Re-Post: Keith Neumeyer is Plain Wrong About the Future of the Price of Silver

By Otto Rock

This post from August 2016 continues to be one of the most popular of the blog back catalogue and with silver now making a move and, of course, Keith Neumeyer coming out with a new round of “Gold to $8,000 and silver to $130” nonsense, it’s worthy of a repeat showing. It’s long and if you want to skip some of the minor matters that’s cool too, the most important point comes at the end about the way in which the supply of silver has changed since the advent of large copper porphyry/skarn mines and the large amount of very cheaply produced silver that comes with them.

And a fact: Since this analysis was first published, nearly two years ago in IKN369 dated June 5th 2016, we have had several other times when Keith Neumeyer and other silverbugs have come out and predicted massive numbers for silver in the near future. Meanwhile, the model as laid out in this post has been a more accurate scenario by far of the market in silver, which has not blasted to $20 then $25 then $30 per ounce and beyond. The gold/silver ratio has not dropped, in fact it’s moved up to over 80X (and it’s good that it’s recently dropped under that line, but don’t confuse that with a victory). More large scale silver stream and royalty deals have been inked. Silverbugs, when reality doesn’t fit your model…

Read on.

Continue reading Re-Post: Keith Neumeyer is Plain Wrong About the Future of the Price of Silver

Silver Outperforms Gold For a Change

By Rob Bruggeman

[biiwii comment: our disclaimer is that one of the linked sources below has been bullish, nearly non-stop, for years; so caveat emptor]

There seems to have been increased talk about silver over the past few weeks.  Rather than rehashing the reasons why, here are a couple of good articles about how it may be silver’s turn to shine:

The Assay – Indicators Point to a Silver Rally
Silver Seek – New Silver Bull Coming

I’d also previously indicated on this blog that a gold-silver ratio of 80 has historically marked the bottoms for silver.

Interestingly, silver moved up 2.5% yesterday while gold was only up 0.2%.  Could this be the start of a mean-reversion trend that sees silver move back towards its more typical range of 1-to-65 versus gold?  That would imply that silver should be trading at $20.75/oz, based on the a gold price of $1,349.  I hope so, given the significant silver exposure in my portfolio.  However, I have a hard time believing that silver can have a significant rally without gold’s participation.  If gold can break out of its range and trade above $1,370, then I think silver will do very well.

Continue reading Silver Outperforms Gold For a Change

Gettin’ High on Bubbles

By Keith Weiner

Back in the drug-soaked, if not halcyon, days known at the sexual and drug revolution—the 1960’s—many people were on a quest for the “perfect trip”, and the “perfect hit of acid” (the drug lysergic acid diethylamide, LSD). We will no doubt generate some hate mail for saying this, but we don’t believe that anyone ever attained that goal. The perfect drug-induced high does not exist. Even if it seems fun while it lasts, the problem is that the consequences spill over into the real world.

Today, drunk on falling interest rates, people look for the perfect speculation. Good speculations generally begin with a story. For example dollar-collapse. And then an asset gets bid up to infinity and beyond (to quote Buzz Lightyear, who is not so close a friend as our buddy Aragorn). It happened in silver in 2010-2011. It happened more recently in bitcoin.

Most speculators don’t care about the economic causes and effects of bubbles. They just want to buy an asset as the bubble begins inflating, and sell just before it pops. But bitcoin and many gold proponents are different. They promise that their favorite asset will cure many social ills, fix many intractable problems, and increase liberty. Oh yeah and get-rich-quick.

Continue reading Gettin’ High on Bubbles

Milking the Savers

By Keith Weiner

Do you want to lend your hard-earned money to the US government? In exchange for the high, high interest rate of 2.8%? It’s a most generous deal, even though the Federal Reserve is committed to dollar devaluation at the rate of 2% per annum. So you are getting 0.8% per year, assuming that the Fed hits its goal. In exchange for lending to a profligate and counterfeit borrower—the government has neither the means nor intent to repay.

No, you don’t? This sounds like a bad deal? Well, tough.

It sucks, but if you need to hold a cash balance, your other choices suck more. Instead of lending to the government, you could deposit the cash in a bank. There’s only one problem. The bank will lend to the government. After taking out the costs of compliance, this rate is 2% according to the St Louis Fed.

This is actually up from 0.13% over the last three years, in our current bout of risinginterestrate-itis. Enjoy this high rate while you can.

In any case, the bank adds risk. On top of all of the risks you incur by lending to the government, you take the risk of bank insolvency too. The government does provide deposit insurance—but this is the same government whose risk you are trying to avoid by not buying its bonds.

