In today’s post you’ll find out what really started this upward move for the temporary bottom put in place around 6500 on the Dow. Plus you will find out why long term how dangerous this is for us as American Taxpayers! Otherwise, today is the big test day, is this the exhaustion push of the bear market rally or is it confirmation of the beginning of a new bull market? Could it simply be window dressing fir the end of the first Quarter? Fundamentally speaking we have some slight (very slight) signs of recovery for the economy. After all pumping in over 3 Trillion dollars into the economy you’d think we would be seeing more. Inflation is continuing to rise. If you don’t believe me go buy some groceries everything is at least $1 higher than 1 month ago There are also some serious rifts growing in the G-20. Who would have ever thought that our European allies would be lecturing us on economics. China is continuing to grow more nervous and is seeking more collateral for their loans to us. Here’s my take, today is the 3rd test at 8000, if we can successfully close over that mark then the next real test will be at 8500. Conversely, failure to hold this level will not bode well at all for stocks. and I think we will go back and test the lows in the 6500 levels. The “shorts” have sucked the “sheeples” money in. Once again my contrarian instinct is taking over as all of the talk is about this is it! “We have now begun the next great rally for stocks.” Even though you are not hearing much about it Inflation is already here and with the U.S. Dollar printing presses still running full steam and overtime, I believe that very soon we will be talking about not just inflation; but hyper-inflation. However with all the news machines telling you to get into stocks now or you will miss it; people are even pouring out of Gold currently $899 – $902oz. However if you push euphoria and hope aside, all of the fundamentals for stocks looks very grim indeed. I am continuing to load up on more Precious Metals producers mining stocks, have re-entered (DGP), and am in process of purchasing more physical gold. From a risk to reward ratio shorting the S&P 500 and Dow Indy’s is looking very interesting right now. Don’t get suckered into regular stocks unless they are in Oil and Precious Metals. Both markets have some exceptional companies selling for very cheap levels. If I am wrong, obviously the market will tell; but I can honestly say I am putting my own money where my mouth is… Good Investing! -jschulmansr
Follow Me on Twitter and be notified whenever I make a new post!
Subject: Two trending markets revisited and analyzed for you
Last week I watched a video analysis of the S&P and Crude Oil markets. The technical analysis was right on at the time, but those markets have changed quite a bit in the last few days. The S&P had a huge rally and Crude seemed to steady out, so what’s the new analysis? Glad you asked!
Below are two free videos, one on Crude Oil and one on the S&P, that gives us an indepth technical look into these markets. Again the videos are free and very informatitive. Just Click on the Links Below…
S&P Video Analysis: Crude Oil Projections:
Here’s your chance to analyze that stock you have been thinking about adding to your portfolio. Just enter the ticker of any company, name of a commodity, or forex pair and get your complimentary technical analysis. It cost you nothing and and no payment info will ever be requested.
Click Here To Enter Your Symbol/s
=========================================================
Claim a gram of FREE GOLD today, plus a special 18-page PDF report;
Exposed! Five Myths of the Gold Market
Find out:
· Who’s been driving this record bull-run in gold?
· What Happens When Inflation Kicks In?
· Why most investors are WRONG about gold…
· When and How to buy gold — at low cost with no hassle!
Get this in-depth report now, plus a gram of free gold, at BullionVault
========================================================
In the article that follows it is actually a report done on an article in the New York Times by Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz a Nobel Prize winning economist. I highly reccomend that you read the complete article. But what follows below is an excellent synopsis with good commentary. This is the real reason why this rally has occured, Geitner’s Banking Plan is excellent for Wall Street and the Banks, for Investors, at the expense of U.S. Taxpayers! Read On… -jschulmansr
Nobel Laureate Stiglitz: The Administration’s Ersatz Capitalism – Seeking Alpha
By: Paul Haruni of Wall Street Pit
Nobel laureate in economics Joseph Stiglitz writes in The New York Times that Treasury Geithner’s $500 billion or more proposal to fix America’s ailing banks, described by some in the financial markets as a win-win-win situation, it’s actually a win-win-lose proposal: the banks win, investors win — and taxpayers lose.
