Do people actually believe this stuff? Like, seriously?
If we take the argument to the logical conclusion, we would have to say that sports teams are also manipulated seeing as you can bet on the Super Bowl without owning a sports team.
Do people actually believe this stuff? Like, seriously?
If we take the argument to the logical conclusion, we would have to say that sports teams are also manipulated seeing as you can bet on the Super Bowl without owning a sports team.
There's enough evidence out there to support both the manipulation of silver and gold. All you gotta do is find it.
Even Ron Paul mentions in end the fed that he thinks the price of gold is manipulated. The plunge protection team has the right to do anything they want to any stock. It's not outside of the realm of possibility at all.
Gold and Silver, more so gold, are the best indicators of the state of fiat currency it's absolutely plausible that these prices are manipulated.
Proud member of the Silver Liberation Army
80 cent jump to end the week - one of the bigger moves recently.
"The journalist is one who separates the wheat from the chaff, and then prints the chaff." - Adlai Stevenson
“I tell you that virtue does not come from money: but from virtue comes money and all other good things to man, both to the individual and to the state.” - Socrates
Good point.
"The journalist is one who separates the wheat from the chaff, and then prints the chaff." - Adlai Stevenson
“I tell you that virtue does not come from money: but from virtue comes money and all other good things to man, both to the individual and to the state.” - Socrates
For the people who buy and use physical it is.
Yes, but that is only temporary. People were saying "APMEX is sold out of Eagles" when silver dropped from 50 to 44 nearly overnight, but that didn't last. It is just a silverbig cliche.That's one test of manipulation, thank you. And there is your evidence, because availability of physical supply DOES diminish dramatically when PM's dip to low price levels.
I will say this.
You are assuming almost everyone who holds paper, will want physical. Your example is 1928, which is a terrible comparison because at that time it is obvious everyone would want physical. IT WAS THEIR MONEY. Maybe people will want physical in the future, maybe they will abandon it. Traders continue to trade paper when they know not all of it is backed by physical. To me it is pretty obvious it is because they are not actually interested in owning physical.
Where producers meet consumers is where the price is established, on the actual physical market. The paper market acts as a buffer, but the supply or demand for physical can not be masked for long simple because so much of what is mined is consumed.
I would agree with you on gold. It is a different story, than silver.