Finally, you could hold paper cash, $20 bills. Ignoring the risk of theft, there is still a problem with this. You are lending to the Fed. The Fed issues dollars, which are its liability, to fund its purchase of Treasury bonds. The dollar is backed by government bonds.

To have a dollar is not to own a thing. It is a credit relationship. Someone else owes you. If you own the dollar bill, the Fed owes you.

Continue reading Milking the Savers

The Skyrocket Phase

By Keith Weiner

Let’s tie two topics we have treated, one in exhaustive depth and the other in an ongoing series. They are bitcoin and capital consumption. By now, everyone knows that the price of bitcoin crashed. Barrels of electrons are being spilled discussing and debating why, and if/when the price will go back to what it ought to be ($1,000,000 we are told).

As an aside, in what other market is there a sense of entitlement of what the price ought to be, and a sense of anger at the only conceivable cause for why the price is not what it ought?

Bitcoin, Postmodern Money

Anyways, during the incredible run up in price, we wrote a series of articles, entitled Bitcoin, Postmodern Money. We were not focused on the price of the thing, other than to discuss the problems of unstable price, and even rising price. We did not say the price will come down, or when. We said a rising price makes it unusable as money.

In an online forum, some folks insisted that bitcoin is a store of value (in contrast to the dollar). We said that even if you don’t think it will crash, a skyrocket is not a store. Here is the graph through Friday.

Continue reading The Skyrocket Phase

Slaves to Government Debt Paper

By Keith Weiner

Picture, if you will, a group of slaves owned by a cruel man. Most of them are content, but one says to the others, “I will defy the Master.” While his statement would superficially appear to yearn towards freedom, it does not. It betrays that this slave, just like the others, thinks of the man who beats them as their “Master” (note the capital M). This slave does not seek freedom, but merely a small gesture of disloyalty. Of course, he will not get his liberty (but maybe a beating).

Today we do not have slavery, but we are shackled nevertheless. Savers are forced to use the government’s debt paper as if it were money. Most are content, but one says “gold will go up.” He does not expect a beating (but maybe a price suppression).

The slave cannot escape from his bondage, until he stops thinking of the brute as “Master” with a capital M. Freedom does not come from a little show of resentment. So long as malcontent slaves are content to limit themselves to petty disobedience, the Master is content that his rule is absolute. Freedom first takes an act of thinking. One must see the brute for what he is.

Today’s investor cannot escape from the bondage of the Federal Reserve, until he stops thinking of the dollar as “Money” with a capital M. So long as malcontent investors are content to limit themselves to betting on the dollar-price of gold, the Federal Reserve is content that its rule is absolute. Freedom takes an act of thinking. One must see the dollar for what it is.

Continue reading Slaves to Government Debt Paper

Standing Ready to Lease Gold

By Keith Weiner

We will take another break from capital destruction, to treat a topic which has come up this week. On March 11, we said:

“…central bankers do not think about gold.

Granted, they once did. In the 1960’s, there was the now-infamous London Gold Pool to keep the price of gold at $35. This is endlessly cited as evidence of current central bank price suppression, without bothering to mention that until 1971 the official US policy was to maintain the dollar to gold exchange rate of $35 to the ounce. …

But today? We see no sign that central bankers care about the price of gold.”

This turned out to be very controversial. Some conspiracy theorists cited Deputy Secretary of State Thomas O. Enders in 1974. The State Department records the minutes of a meeting with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Here is an excerpt:

“Henry Wallich, the international affairs man, this morning indicated he would probably adopt the traditional position that we should be for phasing gold out of the international monetary system…”

Changing the Dollar

This meeting can only be understood in context. So let’s review three key changes to the dollar that led up to it. The dollar had long been redeemable in gold. However, in 1933 President Roosevelt was desperate to stop the run on the banks (and to push interest rates down). He ended gold redeemability to Americans in 1933 (and criminalized the possession of gold).

When the soon-to-be-victorious Allied Powers met in 1944 at Bretton Woods, they agreed to an insane postwar monetary system, in which the national currencies would be pegged to the US dollar which would be redeemable in gold at a fixed exchange rate. This system contained the seeds of its own destruction as Robert Triffin said in the 1960’s. However, the Allied economies were in ruins (not to mention the Axis)—so who was in a position to say no?