The Treasury, argues the professor of economics at Columbia Univesity – hopes to get us out of the mess by replicating the flawed system that the private sector used to bring the world crashing down, with a proposal that has overleveraging in the public sector, excessive complexity, poor incentives and a lack of transparency.
In theory, the administration’s plan, continues Mr. Stiglitz, is based on letting the market determine the prices of the banks’ “toxic assets” — including outstanding house loans and securities based on those loans. The reality, though, is that the market will not be pricing the toxic assets themselves, but options on those assets.
Mr. Stiglitz uses the example of an asset that has a 50-50 chance of being worth either zero or $200 in a year’s time. The average “value” of the asset is $100. Ignoring interest, this is what the asset would sell for in a competitive market. It is what the asset is “worth.” Under the plan by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the government would provide about 92% of the money to buy the asset but would stand to receive only 50% of any gains, and would absorb almost all of the losses, Mr. Stiglitz says. Some partnership!
What the Obama administration is doing is far worse than nationalization: it is ersatz capitalism, the privatizing of gains and the socializing of losses. It is a “partnership” in which one partner robs the other. And such partnerships — with the private sector in control — have perverse incentives, worse even than the ones that got us into the mess.
Paying fair market values for the assets will not work. Only by overpaying for the assets will the banks be adequately recapitalized. But overpaying for the assets simply shifts the losses to the government. In other words, the Geithner plan works only if and when the taxpayer loses big time.
So what is the appeal of a proposal like this? Perhaps it’s the kind of Rube Goldberg device that Wall Street loves — clever, complex and nontransparent, allowing huge transfers of wealth to the financial markets. It has allowed the administration to avoid going back to Congress to ask for the money needed to fix our banks, and it provided a way to avoid nationalization.
But we are already suffering from a crisis of confidence. When the high costs of the administration’s plan become apparent, confidence will be eroded further. At that point the task of recreating a vibrant financial sector, and resuscitating the economy, will be even harder.
Essentially Stiglitz’s point is that Treasury Geithner, Wall Street’s new main operative after Paulson, and the administration itself for that matter want to bribe investors to buy up “toxic (junk, trash) assets” and guarantee their losses with taxpayer money. A calculative move since it would facilitate a vast and unprecedented transfer of wealth from the great majority of taxpayers (the working class) to the banks, bondholders and the wealthy.
Joseph E. Stiglitz, a professor of economics at Columbia who was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers from 1995 to 1997, was awarded the Nobel prize in economics in 2001.
After Paul Krugman, Prof. Stiglitz is the second Nobel prize-winning economists to rightly criticize the administration’s plan for what it is. A massive, disguised theft.
=========================================================
Hyper-Inflation: Central Banks Gone Wild – Investment U
By: Micheal Checkan of Asset Strategies International
Editor’s Note: Many of our long-time readers will remember our old friend and colleague Michael Checkan at Asset Strategies International, Inc. A specialist in precious metals and foreign currencies, today he takes a look at a unique “hyper-inflationary” economy and the havoc it plays on foreign currencies.
With the U.S. Government printing money like never before, the whispers of inflation float over the currency and bond markets. In fact, inflation has dropped to almost nothing after hitting a high of 5.6% in July of last year.
Within the past two weeks the Fed created one trillion dollars out of thin air. Apart from left or right wing rhetoric, this is reality.
History has taught us that governments can take a perfectly good piece of paper, put some ink on it, and make it totally worthless.
It happened in Hungary in 1946, Argentina in 1988 and today in Zimbabwe.
Since entering the foreign currency and precious metals business in the 1960’s, I’ve seen it happen more than a few times. But extreme examples of currency devaluation are rare. It can be compared to a slow motion train wreck you just can’t keep your eyes off.
