Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive, there is no zero.
Smilies
:gigglesnshit: eyebrow :header: :woteva: :yikes: :smilin: :bawlin: :wubbers: :NAA: :canny: :trollface: :wurms: :doomed: :wubwub: :leer: :grrrrr: :more beer: :ooer: :whistle: :dafinger: :pukeup: :Hiya: :bored: :Wiiiine!: :choc: :flog: :twirl: :pmsl: :dunno: :pointlaugh: :cheers: :yess: :bum: :snooty: :thud: :shell: :shake head: :thumbsup: :hap: :hand: :shame: :popcorn: :monkey: :off head: :bell: :shoot: :mrgreen: :roll: :oops: :razz: :laughing: :cool: :kinell: :wink: :drool: :grub: :awesome: :slap: :again?: :burfday: :srs?:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cactus Jack » Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:27 am

Rolluplostinspace wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:The end of the petrodollar is coming because the end of the petrochemical hegemony is coming it has fuck all to do with gold, sliver, copper or adamantium.

As for the 'end of fiat money' what the Doofus Duo can't grasp is that gold is as much a fiat system as any other.

If you are painting a house to get food for your family you don't want gold you want bread, vegetables, meat and drink - that someone declare a piece of metal is 'worth' so much beef, so much bread or so many eggs is no different to that same person declaring a piece of paper is 'worth' the same.

Perhaps if they get enough bits of metal or pieces of paper they Doofus Duo will be able to buy a fucking clue because they show no signs of coming across one any other way

We all know that dick head and we try to make allowances for your fuckling ignorance in all matters.

Do you get that the petrodollar hegemony will come to an end because of renewable energy or doesn't your understanding extend that far - if it does there may be hope for you.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Rolluplostinspace » Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:09 am

Cactus Jack wrote:The end of the petrodollar is coming because the end of the petrochemical hegemony is coming it has fuck all to do with gold, sliver, copper or adamantium.

As for the 'end of fiat money' what the Doofus Duo can't grasp is that gold is as much a fiat system as any other.

If you are painting a house to get food for your family you don't want gold you want bread, vegetables, meat and drink - that someone declare a piece of metal is 'worth' so much beef, so much bread or so many eggs is no different to that same person declaring a piece of paper is 'worth' the same.

Perhaps if they get enough bits of metal or pieces of paper they Doofus Duo will be able to buy a fucking clue because they show no signs of coming across one any other way

We all know that dick head and we try to make allowances for your fuckling ignorance in all matters.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cactus Jack » Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:26 pm

The end of the petrodollar is coming because the end of the petrochemical hegemony is coming it has fuck all to do with gold, sliver, copper or adamantium.

As for the 'end of fiat money' what the Doofus Duo can't grasp is that gold is as much a fiat system as any other.

If you are painting a house to get food for your family you don't want gold you want bread, vegetables, meat and drink - that someone declare a piece of metal is 'worth' so much beef, so much bread or so many eggs is no different to that same person declaring a piece of paper is 'worth' the same.

Perhaps if they get enough bits of metal or pieces of paper they Doofus Duo will be able to buy a fucking clue because they show no signs of coming across one any other way

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Rolluplostinspace » Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:17 pm

They have also been keeping the price of gold lower than it should be to keep the dollar as strong as possible.
But the dishonesty and trickery is now probably going to make gold surge to five grand an ounce and more and that will signal the end of the petrodollar causing utter chaos in America.
One good thing being they would have to take all their troops home .... not good for America of course.
I think that's when the USA invades S America and owns the two continents full on but the ammount of bloodshed that will bring is unimaginable!
Some blowback by keeping the price of gold down and the dollar up is China has billions of dollars and has been buying gold with them.
Dollars that were cheap now worth more to buy gold art artificially lowered prices.
Russia too has been unloading its dollar reserves to stack up on the gold .... western gold.
So America are responsible for the west's gold now being in the east.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Fletch » Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:04 pm

Peter Schiff: The Next Crash Could Bring Down the Fiat Money System

Peter Schiff appeared on RT Boom Bust on Tuesday (Sept. 17) to talk about interest rates, gold and the dollar. Peter said the fiat currency system may not survive the next recession.

