means

This is a 650 year graph of silver prices in terms of 1998 dollars (blue line) and silver/gold ratio (gold line) from 1344 to 2004. (To have a clearer view of the graph, you can go to http://goldinfo.net/silver600.html 
At first glance, it will seem that the price of silver is going down. But take note that this all the prices u see on the graph is in terms of 1998 dollars. What does this mean? I'll provide my 2-cents. 

In 1477, the price was $806 (806 "1998" dollars). Ever since the "peak" back then that you see on the chart, the price of silver in 1998 dollars has been declining steadily. Take another point in time, say the year 1998 when the price was $5 (5 "1998" dollars - I can't really see very clearly since the chart is so small, but let's take it as $5)

Now, if you live in 1998, you can take $5 and go buy an ounce of silver for $5. Suppose you decide to travel back in time to the year 1477. You bring along your $5 with you and approach a silver seller back there. Will he sell his silver to you for $5? DEFINITELY NOT! Not with your "1998" $5 note! He will demand $806 "1998" notes from you! Even if back then, silver priced in "1477" note is $1, he will not sell his silver to you for your $5 "1998" note. 

So what do we see here. The dollar has lost so much purchasing power between 1477 and 1998. A silver seller back in 1477 will demand more than 160x of the dollar that you use in 1998. This chart does not show that silver is falling in value, but rather, it is showing that the dollar is falling in value. 
 

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

US default 1971, Supply Vs Demand

After WWII, the world was under the Bretton Woods System. All currencies were tied to the USD, and the USD in turn was redeemable in gold. Back then, the US possessed about 22,000 tons of gold, or about 75% of the world's monetary gold!

By 1971, the US had only 7200 tons of gold left, and owed other nations close to 40,000 tons. Alarmed at how fast gold was leaving the US, President Nixon conveniently announced that the USD will no longer be convertible to gold, therefore closing the gold window. The world currencies started 'floating' against each other, without any tie to a physical stuff whatsoever.

In my view, this is equivalent to a default by the US. The US now has unrestrained power to print money to repay its debt. The world quite foolishly agreed to what the US did, because they thought that the USD was as good as gold. 

Back then, the US was still a creditor nation and had a manufacturing base. Fast forward to today, it has become the largest debtor nation in history! It will be much harder to dig themself out of debt this time round, because they are not producing much stuff as a nation. Exporters to the US will suffer for a while, but if they can retool themselves and sell to other nations, then they will be much better off, because the currencies of other nations are sounder than the USD. 

If the USD tanks, it does not mean that demand will drop sharply and the world will be doomed and gloomed, because the purchasing power lost by the USD will simply be transferred to other currencies. The largest creditor nations to the US, China and Japan, will benefit greatly given that they no longer have to throw good money after bad. They will no longer lend to the US. A huge burden will be suddenly lifted off their backs. Their currencies will appreciate relative to the USD, and purchasing power will shift across the Pacific Ocean.

People will do well to get out of the USD or US-denominated assets and into hard assets (commodities) or other sounder currencies.

It's all about keeping oneself in an asset that will gain in PURCHASING POWER. 

=================================
I will quote from my memory 2 of my favourite excerpts from Peter Schiff, with some of my comments added in:

1) If you take US out of the globe, you are left with the producers (Asia). The producers can consume their own products just as well as the US. Everyone will have a higher standards of living! The Chinese will no longer have to work as hard, just to produce stuff for the US, and then lend money to the US so that the US can buy the Chinese-made stuff. If you take the rest of the world out of the globe, you are left with the consumers (US). Who is going to produce for them and how are they going to survive? So you see, the US is the one holding the rest of the world down right now. 

2) (Can't remember the exact details for this one, but the idea is there): Imagine 5 people stranded on an island. One of them is American. The other 4 are Asians. These 5 people need to survive, and they need to gather food and cook, so each of them are assigned different tasks to do. Everyday, one of the Asians is assigned to the role of fishing. The 2nd Asian is assigned the job of collecting firewood. The 3rd Asian collects fruits from all over the island. The 4th Asian is responsible for cooking. And the American? He is assigned the job of eating. So at the end of each day they will gather around and eat. The American eats most of the stuff, leaving just enough crumbs for the Asians, so that they will have enough energy to do their job again the next day. 

Now, a modern economist will look at this island-economy and say: Look! The American is the engine of growth! Without his demand, all the Asians will have no job!!

Well, the reality is, the Asians can consume those food just as well as the American can. In fact, if they kick the American off the island, now they will have much more to eat. They may not even have to work as hard to feed the ravenous appetite of the American. They can take a day or 2 off, relax on the beach, etc.
=================================
There you go! Modern economists focus so much on 'aggregate' demand. They think that demand is everything. This is classic Keynesianism (Now I know why I have no interest in my economics class in university). Unfortunately, supply is what makes an economy. If you want to produce more, if you want more of other people's stuff, you have to produce some things yourself which you can then trade away. Demand is not so important. Everyone has demands for more materials and a better life. Even babies can demand for milk and toys and sweets. The problem is whether you can produce those goods, or whether you can produce something else to trade for those goods with someone else.