Continue reading Standing Ready to Lease Gold

Super-Duper-Irrational Exuberance, Report

By Keith Weiner

Think back to the halcyon days of the dot com boom. This was a time after Greenspan declared “irrational exuberance”. Long Term Capital Management collapsed in 1998, and Greenspan decided to risk propelling exuberance to a level beyond irrational. Super-duper-irrational exuberance?

Anyway, Greenspan cut interest rates a few times in late 1998. Technology companies were able to raise $5 million or more with just a sketch on a napkin (“serviette” for those outside the US). Companies at a “later stage”, though without revenues, could raise $30 million. A company called “Webvan” was able to raise nearly a billion dollars without ever becoming profitable.

These companies should not have been able to raise so much capital. At any given point in the development of a company, there are only so many things that need spending. Not to mention can be justified to investors.

It is obvious in retrospect that those particular companies wasted investor money (if not the broader principles), after investors booked the losses, but it was anything but clear at the time. Keith recalls debating the so called hypothesis of efficient markets with some people who believed that all market prices are correct. That all changes in price are random, unpredictable.

We have written a lot about how falling interest rates cause capital consumption. It drives speculation, which is a process of conversion of one speculator’s wealth into another’s income. No one wants to spend his wealth, but people are happy to spend their income.

Continue reading Super-Duper-Irrational Exuberance, Report

Inflation is Not Under Control

By Keith Weiner

Let’s continue on our topic of capital consumption. It’s an important area of study, as our system of central bank socialism imposes many incentives to consume and destroy capital. As capital is the leverage that increases the productivity of human effort, it is vital that we understand what’s happening. We do not work harder today, than they worked 200 years ago, or in the ancient world. Yet we produce so much more, that obesity is a disease more of the poor than the rich. Destruction of capital will cause us to produce less, and that will mean reverting to a lower quality of life.

Keeping up with Inflation

Let’s start off by addressing how not to look at this destruction. There is a facile belief offered by both Fed propagandists and Fed critics alike. It goes like this. Increased quantity of dollars causes increased prices. Therefore it’s like a tax. And the way to measure your wealth is divide the liquidation value of your portfolio by the consumer price index. This tells you if your stocks, bonds, real estate, and the family farm could trade for more groceries and cars this year. Or less. In this view, you are hoping that somehow your assets keep up with inflation.

We insert the word somehow, because it is a kind of magical thinking. Everyone knows that a central bank cannot print wealth. If it could, Zimbabwe would be the richest country. Yet, if asset prices go up due to central bank policies, most asset owners feel richer. At least if consumer prices do not go up proportionally. One corollary of the fallacy of the Quantity Theory of Money is the fallacy of using consumer prices as the measure of economic value.

Why do we say this is not the method of looking at capital destruction? It’s because over the last 10 years, the Fed and other central banks have overstimulated capital destruction. And yet the above metric of the purchasing power of your estate has gone up. Everyone (at least those who own substantial assets) feels richer, despite economy-wide impoverishment.

If you were a doctor, and your deathly ill patient had a body temperature of 98.6F (37C), you would have to find another measurement tool. Clearly not all diseases cause a fever. Well, monetary doctors need to look past consumer price indices, inflation so called, and purchasing power of your assets.

Our first observation is that the purpose of a capital asset is not for spending. The prudent investor does not think about spending his savings, or selling the family farm. He says “I cannot afford that $300,000 Ferrari” if he has only a million or two in the bank.

Continue reading Inflation is Not Under Control

Gold is a Giant Ouija Board

By Keith Weiner

We have been promising to get back to the topic of capital destruction, which we put on hiatus for the last several weeks to make our case that the interest rate remains in a falling trend. Today, we have a different way of looking at capital destruction.

Socialism is the system of seeking out and destroying capital. Redistribution means taking someone’s capital and handing it over as income to someone else. The rightful owner would steward and compound it, not consume it. But the recipient of unearned free goodies happily and uncaringly eats it up. Socialism is not sustainable. It inherits seed corn from a prior, happier system, and it lasts only as long as the seed corn.

Totalitarian Socialism

There are different flavors of socialism. The 20th century witnessed an aggressive totalitarian form. Both communism and Naziism feature military occupation of domestic territory and conquest of foreign lands. Few people willingly feed whatever they have into the sausage grinder of State sacrificial collectivism. And so totalitarian socialism has armed thugs all over the streets, both open military and secret police. There are frequent killings, of those suspected of disloyalty or holding back small scraps. In their constant fear of uprising, they use disappearances, interrogations, and torture to root out the names of traitors to their bloody revolution.

Continue reading Gold is a Giant Ouija Board