Tag: news

By the SRSrocco Report,

The situation Americans face in the future will be nothing like anything they have experienced in the past.  While we have seen old footage and heard stories about the Great Depression (starting in 1929), we have no idea how bad things really were during the 1930’s.

At that time, approximately 25% of the American population were farmers.  Thus, when things really got bad, folks in the cities could move out and stay with their families or relatives on the country farm.  This is not an option for most Americans today as only 2% of the population are farmers and ranchers (source).

After WWII, Americans left the farms in large numbers for the allure of the great life in the cities and suburbs.  For decades, living in the city or suburb offered Americans a much easier way of life as the United States had plenty of cheap energy and resources to tap into.

Matter-a-fact, after the 1930’s Great Depression, U.S. oil production continued to increase for nearly 40 years:

Even though U.S. oil production declined some years (1930-1970), overall growth steadily increased in a linear fashion.  However, the recent surge in U.S. oil production (2007-2015), mainly due to the ramp up of expensive shale oil, moved up exponentially and will likely decline in the same fashion.  This will have a profoundly negative impact on the U.S. economy and financial system.

Furthermore, the U.S. was able to pull itself out of the Great Depression due to the fact that it was just starting to tap into its huge reserves of cheap, high EROI (Energy Returned On Investment) oil supplies.

For example, the massive Lakeview Gusher in California (1910) had an estimated EROI of 35,000/1 (source):

Basically, for one barrel of energy equivalent consumed to drill the Lakeview Gusher, it provided 35,000 barrels of oil.  Today, Shale Oil comes in at whopping 5/1 EROI and Oil Sands in Canada is about 4-5/1 EROI.

The EROI of U.S. Oil & Gas in 1930 was 100/1.  This includes exploration and production.  According to white paper, A New Long Term Assessment Of Energy Returned On Investment (EROI) For U.S. Oil & Gas Discovery and Production, the U.S. oil industry in 1919 was finding 1,200 barrels of oil for each barrel of oil equivalent energy it consumed in exploration.  Today it has fallen to less than 5/1.

As the U.S. oil and gas EROI declined, especially after 1970, the United States continued to thrive due to the Petro Dollar system and the ability to import high EROI from the Middle East and other oil exporting nations.  Unfortunately, this is not a situation that will continue for much longer as the massive debt in the system is unsustainable.

Comparing U.S. Debt 1929 vs Today

It’s quite interesting to see how much of a change has occurred since the Great Depression.  While things were very bad for Americans in the 1930’s, the amount of U.S. public debt per person was very low versus today:

According to several sources, the U.S. population was 122 million in 1929 while total public debt was $16.9 billion.  Thus, the average debt per American in 1929 was $139.  Compare that to a population of 320 million and $19.4 trillion in debt at an average $60,625 per American today.

NOTE:  A few readers suggested that I adjust for inflation in this example.  So, if we take $139 in 1929 and adjusted for inflation today, it would be worth $3,288.  So, the net difference would be nearly 20 times higher.

What is interesting about total U.S. debt is that after each World War, the total level of debt declined for several years.  For example, after the end of World War I, total U.S. debt fell from $27.4 billion in 1919 to $16.1 billion in 1930 (source).  This was also true after World War II when total U.S. debt fell from a high of $269 billion in 1946 to a low of $252.7 billion in 1949.  Over the next several, as total U.S. debt continued to increase, there were a few years that experienced declines (1951, 1956 & 1957).

However, after 1957, there wasn’t a single year that total U.S. debt declined…. it continued to increase for 58 consecutive years:

I believe the reason total U.S. debt was able to decline after each World War and during a few years in the 1950’s, was due to the relatively high EROI of U.S. oil and gas.  Moreover, as cheap domestic U.S. oil production peaked in 1970, oil imports had to increase to supply the ever-growing sprawl of the AMERICAN LEECH & SPEND SUBURBAN ECONOMY.

At the peak, the U.S. imported a staggering 14.1 million barrels a day of oil in 2005 (net imports).  This accounted for nearly three-quarters of total U.S. oil consumption.  Again, the Petro-Dollar system allowed the United States to exchange U.S. Treasuries (paper IOU’s) for oil.

As U.S. oil consumption declined after the 2008 Investment Banking and Housing collapse on top of increasing domestic shale oil production, net imports fell to a low of 4.1 million barrels a day in May 2015.  However, according to the EIA – U.S. Energy Information Agency’s recent update (Aug 24th), net oil imports jumped to 6.6 million barrels a day (source).