The conversation started focusing on the repo operations conducted by the Federal Reserve early in the week, Peter said the financial media and Wall Street are being much too complacent about what’s going on.

phpBB [video]


Peter noted that the Fed has been artificially suppressing interest rates, particularly since the 2008 financial crisis.

And by keeping interest rates artificially low, they have created a bubble that’s much bigger than the one that popped in 2008. And what happened this morning is you could see the air coming out of that bubble, because the market is trying to bring interest rates higher because we have no real savings in this country. We have enormous debt. Everybody is levered up to the max — government, the private sector, business, consumers — because rates have been so low, we’ve borrowed so much money. The market wants interest rates to be higher but the Fed doesn’t want that to happen because the road back to normal interest rates is a very bumpy one because it’s going to take us right through another financial crisis. So, the Fed is trying to keep interest rates artificially low and they almost lost control of it this morning. “

In effect, the Fed created about $50 to $70 billion out of thin air to supply the liquidity that the market needed.

But what happens next time? What happens if we need $100 billion? What happens if we need a trillion? Because eventually, we will. Eventually, the Fed has to choose between destroying the dollar and allowing the market to bring interest rates to a level that makes sense for an economy with this much debt. Then all hell breaks loose because we have a much worse financial crisis than the one we had in ‘o8.”

https://schiffgold.com/videos/peter-sch ... ey-system/

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by jra » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:54 pm

Lady Murasaki wrote:I wonder if this one turns green after too many flushes.

Image


That's what happens sometimes with chromium (plating), not gold.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium(III)_oxide

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cannydc » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:37 pm

Fletch, you just keep spouting the same garbage, over and over.

Gold has been held as a 'reserve' by many countries for many years. However, the amount we had was pitifully tiny (£16bn or so) compared to a £1,600Bn GDP.

When you get that we spent three times as much saving Northern Rock alone as Brown got for selling half our gold, you will see the perspective.

Gold on that scale is a tiny pinprick in the UK economy, and as such was a completely wasted asset which could be put to work.

And was.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Fletch » Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:38 pm

Cannydc wrote:
Fletch wrote:Gordon Brown Dumped Britain’s Gold to Save Goldman Sachs & JP Morgan

The Telegraph’s Thomas Pascoe has released a riveting account of why Gordon Brown dumped 400 tonnes of Britain’s gold (which has been dubbed Brown’s Bottom) intentionally at the lowest price possible.
Pascoe’s sources have informed him that one globally significant US bank was short 2 tonnes of gold at the time of the 400 tonne gold dump.

Goldman Sachs reportedly approached Treasury Head of Commodities Gavyn Davies to explain its dire predicament, and the immediate global financial consequences should The Vampire Squid default on its gold delivery obligations.

Pascoe alleges that Gordon Brown used various mechanisms (telegraphing the sale, using an auction rather than the London fix, etc) to intentionally sell Britain’s gold reserves at the lowest possible price to save the necks of Goldman Sachs’ massive gold shorts (which likely included JP Morgan which was even more massively short gold at the time).

When Brown decided to dispose of almost 400 tonnes of gold between 1999 and 2002, he did two distinctly odd things…
It seemed almost as if the Treasury was trying to achieve the lowest price possible for the public’s gold. It was.

From the Telegraph:
One decision stands out as downright bizarre, however...
.
.
.
Goldman Sachs, which is not understood to have been significantly short on gold itself, is rumoured to have approached the Treasury to explain the situation through its then head of commodities Gavyn Davies, later chairman of the BBC and married to Sue Nye who ran Brown’s private office.

Faced with the prospect of a global collapse in the banking system, the Chancellor took the decision to bail out the banks by dumping Britain’s gold, forcing the price down and allowing the banks to buy back gold at a profit, thus meeting their borrowing obligations.

https://www.silverdoctors.com/gold/gold ... jp-morgan/

That's what I was referring to in my comment to you about the gold sale earlier in the thread canny. It was Goldman Sachs who wanted it but as I said, JPM was also massively short.


