Central Banks To Add To Gold Reserves russia is loading up

i thought the federal reserve us dollar is king around the world still? why is china and Russia loading up on gold at these cheaper prices, are they in the know that the us debt bubble of 17 trillion will soon make the us dollar toilet paper, as future global currency.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kitcone...add-to-gold-reserves-despite-turkeys-decline/

http://rt.com/business/russia-gold-reserves-june-729/

 

Maybe they're trying to recoup some of that 30+% loss they suffered from the peak.

 

There's two choices here, to stave off a collapse, as far as I reckon.

1) Print baby print (as we are doing).. This allows us to stave off collapse, but makes the situation worse and worse as years go on, until a catastrophic USD collapse, which would be inevitable in this case. No country who has ever had the global currency has solved this problem in this way. Other countries see this devaluation of currency, and are nowadays slowly beginning to lose confidence in the USD.

2) Overhaul basically everything.. Stop the QE, and raise the interest rates. Stop spending trillion after trillion on on pointless military (*)(*)(*)(*), banker bailouts etc.. Prosecute financial fraud at all levels.

We could seriously plug the hole enough to not sink, but we would HAVE to start this IMMEDIATELY, as the point of no return could be crossed very soon, and the window of opportunity slams shut.

 

but most of there past buying was below market price

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bullion_Depository
The United States Bullion Depository holds 4,578 metric tons (5,046.3 short tons) of gold bullion (147.2 million oz. troy). This is roughly 3 percent of all the gold ever refined throughout human history. Even so, the depository is second in the United States to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's underground vault in Manhattan, which holds 7,000 metric tons (7,716 tons) of gold bullion (225.1 million oz. troy), some of it in trust for foreign nations, central banks and official international organizations.

Well, if russia keeps buying at the same rate, it will only take them some 35 years or so to achieve US reserves.
China would have to by 1,000 tons a year for 10 years.

Boy the doom and gloomers sure have some funny wet dreams.

 

What calculations are you using to know what the "point of no return" is? Or you just throwing darts?

 

I didn't say when it would be.

I never threw such a dart.

 

This is easy. We are headed to WWIII. Russia is simply building its reserves.

The dollar is the only currency oil is traded in. That is why we keep going to war over there. We go to war to product the dollar, NOT the oil itself.

As soon as we invade Syria, Iran will jump in on Syria's side. When that happens, look for Russia and China to jump in against the U.S. also.

We will invade Syria under the guise of some stupid nonsense, but in reality, it is to keep oil being purchased only in US dollars. Please see Petrodollar warfare for more information.

Or you can watch this video:

[video=youtube;0tsUZinrCo8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tsUZinrCo8[/video]

 

So it can be next month, in 5 years, 20 years, or 5000 years? Interesting theory.

- - - Updated - - -

When will you guys learn. Oil is not traded in USD, it is priced in USD. Please learn the difference.

 

I don't think it will be 5000 years though..

It's like living under a volcano. It could go off in a few years or it could go off in ten minutes.

 

What will go off? You seem to think the economy is magic. We just went through one of the biggest economic collapses in American history. What are you imagining will destroy us in ten minutes?

The guy I replied to

 

They will sell it afterwards and do calculate that buyers are at hand when time comes,
I think it's more stable in gold prices that laying it with Forex.

 

you dont need a calculator or a Crystal ball to know that it wont be long before the wrecking is upon us, the news is fed is full speed ahead with the titanic no changes with the course...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/business/economy/fed-maintains-course-on-policy.html?_r=0

 

People said this 70 years ago. So you don't have any calculations? Just a "feeling"?

 

but your theory doesn't hold much water see because , russia is now buying its own gold from there mines..
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/25/russia-polyusgold-idUSL6N0FV10P20130725

there not showing any signs of selling

 

the fed is so lost there guessing there just data watching {video time 1:00 below} and now hoping the economy will take off, so i dont need a calculation, the direction of the wind is blowing the sails of the ship to the ice berg
[video=youtube;tSAicz9r7t4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSAicz9r7t4[/video]

 

The word buying is still there, it is still okay.

 

I'm not the one who thinks the economy is magic. The feds think that the USD is magic. Because it's the world reserve currency, they think they can just print as much as they want to combat our debt crisis, which is what they are doing. Meanwhile, spending is still at an all time high, especially wasteful spending, so debt still goes up anyway. But the people at the bottom have less valuable currency, so they become more impoverished. Tax revenues from them decline. Production and wages stagnate, as we see today.

Now the "magic" reserve currency doesn't work like that. Many countries have been in the same situation, with the reserve. All have come to the same problem. All have tried printing their way out of debt. ALL have failed. It is mathematically impossible. Look what happened to the UK in the mid 20th century. They lost their reserve status and their empire. They were neither the first nor the last to do so.