Economies don't grow with demand per se. And they certainly don't remain healthy due to 'consumer confidence', like most economists will say. To quote Tom Woods, if you think consumer confidence is so fundamentally important, why not pour money into researching a "happy pill" or something. That will keep everyone happy and confident and spending away, and the economy will not crash.

So, what is the US exporting to the world?? Paper money! And inflation! Why the world will accept this paper money is beyond comprehension. And this applies to all other currencies as well. The world should be furious that an elite group of people is controlling the money, taxing the population with inflation, and creating booms and busts in the economy and profiting from them.

If there are no central banks in the world, and if there is no fractional reserve banking system practised by the banks, the world will be a much better place. Less wars, less poverty, more individual liberty.



Saturday, November 6, 2010

$600 billion 'stimulus' package

Another nail in the coffin for the US economy, as simple as that.

Unfortunately, the Fed Chairman doesn't know history, economics and currencies. Or maybe he does and is doing this on purpose. If this is the case, then he will be the biggest criminal in the world.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Gold at record highs, even more gains for silver

Gold has been hitting record highs recently, breaking the $1,300 level. Its sister metal silver has hit the highest level in nominal terms in 30 years. Silver has gone up 17% in the month of September. Nice numbers indeed, but this is just a prelude to a greater show that is to come a few years down the road. 

So Bernanke and Geithner said that the US needs a second QE. Quantitative easing, what a nice euphemism for inflation, which in turn is a nice euphemism for wealth-stealing. 

If printing money makes a nation rich, Zimbabwe will be the richest nation on earth by now. Printing money does not increase real wealth. It merely re-distributes wealth in the population from the man on the streets to the money printer. Here's a simple example to illustrate my point:

Say there're only you and me on this island, and an apple seller with 2 apples to sell. You have $10, I have $0. So 2 apples will cost $10, or $5 per apple. Now I magically create $10 out of thin air. The total money supply in the system jumps to $20. By the law of supply and demand, I will compete with you for the apples, and each apple will now cost $10. Your $10 can only buy you an apple. You have lost half your wealth to me. I have stolen wealth away from you by printing money. But the collective wealth of the island certainly hasn't increased! Lots of paper money gives the illusion of wealth. 

Real wealth comes from being more productive. I highly recommend the book "How an Economy Grows and Why it Crashes" by Peter Schiff. I will do a short book review on it soon. It's a great book for economics novice and experts alike. Tremendously easy and fun to read, I finished it in a matter of hours. In terms of impact on my knowledge, I will rank it on par with Mike Maloney's Guide to Investing in Gold and Silver. Mike's book introduced me to Austrian Economics. Schiff's book really hammers in the super basic concepts of economics.

After studying Austrian Economics and listening to Schiff, you will understand how easy economics is. And how ridiculous politicians are in trying to micromange it. The US is debasing its currency like no tomorrow. And the world is also in the race to devalue their currencies against the USD. The countries are in a race with each other to the bottom. What utter foolishness.

1 in 7 Americans are living below the poverty line. 1 in 8 Americans are on food stamps. More and more Americans are living from paycheck to paycheck. According to a study done by careerbuilder.com, in 2007, 43% of Americans said they are living from paycheck to paycheck. In 2008 it was 49%. In 2009, the supposed year of great stimulus and great recovery, the figure was 61%. And in 2010, the year when it was announced that the recession is officially over, the number jumped to 77%. Does this look like the richest nation in the world? I beg to differ. Without the life support from China and Japan, the US will be long gone. 

The US has no savings. It is living off the savings of the Chinese. Why should the Chinese work so hard, save so much, and lend it to the Americans so that they can consume the goods that the Chinese make? It makes no sense and the Chinese will wake up to the reality that they can consume those goods themselves. They can enjoy the fruits of their own labour.
In the next few years the world will see the great flaw of Keynesian economics, which focuses on demand-side economics. People may come to realise that it is supply and production which really matter. And hopefully, the world can also come to see the great immorality of Keynesianism.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Greenspan and Gold

So the former FED chairman has been touting the merits of gold in the media recently. Now that he is retired, he can finally tell the truth. He is of the view that fiat currencies have no place to go but gold.

He has advised central banks to keep a close look on gold, and also influenced John Paulson, one of the star hedge fund managers, to start a gold fund which focuses on gold mining stocks and gold-related investments. 

Why is Greenspan in support of Gold now, but not back then when he was Fed chairman? Afterall, his policies were similar to Bernanke's policies. Low interest-rates, flood the economy with paper, easy money. He was the one who blew up the real estate bubble in 2007 when he tried to re-flate the economy from the dot com bubble burst back in the early 2000s.

It shouldn't be surprising that Greenspan recently made these gold-related comments. In fact, it gives credence to gold vs fiat currencies. Greenspan was once a supporter of the Gold Standard, but he had sold his soul to the Fed when he became chairman of the organisation in 1987. Noted investor, author and commentator Jim Rogers has claimed that Greenspan lobbied to get this chairmanship in his book Adventure Capitalist (It's a great read by the way).

It's too late, Mr. Greenspan. He has destroyed millions of lives and possibly an entire generation with his printing presses.
 
For me, being a central banker is one of the worst crimes in humanity.
 
Web Statistics