Riveting - but extremely unlikely.

Brown was driven to diversify UK investments. In Scotland before the financial crash of 2008, many professional families held a high proportion of their savings in bank shares. Banks were safe, paid a decent dividend, and there was also the prospect of a capital gain. Then both the Royal Bank and Bank of Scotland went bust. Many families saw their savings wiped out. They thought they were being prudent, but they had failed to diversify.

He decided that selling gold and moving the proceeds into such investments as the (then new) Euro, and interest bearing US bonds (gold earns no interest) was the right thing to do.

Brown wasn't the luckiest man, and the fact that the price of gold rocketed soon after, which it had shown no signs of doing for many years before, was an unfortunate issue. However, had he not sold it (about £5bn 'lost' on the deal was reported) that same gold would still be sitting in a vault earning nothing and waiting for a precipitous price drop. Instead, Brown's investments have made real cash, billions, immediately available to spend.


You think countries own gold as an investment? You have no idea canny. As said further up thread, 'Gold is the ultimate safe haven'. Countries know FIAT is worthless paper and it can be gone in seconds. Gold isn't.

You're just making it up as you go along, yet again. If the idea was to make more money, why then did this happen?

When Brown decided to dispose of almost 400 tonnes of gold between 1999 and 2002, he did two distinctly odd things.

First, he broke with convention and announced the sale well in advance, giving the market notice that it was shortly to be flooded and forcing down the spot price. This was apparently done in the interests of “open government”, but had the effect of sending the spot price of gold to a 20-year low, as implied by basic supply and demand theory.

Second, the Treasury elected to sell its gold via auction. Again, this broke with the standard model. The price of gold was usually determined at a morning and afternoon “fix” between representatives of big banks whose network of smaller bank clients and private orders allowed them to determine the exact price at which demand met with supply.
The auction system again frequently achieved a lower price than the equivalent fix price. The first auction saw an auction price of $10c less per ounce than was achieved at the morning fix. It also acted to depress the price of the afternoon fix which fell by nearly $4.

It seemed almost as if the Treasury was trying to achieve the lowest price possible for the public’s gold. It was. …
This plan worked brilliantly when gold fell and the other asset – for the bank at the heart of this case, yen-backed securities – rose. When the prices moved the other way, the banks were in trouble.


From the Telegraph: https://www.silverdoctors.com/gold/gold ... jp-morgan/

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Lady Murasaki » Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:06 pm

I wonder if this one turns green after too many flushes.

Image

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by jra » Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:56 am

Guest wrote:
Rolluplostinspace wrote:Why do we value gold?

Mankind's attitude to gold is bizarre. Chemically, it is uninteresting - it barely reacts with any other element. Yet, of all the 118 elements in the periodic table, gold is the one we humans have always tended to choose to use as currency. Why?

Why not osmium or chromium, or helium, say - or maybe seaborgium?

I'm not the first to ask the question, but I like to think I'm asking it in one of the most compelling locations possible - the extraordinary exhibition of pre-Columbian gold artefacts at the British Museum?

He pulls out a copy of the periodic table.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25255957

Simples! It doesn’t tarnish like other metals because it doesn’t react with other elements and maintains its glorious sheen.
For decorative purposes it looks wonderful - except in a bathroom.
That’s what made it so prized and why the ancients placed great value on it, and that has continued.
It doesn’t degrade like other metals and is always literally worth it’s weight in gold.


Not quite right.

Gold reacts to a mixture of nitric acid and hydrochloric acid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_regia

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by jra » Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:51 am

Cactus Jack wrote:Accepting - for the sake of argument - that Boris will be successful and push through a No Deal Brexit on 31 October there will be some long term effects, and not just economically. Indeed for the purpose of this let's leave aside the economics and talk purely in terms of the cultural and political changes.

1 - The end of the UK.

The inarguable facts are that both Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain whilst England and Wales voted leave.

Even if the UK had negotiated staying in the Customs Union or the Single Market that would have been a problem to seeing the Little Englanders have so completely hijacked the agenda and forced through a No Deal Brexit the only conclusion left for the Scots and the Irish is that there is no place for them in the UK.