Today, Zimbabwe looks to take its place in history with the most corrupt government and devalued currency for the record books. Apart from being just another economic disaster and newspaper headline, we can learn something from these extreme examples of central banks gone wild and why inflation is so important.
What is Hyper-Inflation?
I saw hyper-inflation first hand when I visited Argentina in 1988. At the time, their government was using the Austral as their currency and inflation was running at 387.7%.
Afterwards, the currency name was changed to the Peso and eventually the hard or new Peso. Visiting last year I still found a questionable government dealing with political, economic and social unrest. Unfortunately, currency devaluation is just one of their issues.
You can expect to see more changes in their currency in the years ahead.
Inflation is the rising cost of daily goods and services – usually based off the Consumer Price Index. There’s a humorous quote that says, “With inflation, everything gets more valuable except money.” But it’s a great way to explain why inflation needs to be managed. Hyper-inflation is simply runaway inflation.
Imagine a $2.00 gallon of milk spiking to $775.40 within a year – like in Argentina, 1988.
That’s no April Fool’s joke.
Some inflation is necessary for individuals to see a reason for investing their money. If your dollar was going to be worth a dollar “tomorrow,” you would be less inclined to risk it in an investment. Inflation eats away at purchasing power.
Central Banks and governments have a number of other tools at their disposal to influence inflation, but their main tools are to shrink the money supply and raise interest rates. On average the United States sees inflation at around 3-4%.
Argentina’s troubles are nothing compared to the state of Zimbabwean currency.
“The death knell for the Zimbabwean dollar came as it does for currencies in all hyper-inflationary markets. That is, people just refuse to use the money. It really is a nuisance. So it just disappears on you,” said Steve H. Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University.
Officially, Zimbabwe’s monthly inflation is an unfathomable 231 million percent.
And while outrageous, that figure may be far too small. In November, the last time reliable data was available, Hanke calculated it at 79.6 billion percent and proclaimed Zimbabwe “second place in the world hyper-inflation record books.” Currently, the largest note in circulation is a $100 trillion note.
Hyper-Inflation & The Zimbabwe Banknote – Collecting Funny Money
My good friend, David who also deals in banknotes and coins says,
“The situation with the Zimbabwe banknote is complicated because the new notes so rapidly become worthless it seems the Central Bank does not produce as many.
In any case I’ve managed to accumulate some and I am constantly working at it. You are aware that last August after getting up to 100 billion they started the new currency. The new currency has now had a short life. It is now being replaced with the “new” new currency.
I saw on the web site of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe the new, new, new banknotes. The only question is how long it will take before they get up to a quadrillion?”
Of course in these situations there’s always profit to be made. In this case, it’s exploiting the value of the physical coins and the value of the hyper-inflated notes.
“I happen to have a lot of one-cent coins from a few years back. The basic idea is to go to the bank with a 100 billion dollar note and request the 10 trillion 1 cent coins. Because the coin weighs about two grams, one would expect to receive 20 trillion grams of coins, which is 20 billion kilos or 20 million tons. The coin is made of steel with a copper coating. That is a lot of metal.”
It’s a physical impossibility for Zimbabwe to make good on their printing presses’ obligations in coins. From a far worse perspective, they are destroying their economy and global investment interest.
David tells me the Zimbabwean banknotes may be monetarily worthless, but they do have collector value. Some currency collectors are rushing to pick up as many of these “super-notes” as possible.
How many Americans can say they’ve held a 100 trillion dollar note? I prefer to think that a “trillionaire” should reach that status because of hard work and luck, not because their government can’t keep its hands off the printing presses.
It’s a sobering lesson on the dangers of too much money.