So, now that U.S. oil production has declined 12% from its peak last year, imports are again on the rise.  Unfortunately, many oil exporters in the future will likely not take U.S. Treasuries or Dollars for oil.  This will cause serious trouble for Americans as U.S. oil production continues to collapse over the next 5-10 years.

While U.S. debt has exploded, so has the value of gold.

Homestake Mining 1929 vs Barrick Gold Today

If we compare the two largest mining companies in the U.S., we can see what a difference has taken place since 1929.  I was able to obtain several older annual reports from Homestake Mining, which was the largest gold producer in the country during 1929.

Here is a rare copy of Homestake Mining’s 1929 Annual Report:

According to the USGS 1929 Gold & Silver Annual Report, Homestake Mining produced 312,328 oz of gold in 1929.  As we can see on the top of the annual report, Homestake Mining processed 1,437,935 tons of ore which resulted an average yield of 0.22 ounces per ton (oz/t).

Now, if we compare that to Barrick that produced 6.1 million oz of gold in 2015 while processing a staggering 139 million tons of ore, their average yield was a pathetic 0.04 oz/t:

When Homestake Mining was producing gold in 1929, it was extracting nearly enough gold per ton to make an 1/4 oz Gold Eagle (0.27 oz) versus Barrick in 2015 that wouldn’t have enough metal to make half of an 1/10 Gold Eagle (0.11 oz) (source).

Furthermore, Homestake Mining paid its shareholders a staggering $1.7 million in dividends on total revenues of $6.5 million that year.  Thus, Homestake Mining’s dividends were 26% of total revenue in 1929 and each investor received a stunning $7 per share.

Now, let’s look how this compares to Barrick.  Barrick paid a total of $160 million in dividends in 2015 on total revenues of $9 billion.  Which means, Barrick’s dividends were less than 2% of total revenues while investors received a paltry 14 cents for each share.

What a difference, eh?  By the way, Homestake Mining only had a little more than 251,000 outstanding shares versus Barrick’s 1,165 million…. LOL.  So, if an individual had 100 shares of Homestake Mining in 1929, they would have received $700 versus Barrick’s investors receiving $14.  The math is certainly not good for modern gold mining investors.

If we compare the cost to mine gold at Homestake Mining 1929 vs. Barrick Gold Q2 2016, there is a significant difference.  According to my adjusted income approach in calculating an estimated break-even for gold mining for each:

Homestake Mining 1929: = $17.33 oz (based on $20.63 spot in 1929)

Barrick Gold Q2 2016: = $1,152 oz (based on $1,259 spot in Q2 2016)

Even though Homestake Mining’s 1929 margin of a 16% profit was only twice as high as Barricks Q2 2016 margin of 8%, we can clearly see the real winners were the Homestake Mining shareholders who made 50 times more money in dividends than Barrick’s shareholders.

NOTE:  The margins were simply calculated by taking the cost of production by the spot price in both examples.

As we can see, producing gold for its shareholders was a much better deal for Homestake Mining investors than for Barricks.  Furthermore, a Dollar could buy a lot more gold in 1929 than it can today.

U.S. Gold Certificates 1929 vs Federal Reserve Notes Today

Prior to President Roosevelt confiscating gold in 1933, the U.S. Treasury issued Gold Certificates.  Thus, any American could go into a bank prior to that period and turn in their paper Gold Certificate and demand actual gold.  Today, if you tried to do that at any bank, they would bring everyone out from the back and laugh at you.

Below are two $20 bills.  The top is a $20 Gold Certificate and the bottom is a $20 Federal Reserve Note:

The $20 Gold Certificate was printed in 1929, and the $20 Federal Reserve Note was printed 80 years later in 2009.  Both are bills, but one was backed by real gold and the other is now backed by $19.4 trillion in U.S. Public Debt.  That is why it’s called a “Note.”

We must remember, a “Note” is an obligation.  When you take out a home mortgage or car loan, it can be also called a “Note.”  So, all those Federal Reserve Notes we keep in our wallet or purse are debts or obligations we owe, rather than an asset such as a Gold Certificate that represents physical gold.

Here is another Gold Certificate printed in 1928:

This $1,000 Gold Certificate was rare and even rarer today.  Of the 84,000 printed that year, there are only 200 available today to collectors (source).  The value of this $1,000 bill today ranges from $4,000 to over $20,000 depending on the condition.  So, not only did this $1,000 Gold Certificate represent a lot of value in gold at the time, it’s worth 4 to 20 times more today.

