저자: JimRogers · 외국인
요약 보기
은 실물 인수 흐름과 가격 조작 의혹을 주장하며, 중앙은행들의 금 실물 회수와 미국 재정적자·이자부담 확대를 근거로 귀금속 보유 필요성을 강조. 페이퍼 시장 가격은 조작되며 대형 실물 인도가 이어진다고 주장. 구체 수치로 미국 국가부채 약 40조 달러, 미래 미적립 부채 약 170조 달러, 2031년 세수의 100%가 의무지출·이자에 쓰일 것이라는 CBO 전망 인용.
다듬은 글
Is it coincidence that after all those months of of silver deliveries that Trump called it a critical mineral in project vault to to to to have a government-backed accumulation program and price floors government-backed in order to incentivize domestic mining and and refining. Um, I can keep going on, but the point is simply this.
Price is simply a tool of misdirection. And when the most well-funded and well-informed traders on the globe are prioritizing physical possession. Look at France. What did they do? They just brought all their gold back. But that followed Bundesbank, the Dutch National Bank, Bank of Hungary, Turkey, Poland, Bank of Austria.
All of these banks, the Czech National Bank, they all brought their gold back from the Bank of England and the New York Fed, which was great convenience, added great liquidity to their gold holdings cuz you can sell it in a second on the LBMA or on the COMEX. But you know what they'd say? Yeah, I think I'll prefer holding it myself and at the expense of a little bit of convenience.
It all boils down to trust. We don't people don't trust the Treasury market. They don't trust our geopolitical and political motivations. They don't trust our our our anything these days and and that's including our exchanges. And that's why you are seeing removal of metal quietly, not too fast to cut off your nose to spite your face, but slow enough slowly draining so as to maximize what they can off take because if they try to do it all at once, they would get cash settled force majeure and the whole thing blows up.
But every month we're seeing the same thing and it is being missed completely and totally by the mainstream and that's really to me all that matters. Andy, [snorts] just so I understand what you're saying because maybe I'm missing it, is essentially that there are large groups out there using the paper market to get the price down so they can collect the physical?
That begs the question then, who would have the ability and the the balance sheet to manipulate the paper markets to the tune of billions and billions of dollars just so they can collect the physical? Am I understanding that correctly? And second, do you have any thoughts on who would have a balance sheet that would allow them to do this?
No, I you could argue on on many levels that it's it's the central banks. It's you know, the Chinese as example could short the paper price through a proxy bank in New York, which drives the price down and then buy through all of the dot exchanges across the globe because New York is the only place price is set.
You drive it down in New York and stand for delivery everywhere else. You [snorts] can talk about JP Morgan who paid a $920 million fine for manipulating the metals market and is still allowed to be the custodian of the world's largest silver trust and one of the largest gold trusts in the world. SLV and GLD by the infinite wisdom of the regulators, you can talk about how Bart Chilton went into his superior at the time which was Hank Paulson who by the way just came out and said he wants the government to prepare for a an event where the world starts dumping treasuries.
I digress. But he went into Hank Paulson's office when a deal was struck when J.P. Morgan took over the short position of Bear Stearns, the largest silver short in the world. When Bear Stearns failed largely because silver went from 9 to 21, Hank Paulson called him into his office with Ben Bernanke and then Jamie Dimon and said, "We need you to take this position." This is all on an interview, two interviews that Bart Chilton did with Chris Marcus of Arcadia Economics and also Andrew Maguire.
Both of these interviews were done within a week or two of each other. And after the last interview with Arcadia, he died under 2 weeks later. Now, not saying there's causation, but what he did say publicly, which made me fall off my chair, this is the head of the CFTC, Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
This is the commodity police. Uh he says, "Uh I was called into Jamie Dimon's office. Uh excuse me, I was called into Hank Paulson's office with Jamie Dimon and Ben Bernanke, and we told Jamie, 'Jamie, we need you to take the short position of of Bear Stearns. They've collapsed.' And he said, 'Fine, guys.
I'll take it. But J.P. will be in violation of position limits.' "Well, that's okay, Jamie. We'll give J.P. a few weeks to get it in order, get it in order, and then all is good.' And I'm sure there were some concessions made, and off he went. At the end of the dot time frame, Bart Chilton says, "I I went into my superior's office, that would be Hank Paulson, Treasury Secretary, and I said, 'Not only have they not removed their position, they've increased it.
They're in violation of our agreement and of antitrust law. They need to be prosecuted. He said, and I quote, I was told to back down, Bart. It's a political decision. Now, here again, if we think there are free markets anymore, I would argue I would that there is only manipulations. Free markets are not the case anymore.
And the metals markets are manipulated. Who has the balance sheet to do it? Who has the ability to sidestep antitrust law and be told to back down? I don't know, you tell me. Is it the US government? Could it be that because now this is a matter of matter of national security that the Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Pruitt, who who was a self-proclaimed gold bug in his previous life running a hedge fund, um is accumulating gold and silver on behalf of the US government through the Exchange Stabilization Fund, which he controls, and if it's of national security priority, no congressional approval needed.