Good investing,
Michael Checkan
Editor’s Note: Michael is the President of Asset Strategies International and has been a Pillar One Partner with The Oxford Club for more than a decade. Asset Strategies is a consulting and broker/dealer investment firm specializing in precious metals, offshore wealth protection, inter-bank foreign currency transactions and banknote trading. To find out more about his free Information Line newsletter, go here.
=========================================================
Next- More Evidence of Massive Collaberation and Central Banks Suppression of Gold Prices and actual Fraud? Securities lawyer Avery Goodman, writing today at Seeking Alpha, notes the coincidence of huge gold offtake at the Comex and a sudden huge sale of gold by the European Central Bank. He adds that evidence of gold market manipulation is so great that the authorities should start investigating it. But of course the manipulation is DONE by the authorities, so the investigation will have to be done by the financial press. (It would be nice if someone invented such a press soon.) Read On… – Can You Say “Short Squeeze” in the making! – jschulmansr
Did the ECB Save COMEX from Gold Default? – Seeking Alpha
By: Avery Goodman
On Tuesday morning, gold derivatives dealers, who had sold short in the face of a fast rising gold price, faced a serious predicament. Some 27,000 + contracts, representing about 15% of the April COMEX gold futures contracts remained open. Technically, short sellers are required to give “notice” of delivery to long buyers. However, in reality, buyers are the ones who control the amount of gold to be delivered. They “demand” delivery of physical gold by holding futures contracts past the expiration date. This time, long buyers were demanding in droves.
In normal times, very few people do this. Only about 1% or less of gold contracts must be delivered. The lack of delivery demand allows the casino-like world of paper gold futures contracts to operate. Very few short sellers actually expect or intend to deliver real gold. They are, mostly, merely playing with paper. It was amazing, therefore, when March 30, 2009 came and passed, and so many people stood for delivery, refusing to part with their long gold futures positions.
On Tuesday, March 31st, Deutsche Bank (DB) amazed everyone even more, by delivering a massive 850,000 ounces, or 850 contracts worth of the yellow metal. By the close of business, even after this massive delivery, about 15,050 April contracts, or 1.5 million ounces, still remained to be delivered. Most of these, of course, are unlikely to be the obligations of Deutsche Bank. But, the fact that this particular bank turned out to be one of the biggest short sellers of gold, is a surprise. Most people presumed that the big COMEX gold short sellers are HSBC (HBC) and/or JP Morgan Chase (JPM). That may be true. However, it is abundantly clear that they are not the only game in town.
Closely connected institutions, it seems, do not have to worry about acting irresponsibly, in taking on more obligations than they can fulfill. Mysteriously, on the very same day that gold was due to be delivered to COMEX long buyers, at almost the very same moment that Deutsche Bank was giving notice of its deliveries, the ECB happened to have “sold” 35.5 tons, or a total of 1,141,351 ounces of gold, on March 31, 2009. Convenient, isn’t it? Deutsche Bank had to deliver 850,000 ounces of physical gold on that day, and miraculously, the gold appeared out of nowhere.
The announcement of the ECB sale was made, as usual, dryly, without further comment. There was little more than a notation of a sale, as if it were a meaningless blip in the daily activity of the central bank. But, it was anything but meaningless. It may have saved a major clearing member of the COMEX futures exchange from defaulting on a huge derivatives position. We don’t know who the buyer(s) was, but we don’t leave our common sense at home. The ECB simply states that 35.5 tons were sold, and doesn’t name any names. Common sense, logic and reason tells us that the buyer was Deutsche Bank, and that the European Central Bank probably saved the bank and COMEX from a huge problem. What about the balance, above 850,000 ounces? What will happen to that? I am willing to bet that Deutsche Bank will use it, in June, to close out remaining short positions, or that it will be sold into the market, at an opportune time, if it hasn’t already been sold on Tuesday, to try to control the inevitable rise of the price of gold.