In the case of Northern Ireland a No Deal exit breaks the terms of the Good Friday agreement and as surely as night follows day terrorist attacks in London will happen within two years of a No Deal exit. Without the infrastructure offered by the EU single market as a framework the Good Friday agreement cannot be revived and another few decades of strife seems inevitable. The only viable outcome will be a United Ireland with those few disgruntled Unionists being invited to live in the United Kingdom they avow such affection for and probably being denied entry.

In the case of Scotland it will probably be a lot more peaceful. Scotland has been held up as the 'demon' by three successive Tory Prime Ministers now and that shit isn't going to go away when Indy II lands. I expect a result around 80% in favour of Scottish Independence as soon as the efforts to keep kicking that can down the road eventually run out - I doubt it will come to a terrorist attacks from that quarter but I don't rule it out.

2 - The end of the Royal Family.

Through no fault of their own - the Queen never turns down a request from the Prime Minister to exercise a Royal Prerogative- the British Monarchy were condemned to abolition this week.

Personally I don't see that as a bad thing. Ironically, many years ago in a debate on whether Britain should have a constitution, I foresaw a situation where a Prime Minister could use Prerogative powers to completely bypass Parliament and was told - categorically - by an MP that could never happen. That MP was Boris Johnson. We've already seen on prerogative power legislated away in most of our lifetime, the Fixed Term Parliament Act took away the power of the PM to dissolve Parliament and call an election on a whim, and the rest will now follow.

When the dust settles and chaos of No Deal unfolds one man will be left with the blame but the mechanism by which he took that step on the road to tyranny will also be examined. As by that time the Brexitshitters will want to remove any chance of prerogative powers being used to rejoin the EU. The remaining Prerogative powers will be legislated away and without them there is simply no basis for having a Royal Family (but at least this will please the racist who have gone off the royals since Megan Markle became one)

3 - The End of the Commonwealth.

Without the Royal Family as a figurehead and with the notion that the UK is headed so firmly down the road of Isolationism and Xenophobia expect the Commonwealth to disintegrate in a very short time - less than twenty years.


Cactus. Do you expect me to read all that? This is a message board, not somewhere to post a mini-thesis. tl;dr.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cannydc » Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:32 am

Fletch wrote:Gordon Brown Dumped Britain’s Gold to Save Goldman Sachs & JP Morgan

The Telegraph’s Thomas Pascoe has released a riveting account of why Gordon Brown dumped 400 tonnes of Britain’s gold (which has been dubbed Brown’s Bottom) intentionally at the lowest price possible.
Pascoe’s sources have informed him that one globally significant US bank was short 2 tonnes of gold at the time of the 400 tonne gold dump.

Goldman Sachs reportedly approached Treasury Head of Commodities Gavyn Davies to explain its dire predicament, and the immediate global financial consequences should The Vampire Squid default on its gold delivery obligations.

Pascoe alleges that Gordon Brown used various mechanisms (telegraphing the sale, using an auction rather than the London fix, etc) to intentionally sell Britain’s gold reserves at the lowest possible price to save the necks of Goldman Sachs’ massive gold shorts (which likely included JP Morgan which was even more massively short gold at the time).

When Brown decided to dispose of almost 400 tonnes of gold between 1999 and 2002, he did two distinctly odd things…
It seemed almost as if the Treasury was trying to achieve the lowest price possible for the public’s gold. It was.

From the Telegraph:
One decision stands out as downright bizarre, however...
.
.
.
Goldman Sachs, which is not understood to have been significantly short on gold itself, is rumoured to have approached the Treasury to explain the situation through its then head of commodities Gavyn Davies, later chairman of the BBC and married to Sue Nye who ran Brown’s private office.

Faced with the prospect of a global collapse in the banking system, the Chancellor took the decision to bail out the banks by dumping Britain’s gold, forcing the price down and allowing the banks to buy back gold at a profit, thus meeting their borrowing obligations.

https://www.silverdoctors.com/gold/gold ... jp-morgan/

That's what I was referring to in my comment to you about the gold sale earlier in the thread canny. It was Goldman Sachs who wanted it but as I said, JPM was also massively short.