Now, 2008, if that's what you're referring to, wasn't a disaster of epic proportions. Not compared to this. Not only that, but we did nothing since (still haven't implemented the regs that were supposed to fix it) so the SAME toxic scenario is STILL around to happen again, only worse, especially with a massive bond bubble to boot.

Now, how do I know things will fall apart if we follow the same course? Basic maths. We are adding to our debt, and it gets bigger. You cannot possibly get out of debt without reducing the principle balance. The debt can do nothing but increase. So unless you're suggesting we can accommodate infinite debt, something's gotta give. Is that it? Can we support infinite debt?

 

So you have absolutely no real evidence, math, or calculations to determine any of this. If it's "basic maths", you should be able to easily show it. But nope, just this weird irrational fear of debt and fallacies about reserve currencies.

The funniest thing is the conviction in which you say this, like you truly believe you know what you are talking about. At least tucker agrees with you, he seems like a sane person that understands economics, lol.

 

i have a feeling they know that don't really know what they're talking about

they listen to guys like peter schiff and buy into his bs

[video=youtube;LiIYkFXUhHs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiIYkFXUhHs[/video]

 

Can we sustain infinite debt? Yes/no,

 

Yes.......

 

of course you don't understand the national debt


Why the U.S. Government Never, Ever Has to Pay Back All Its Debt

MATTHEW O'BRIEN - FEB 1 2013

How will our children, grandchildren, and sundry other friends and relatives too young to see an R-rated movie unaccompanied ever pay back the entire debt the government is piling up now? Easy. They won't. The U.S. government is never completely debt-free (except for that one time it sold land seized from Native Americans).

There's only one thing you need to know about the government. It's not a household. The government, unlike us, doesn't need to pay back its debts before it dies, because it doesn't die (barring secession or a sneak attack from across the world's longest unprotected border -- a most unworthwhile initiative). In other words, the government can just roll over its debts in perpetuity. That's the point Michael Kinsley misses when he says we "can't borrow forever," in an otherwise fine column trying to convince unemployment and deficit hawks that they actually agree on a "barbell" approach -- stimulus now, austerity later -- to fiscal policy. We can, and in fact have, borrowed forever. And that doesn't mean our debt burden will go up forever either. As you can see in the chart below, the government dramatically decreased its debt-to-GDP ratio in the three decades following World War II, despite mostly running deficits during the time.



Here's the budget math. Between 1946 and 1974, debt-to-GDP fell from 121 to 32 percent, even though the government only ran surpluses in eight of those years (and the surpluses were generally much smaller than the deficits). That's because nominal GDP -- just the cash size of the economy -- grew much faster than debt did. As Greg Ip of The Economist points out, fast nominal GDP growth, and the easy monetary policy that requires, is the only way governments have ever successfully reduced debt ratios in the past. Austerity alone will fail. (See Europe).

Okay, so maybe endless debt and deficits aren't a problem, but won't bond markets go Galt on us if we don't start to get our fiscal house in order? And even if the bond vigilantes turn out to be more like Godot, won't ever-increasing debt lead to ever-decreasing growth?

Well, as Mike Konczal of the Roosevelt Institute points out, the oft-cited Rogoff-Reinhart 90 percent debt-to-GDP threshold, after which growth supposedly slows, hasn't been proven. It's just a correlation. If anything, it probably gets the causation backwards, with low growth driving deficits and debt, not vice versa. Now, high deficits during high growth could crowd out private investment, and raise interest rates -- the fabled bond vigilantes -- but it couldn't bankrupt us a là Greece. We borrow in a currency we control, so we can never run out of it; we can always inflate as a last resort. This money-printing escape hatch protects us from the kind of self-fulfilling run -- where markets push up borrowing costs on fear of default, which, perversely, makes default more likely -- that had plagued Europe before ECB chief Mario Draghi promised to do "whatever it takes" to save the euro. The worst we have to fear is some kind of replay of 1992, with rising interest payments forcing some combination of tax hikes and/or spending cuts. There's a little bit more to fear than fear itself, but not too much more.

That leaves us with one last reason to worry, and one not to. Long-term healthcare spending is on an unsustainable trajectory ... but there are some signs it might already be slowing to more sustainable levels. That's the worry. The reason not to is the world's insatiable appetite for our debt. Treasury bonds are a kind of money for the financial system -- shadow banks in particular use them as collateral to fund day-to-day operations -- and they're a kind of money the financial system desperately needs more of now. This brave, new financial world was in embryonic form just 30 years ago, but is so developed today that demand for our debt is much less elastic than you might think.

In other words, don't think of the children. The government should keep borrowing today, and tomorrow, and every day after that. Being a government means you can borrow forever.



http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/why-the-us-government-never-ever-has-to-pay-back-all-its-debt/272747/

 

I see the insane asylum is letting folks out today.....