Circumstantial evidence has always been a powerful force in the law. It allows police, investigators, lawyers and judges to ferret out the truth. Circumstantial evidence is admissible in any court of law to prove a fact. It is used all the time, both when we initiate investigations, and once we seek indictments and convictions. We do this because we deal in a corrupt world, filled with suspicious actions and lies, and the circumstances are often suspicious enough to give rise to a strong inference that something is amiss. Most of the time, when the direct evidence is insufficient to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance of direct evidence, circumstantial evidence fills the void, and gives us the conviction. We even admit evidence of the circumstances to prove murder cases. In light of that, it certainly seems appropriate to use circumstantial evidence in evaluating possible regulatory violations. The size and timing of the delivery of Deutsche Bank’s COMEX obligation is suspicious, to say the least, when taken in conjunction with the size and timing of the ECB’s gold sale. It is circumstantial evidence that the gold used by Deutsche Bank to deliver and fulfill its COMEX obligations, came directly or indirectly, from the ECB.
I’d sure like to know what the ECB’s “alibi” is. If I were an investigator for the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), assigned to determine whether or not gold short sellers are knowingly violating the 90% cover rule, I’d be questioning the hell out of the ECB staffers, as well as employees in the futures trading division of Deutsche Bank. There is certainly enough evidence to raise “reasonable suspicion”. Reasonable suspicion is all that one needs to start a criminal investigation. It should be more than sufficient to prompt the CFTC, as well as European market regulators, to start a commercial investigation of the potential violation of regulatory rules by both the ECB and one of the world’s major banking institutions. That is, of course, if and only if, the CFTC staff really wants to regulate, rather than simply position themselves for more lucrative jobs inside the industry they are supposed to be regulating, after they leave government service.
It is quite important to determine whether or not Deutsche Bank was bailed out by the ECB because that will answer a lot of questions about allegations of naked short selling on the COMEX. If the ECB knew that its gold would be used as post ipso facto “cover” for uncovered shorting, staffers at the central bank might be co-conspirators. At any rate, if the German bank did sell short on futures contracts without having enough vaulted gold it sold a naked short. It also means that the ECB has facilitated a major rule violation in a jurisdiction (the USA) with which Europe is supposed to have extensive joint regulatory agreements, any number of which may have been violated by this action of the ECB. At the very least, naked short selling is a blatant violation of CFTC regulations, which require 90% cover of all deliverable metals contracts. If the delivered gold came directly, or indirectly, from the ECB, it means that Deutsche Bank’s gold short contracts were “naked” at the time they were entered into.
The 90% cover rule is very old rule, designed to prevent fraud on the futures markets. Its origin dates back into the 19th century. Farmers, in that simpler age, were complaining that big bank speculators were downwardly manipulating grain prices on the futures exchanges. Nowadays, the CFTC has a predilection toward categorizing banks as so-called “commercials” or “hedgers”, rather than as the speculators that they really are. Traditionally, only miners and gold dealers whose business involves a majority of PHYSICAL trade in gold should qualify as commercials. However, the CFTC has ignored this for a long time, and qualified numerous banks and other financial institutions, whose main gold business is derivatives, as “commercial” entities, immunizing them from position limits and other constraints. As a result, just like the farmers of the 19th century, today’s gold “cartel” conspiracy theorists revolve their theory around an allegation of downward manipulation, and heavy short selling concentration.
Manipulation can only take place when there is a disconnect between supply, demand, and trading activity on the futures exchanges. The 90% cover rule attempts to force a direct tie between the futures market and the availability of particular commodities, so that supply and demand become primary even on paper based futures markets, just as it is in trading the real commodity. Unfortunately, the modern CFTC has ignored or misinterpreted the purpose of the 90% cover rule for a very long time. This regulatory failure has allowed the current free-for-all “casino-like” atmosphere that now prevails at futures exchanges.