Riveting - but extremely unlikely.

Brown was driven to diversify UK investments. In Scotland before the financial crash of 2008, many professional families held a high proportion of their savings in bank shares. Banks were safe, paid a decent dividend, and there was also the prospect of a capital gain. Then both the Royal Bank and Bank of Scotland went bust. Many families saw their savings wiped out. They thought they were being prudent, but they had failed to diversify.

He decided that selling gold and moving the proceeds into such investments as the (then new) Euro, and interest bearing US bonds (gold earns no interest) was the right thing to do.

Brown wasn't the luckiest man, and the fact that the price of gold rocketed soon after, which it had shown no signs of doing for many years before, was an unfortunate issue. However, had he not sold it (about £5bn 'lost' on the deal was reported) that same gold would still be sitting in a vault earning nothing and waiting for a precipitous price drop. Instead, Brown's investments have made real cash, billions, immediately available to spend.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by calitom » Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:22 pm

Cactus Jack wrote:
calitom wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
calitom wrote:gold has been a crappy investment except for those who sell it to the poor suckers.

Gold is a commodity as much a subject to the vicissitudes of market forces as any other commodity.

When there is a threat of war gold prices rise.


Gold is a lousy investment and that has been proven in every objective way.
Like I said---the only ones making money from this 'commodity' are those selling it to the poor suckers.
The buyers of gold are poor suckers for many reasons.2 big ones are 1)Gold prices in any decent time period underperform those of plain old cash--let alone stocks
2)The mark up for buying the gold goes from excessive to criminal.Sadly the best deals are probably from pawn brokers--not the
criminals who market gold online and on television.
The fear mongering is what the rip off artists use to sell gold at huge markup..like "there is a threat of war!! hurry up and buy our gold"!!

Gold is beautiful to look at....and in concert with it being part of an art piece or a specialty collector coin CAN be part of a great investment.

We agree.

I think it's a moment we should savour as it happens so rarely


a breakthrough has happened in the cosmos!

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cactus Jack » Wed Sep 18, 2019 5:58 pm

Cannydc wrote:
Rolluplostinspace wrote:Why do we value gold?

Mankind's attitude to gold is bizarre. Chemically, it is uninteresting - it barely reacts with any other element. Yet, of all the 118 elements in the periodic table, gold is the one we humans have always tended to choose to use as currency. Why?

Why not osmium or chromium, or helium, say - or maybe seaborgium?

I'm not the first to ask the question, but I like to think I'm asking it in one of the most compelling locations possible - the extraordinary exhibition of pre-Columbian gold artefacts at the British Museum?

He pulls out a copy of the periodic table.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25255957


My guess it that it's a combination of 3 things. It comes 'as is', i.e you can dig it out of the ground as lumps of pure gold - it is rare but was discovered long before many of the rarer elements e.g. Osmium etc - and it makes beautiful jewellery making it something to be flaunted and admired.

The Aztecs didn't value gold all that much.

Re: Opinion: The lasting effects of a No Deal Brexit

Post by Cannydc » Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:35 pm

Rolluplostinspace wrote:Why do we value gold?

Mankind's attitude to gold is bizarre. Chemically, it is uninteresting - it barely reacts with any other element. Yet, of all the 118 elements in the periodic table, gold is the one we humans have always tended to choose to use as currency. Why?

Why not osmium or chromium, or helium, say - or maybe seaborgium?

I'm not the first to ask the question, but I like to think I'm asking it in one of the most compelling locations possible - the extraordinary exhibition of pre-Columbian gold artefacts at the British Museum?

He pulls out a copy of the periodic table.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25255957


My guess it that it's a combination of 3 things. It comes 'as is', i.e you can dig it out of the ground as lumps of pure gold - it is rare but was discovered long before many of the rarer elements e.g. Osmium etc - and it makes beautiful jewellery making it something to be flaunted and admired.

Top