Well, certainly platinum and silver would fall into that category. And you can make the argument gold is, too. And so I would simply say to you, ask yourself, who's got that kind of bread? Who can stand for delivery with no margin for billions and billions and billions? So you ask yourself, they drive the price way up, they suck in the speculators, they increase the margin, and rebalance ETFs, and the price collapses.
And then what happens? Biggest deliveries you've ever seen, and a lot of it leaving COMEX and China buying more than they ever have. And this is sovereign wealth money. This is big big money who isn't using margin who then said, "Thank you very much for the 30% subsidy. We'll stand for delivery. Have a great day." This is not mom pop.
These are the biggest, most well-informed, sophisticated traders on the planet, period. Who they are, guess that remains to be seen, but I have a good idea who they are and it it it rhymes with mental mink. You know, it's you got the central banks doing this would be my guess. Okay. So, right now there's a whole bunch of hoopla in Canada because Mark Carney announced what he's referring to as a $25 billion sovereign wealth fund called the Canada Strong Fund where they're going to start investing in resource projects.
Now, there's a lot of people who are more right-leaning that are up in arms but because it's completely unfunded. Normally, when you have a sovereign wealth fund, it comes from wealth or savings that the country already has. And Canada's not exactly in a position to just show up with $25 billion unless that's going to be deficit spending.
And the thing I wonder about, given the state of Canada and even the state of the US, is whether uh governments are now thinking about deficits differently. Right? Like you look at a country running a deficit to GDP ratio of close to 2.6%. Well, maybe doing 2% GDP growth and you realize that the math tells us that without that deficit spending, GDP would be negative.
So, I I almost wonder if governments are now setting deficit levels to GDP growth and just not caring about the consequences. Maybe they're looking for something that's politically palatable to increase that deficit spending so that they can buy political favor with the voting public. And if we're heading down towards a path where we wake up one day and tax dot revenues collected are less than the interest payments on the debt, where does all that head?
Do you think that this really is the logic of why people should own precious metals? Yeah, well, yeah. I mean, every every measured in gold, every major currency has lost over 90% of its value since 2000 with an average of about 94%. Um and when you talk about revenue and first of all, the fact that government spending is counted in GDP is a crock crap, if you ask me.
That there's no they don't produce anything, right? They just take from one and redistribute it to another. They take through taxation and then do other things, but they don't produce anything. So that the fact that that adds to the GDP is a joke. But, when you talk about your point about um tax revenue exceeding um everything, well, that's happening.
In fact, that's happening right now. Um in fact, the um the uh Congressional Budget Office, which is a non-partisan group, came out and they said that by 2031, 100% of tax revenue will go just to pay dot mandatory entitlement spending, which is all off-balance sheet, Medicare, Medicaid, social security, government, military pensions, and interest on the debt.
And then so that is a very big problem. When you talk about how big of a problem it is, we're 40 trillion in debt nearly. Right? Nearly 40, 39, will be 40 by the end of the month, probably next month. Um, but that doesn't include the 170 trillion in unfunded liabilities. A trillion seconds ago, Steve was 31,688 years ago.
So, when you talk about how big these done numbers truly are, they are too big. They are too big to ever be paid off, as far as I'm concerned. And so, you know, there comes a point where the debt begins to matter, where people who would otherwise invest, why would anyone anyone be foolish enough to hold their wealth in a currency that is being debased that way, where it's got the the melt or the the lasting quality of a melting ice cube?
And why would anyone hold treasuries that can be sanctioned, and also are being inflated away in an environment where interest rates have to go higher? And that's why it's very frightening and ironic that you see former Treasury Secretary Paulson calling on the US authorities to draft what he calls an emergency contingency plan for a potential collapse in demand for US Treasuries.
He said that the plan needs to be targeted and short-term and ready before a crisis hits, cuz when it does, it will be vicious. So, we have to prepare for that eventuality. It's the Treasury Secretary saying that. So, we're getting closer to that moment. By 2031, that number is. Now, there's something interesting that I read the other day, and I took a note on it, and I'll read it to you real quick.
It will just take a second. Um, it is called since you asked. Uh, it is called the Ferguson law, and it says, to your point, interest payments on the US national debt are are set to surpass $1 trillion in 2026. Some 88 billion a month, equal to spending on deficit and defense and education combined.
An excess of debt over defense is a violation of Ferguson's law. Ferguson's law states that any great power that spends more on debt servicing than on defense risks ceasing to be a great power. This is because the debt burden draws scarce resources towards itself, reducing the amount available for national security, and leaving the power increasingly vulnerable to military change.
So, you know, here's another scary thing. You got the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget estimated that a 1% rise in interest rates on the 10-year from band of band of age of 4.3 to 5, three would add 3.5 trillion to the US debt over the decade. Well, what if interest rates spike? And so, I think Ferguson's core point is simple.
When a great power spends more on interest than defense, its strategic position weakens. And unless the US makes some major entitlement reforms, which they can't do. Dole said, here's 2 trillion. They came up with 200 billion dollars or whatever, which was like 30 hours of spending. The only way out of the Ferguson limit dot is a productivity boom.
And I I don't know how they're going to do that with a manufacturing base that's been eviscerated through Triffin's dilemma and the world reserve currency standard.
Comments 0