It would be helpful if some of my colleagues, within the public prosecutor and securities regulatory offices, in Europe, as well as the CFTC in America, filed complaints for discovery, to ferret out the truth. In the interest of transparent markets, the ECB should be forced to disclose who purchased the gold they sold in the morning of March 31, 2008 and why the sale was timed in a way that corresponded to the exact moment in time that Deutsche Bank had a desperate need for gold bullion.
Was it yet another bank bailout? Has another bank sucked up precious resources belonging, in this case, to the people of Europe? Gold is needed to bring confidence to the Euro currency, as often noted by Germany’s Bundesbank, which seems to be less kind to German banks than the ECB. Why should the ECB be permitted to sell gold to closely connected derivatives dealers, if the primary purpose is to save those dealers from the bad decisions they have made, and the end result is to reinforce moral hazard? Should banks like Deutsche Bank be allowed to take on more derivative risk than they can afford without involving publicly owned assets? Did Deutsche Bank issue naked short positions? Have innocent European citizens now had their currency placed at more risk, and some of their gold stolen from them, simply to enrich private hands? All of these questions are begging for answers.
European regulators are quick to condemn the Federal Reserve for its incestuous relationship to client “primary dealer” banks, special treatment of favored institutions at the expense of other non-favored institutions, propensity toward injecting dollars to artificially stimulate the stock market, seemingly endless bailouts of closely connected banks, and, now, the seemingly unlimited printing of new dollars. I’ll not attempt to excuse the Fed for its failures. Indeed, I believe that it is in the best interest of the American people to close down that malevolent institution, permanently. However, if any of the questions I have posed are answered in the positive, people might begin to understand that special favors, nepotism, corruption, and a failure to properly regulate are not confined to America. The real estate bubble, for example, was allowed to become much bigger in the U.K., Ireland, Spain, and eastern Europe, than it ever was in the USA. The collapse of real estate, in those countries, is going to be more severe, even though it is more recent in origin than the pullback in the USA. America happened to be the first nation affected, but it did not cause the world economic collapse. That was caused by the joint irresponsible policies in almost every major nation in the world.
Those who rely on the good faith of Angela Merkel, to keep the Euro inviolate, certainly have a right to get answers from the ECB and from Deutsche Bank. The answers will tell us a lot about the real proclivities of the ECB. As the U.S. dollar is progressively debased, in coming years, will the Euro be any better? Is the ECB merely a European copy of the Federal Reserve “slush fund”, utilized by well connected European banks, for the purpose of private financial gain, much as the Federal Reserve’s assets are utilized by its primary dealers? If the ECB is willing to bail out a major trading institution from the mismanagement of its derivatives operations, who could honestly claim that it would hesitate to competitively debase the Euro against the dollar? Having the answers to the questions I have posed would give everyone the knowledge needed to make important decisions. That is exactly the reason that, in all likelihood, we will never get these answers. Maybe, Europeans and others ought to be dumping Euros just as fast as they are now dumping dollars, and buy gold and silver, instead.
Aside from the regulatory issues, if we did discover that Deutsche Bank got its gold from the ECB, one glaringly strong inference arises. When a major derivatives dealer goes begging for gold, to the ECB, it is very strong circumstantial evidence that not enough physical gold is available for purchase on the OTC wholesale market. Up until now, bearish gold commentators have steadfastly denied that wholesale gold shortages exist. Instead, they have insisted that all shortages are confined to retail forms of gold. Now, when combined with the circumstantial evidence, however, common sense tells us that they are wrong.
Decision: There is sufficient evidence for this case to go to a full scale investigation. The CFTC and similar securities regulators in Europe need to properly investigate the gold conspiracy allegations. That has never been done to date. They must determine who is buying central bank gold and whether or not it is simply being sold into the open market, or channeled into the hands of favored financial institutions who then use it to cover naked short selling. The investigation must include detailed vault audits and explore all paper trails.
Disclosure: Long on gold.