If an American took that $1,000 bill and went to the bank to demand gold bullion in 1929, he or she would receive (50) $20 gold coins.  The amount of gold in a typical $20 St. Gaudens gold coin was 0.967 oz. (source).  So, even though the spot price of gold in 1929 was $20.63, when we multiply it by 0.967, we end up with almost $20.

Regardless, that $1,000 Gold Certificate in 1929 would enable the holder to a nice bag full of 50 gold coins.  The average cost of a new car in 1929 was $643 and a new median home price was $7,246.  Today, $643 would only pay half of the taxes on a $25,000 car.  Furthermore, $7,246 would be less than a third of one percent of a down payment for the typical $250,000 house today.

Lastly, $1,000 today in (10) $100 bills won’t even buy you one ounce of gold.  All you could get today for $1,000 is 3/4 oz gold compared to 50 oz in 1929.

What a change in 85 years… eh?

Americans are in real trouble and I don’t continue to say that just to be pessimistic or negative.  U.S. oil production is about to collapse while total U.S. public debt of $19.4 trillion turns out to be a staggering $60,625 for each American.  There is no way this debt will ever be repaid.

Some investors and analysts believe there should be a “Debt Jubilee” or a wiping out of debt so we can start fresh.  I would like to remind these “Einsteins” that wiping out debt also wipes out the supposed assets on the other side.  When assets implode, so will the capital available to the market for future economic activity.

Anyhow, U.S. debt will implode due to the collapse of U.S. domestic oil production on top of falling oil imports in the future.  This will create an event in history that will make the population understand the value of GOLD & SILVER once again.

While Americans have been suffering 45 years of Gold & Silver Monetary Amnesia, PRECIOUS METALS RELIGION will finally wake up the living dead.  However, when this occurs, I would imagine most Americans will be caught by surprise as many will be wondering why their Banks are closed for an extended “Holiday” and their brokers are no longer taking their calls.

While I have tried to wake up family and friends about whats coming, I hate to say…

GOD HATH A SENSE OF HUMOR…..

Lastly, if you haven’t checked out our new PRECIOUS METALS INVESTING section or our new LOWEST COST PRECIOUS METALS STORAGE page, I highly recommend you do.

Check back for new articles and updates at the SRSrocco Report.

via http://ift.tt/2bN7wvm SRSrocco

Authored by The Daily Sheeple's Joshua Krause, via SHTFPlan's Mac Slavo,

I have often wondered if/when the softening on the War on Drugs would be used as a weapon of disarmament. This is an interesting ploy by the feds to use the move towards decriminalizing marijuana as a means of barring Second Amendment lovers from purchasing guns – since it will be argued that marijuana introduces a dangerous or ‘irrational and unpredictable’ element. Of course, they don’t ban alcoholics or prescription pill poppers from purchasing weapons, but I’m sure that many people would be interested in doing so if they could.

 

The rise of Obamacare has also institutionalized medical snitching on patients. Whereas their data and personal information were once held sacred, today they are precious fragments in the age of data analysis, and federal reporting. If/when mental health patients confess to certain trigger words (i.e. feeling angry, violent, suicidal, anti-government, depressed, etc), doctors will flag patients as potentially dangerous. Felons are barred from purchasing, and that category is likely to expand – in the name of Sandy Hook, the Pulse nightclub and whatever else they roll out on the table.

 

Doctors have been encouraged by executive order to ask patients about guns… and no doubt keep records on this special category of patients. Likewise, admitting to drug use (as one does by signing up for a medical marijuana list-database) will be used to flag patients as potentially unstable, dangerous and/or otherwise unfit for owning a gun.

 

Put those altogether, and there is some pretty ripe potential for abuse, and broad platform to keep a wide gulf between the 2nd Amendment and the world that the U.S. population lives in – one that government sees as sick and needy, and in need of stern supervision and social intervention. This is the beginning of the bureaucratic end of our freedoms.

Medical Marijuana Card Holders Can Now Be Banned From Owning Guns

by Joshua Krause

The battle between the federal government and the states on marijuana legalization has been ongoing for years, but now it’s being fought in an arena that most people have never considered. Now the feds are trying to restrict gun ownership for legal users of marijuana.

A federal government ban on the sale of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.

 

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applies to the nine Western states that fall under the court's jurisdiction, including California, Washington and Oregon.

Five years ago a woman named S. Rowan Wilson tried to buy a firearm in Nevada after she received a medical marijuana card. The purchase was turned down by the gun store, because marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, and there are federal laws that prevent illegal drug users from buying firearms. That led to a lengthy court battle which concluded this week.

