Supposedly seeking to placate Ron Paul’s supporters, the GOP strategists have included in the party’s 2012 platform’s first draft a call for a “gold commission,” which would investigate again linking the dollar to gold. Linking the dollar to gold would limit—if adhered to, which has proven to be a problem for politicians—the number of dollars that the government/Fed could create. The Establishment sees the idea as dead on arrival.
There’s an interesting interview with Marshall Auerback of Pinetree Captial Management posted over on Mineweb.com. It’s interesting not because of any particular subject matter, but rather the complete contradictions presented therein. The first half consists of a well-reasoned case for owning gold and why it is being remonetized in an overextended financial system. By contrast, the second half is a fallacy laden justification of many of the failed policies that are driving people to own gold.
In May, I presented what appeared to be an extremely bullish divergence between the price of silver and its Accumulation-Distribution Line (ADL). I asked whether the price of silver would rise to meet its ADL or would the ADL fall to match the price? Two and a half months later, there has been absolutely no resolution to this situation. The divergence remains, and if anything, has actually increased slightly.
While several heads of Federal Reserve Banks have called for more quantitative easing, Boston’s Fed Head Eric Rosengren has upped the ante and is calling for “open-ended” quantitative easing of a “substantial magnitude.” No joke. Apparently, Rosengren has bought the John Law/John Maynard Keynes position that money is merely a medium of exchange and that