=========================================================
My Final Note: Did I say buy Gold? Do It Now in any form or investment, be patient and you will be REWARDED! – Good Investing – jschulmansr
Follow Me on Twitter and be notified whenever I make a new post!
=========================================================
Claim a gram of FREE GOLD today, plus a special 18-page PDF report; Exposed! Five Myths of the Gold Market and find out:
· Who’s been driving this record bull-run in gold?
· What Happens When Inflation Kicks In?
· Why most investors are WRONG about gold…
· When and How to buy gold — at low cost with no hassle!
Get this in-depth report now, plus a gram of free gold, at BullionVault
=========================================================
Nothing in today’s post should be considered as an offer to buy or sell any securities or other investments; it is presented for informational purposes only. As a good investor, consult your Investment Advisor/s, Do Your Due Diligence, Read All Prospectus/s and related information carefully before you make any investing decisions and/or investments. – jschulmansr
Like this:
Like Loading...
As you can see, from mid-1971 to December 1974, gold rose 471%. It
then fell 50%, from December ’74 to August ’76. After that, it began
its next leg up, exploding 750% higher from August ’76 to January
1980. Now, in its current bull market (2001 to March 2008), gold
rose over 300% from $250 to a little over $1,000. And just like in
the mid-70s, it began showing signs of weakness after its first big
rally up to $1,014 in March ’08. At one point, it even fell to $700, a 30% retraction.
Granted, it wasn’t a full 50% retraction like the one that occurred
from 1974-76. But we are experiencing a financial crisis. And gold
is the most common catastrophe insurance.
If we were to go by the historic pattern of the gold market in the
‘70s, gold should experience upwards resistance for 19 months after
its first peak today. Gold’s recent peak was $1,014 in March ’08
(roughly 17 months ago). If this bull market parallels the last one,
then gold should renew its upward momentum in a very serious way
starting in October 2009. And this next leg up should be a major
one (the biggest gains came during the second rally in gold’s bull
market in the ‘70s).
The chart certainly forecasts a major move.
As you can see, gold has formed a long-term inverse head and
shoulders formation (two smaller collapses book-ending a major
collapse). Typically a head and shoulders predicts a massive
collapse. However, when the head and shoulders is inverse, as is
the case for gold today, this typically predicts a MAJOR leg up.
Indeed, any move above the “neckline” of 1,000 would forecast a
MAJOR move up to $1,300 or so. Going by history, this is precisely
the move we should expect: remember based on historical trends
(the gold bull market of the ‘70s) gold should begin its second
and largest leg up in September or October 2009.
Watch the gold chart closely over the next month or so. If gold
makes a move above $980 perhaps add to your current positions.
If it clears $1,000, hold on tight, cause the next leg up in this
secular bull market has begun.
Good Investing!
===================================================
My Note: After watching stocks (DJI) this afternoon and the strange
price behavior before the close, I felt I would add this article too!
-jschulmansr
===================================================
Anytime stocks explode higher on next to no volume and crap
fundamentals you run the risk of a real collapse. I am officially
going on record now and stating that IF the S&P 500 hits 1,000, we
will see a full-blown Crash like last year.
3) This Latest Market Rally is a Short-Squeeze and Nothing More
To date, the stock market is up 48% since its March lows. This is
truly incredible when you consider the underlying economic picture:
normally when the market rallies 40%+ from a bear market low, the
economy is already nine months into recovery mode. Indeed, assuming
the market is trading based on earnings, the S&P 500 is currently
discounting earnings growth of 40-50% for 2010. The odds of that
happening are about one in one million.
A closer examination of this rally reveals the degree to which
“junk” has triumphed over value. Since July 10th:
04/22/09 Nashville, Tennessee People often accuse me of making “irresponsible” forecasts of massive price inflation. Even though they know that history is replete with examples of central banks ruining their currencies, these critics are sure that “it can’t happen here.” So in the present article I’d like to make the brief case for why we should all be very alarmed about the prospects for the U.S. dollar.