The 9th circuit court decided 3-0, that banning the sale of firearms to a medical marijuana card holder, does not violate the Second Amendment. The court determined that since marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, and since it can be assumed that anyone possessing a medical card is probably using the drug, they can be prevented from buying a gun.

Senior District Judge Jed Rakoff of the 9th circuit court, explained his ruling by saying that marijuana “raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.”

So far there’s no word on whether or not the court will prevent gun sales for consumers of alcohol, or any other legalized drug that causes unpredictable behavior.

via http://ift.tt/2cd36gs Tyler Durden

Upon arrival on Saturday in China as part of his last visit to Asia as US Commander in Chief for the periodic photo-op that is the G-20 meeting, something unexpected happened: a very undiplomatic greeting when an unusual tarmac altercation involving Chinese and U.S. officials, including national security adviser Susan Rice, devolved into a shouting match by a member of the Chinese delegation.

After Air Force One landed in Hangzhou, a Chinese official began shouting at White House staff after the traveling American press contingent was brought onto the tarmac, according to pool reports. The Chinese official also attempted to block Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes after they lifted a blue rope holding back press and walked to the other side of it, closer to Obama.

Barack Obama arrives on Air Force One at Hangzhou Xiaoshan International Airport
in Hangzhou in eastern China’s Zhejiang province on Sept. 3 for the G20 summit

As Politico reports the press pool was brought under a wing of Air Force One where the pool was supposed to stay behind a blue rope. However, a member of the Chinese delegation began shouting at White House staff, demanding the pool leave the arrival scene. A White House official said Obama was our president and Air Force One was our plane and that the press was not going to move from the designated area. The Chinese official angrily responded “This is our country. This is our airport.”

“They did things that weren’t anticipated,” Rice told reporters afterwards.

However, the disagreements between Chinese and American officials did not just stay on the tarmac. At Westlake Statehouse, where the summit was being held, a group of White House staff arriving before Obama was stopped at a security checkpoint. A heated argument between Chinese officials and White House staff, protocol officers and Secret Service, who were trying to enter the building separately from the press, broke out at the security gate.

According to the pool report, U.S. officials could be heard arguing in Chinese with Chinese officials over how many Americans could go through security at one time, how many White House officials were allowed to be in the building before Obama’s arrival, and which U.S. officials were on a security list.

“The president is arriving here in an hour,” a White House staffer was overheard saying in exasperation. A Chinese official assisting the U.S. officials became angered by how the guards were treating the White House staff as the disagreement escalated.

“You don’t push people. No one gave you the right to touch or push anyone around,” he yelled in Chinese at one of the Chinese security officials.

Another Chinese official trying to help White House staff stepped between the two men arguing, as the security official looked like he was going to throw a punch, according to the pool report. “Calm down, please. Calm down,” a White House official said.

“Stop, please,” said a foreign ministry official in Chinese. “There are reporters here.”

Another disagreement occurred when officials and press finally made it inside the building. Chinese officials told White House press officers that only 10 American journalists were allowed in. “That’s not right,” a White House press official said.

Two U.S. journalists were left outside and were not allowed to stand in the room, despite White House press officials insisting there was space. “There’s space. They are print reporters. They would just be just standing,” one White House press officer said. The two reporters were eventually granted access.

The unprecedented show of disrespect for a standing US president and his envoys took place after Obama once again criticized China over the ongoing territorial dispute in the South China Sea. As cited by Reuters Obama said  that China needs to be a more responsible power as it gains global influence and avoid flexing its muscles in disputes with smaller countries over issues like the South China Sea, U.S. President Barack Obama told CNN in an interview to be aired on Sunday.

Obama, who meets with President Xi Jinping at a G20 summit next week in China, told CNN the United States supports the peaceful rise of China but that Beijing had to recognize that “with increasing power comes increasing responsibilities,” a quote taken by Obama’s speechwriter from the Spiderman movie. 

Obama said Washington had urged Beijing to bind itself to international rules and norms to help build a strong international order. “Where we see them violating international rules and norms, as we have seen in some cases in the South China Sea or in some of their behavior when it comes to economic policy, we’ve been very firm,” Obama told CNN. “And we’ve indicated to them that there will be consequences.”

“If you sign a treaty that calls for international arbitration around maritime issues, the fact that you’re bigger than the Philippines or Vietnam or other countries … is not a reason for you to go around and flex your muscles,” Obama said. “You’ve got to abide by international law.”

So far China not only refuses to abide by international law, showing a clear disregard for US warnings about “consequences”, but with today’s latest diplomatic incident has telegraphed to the world that its respect for the US presidential institution has never been lower.

via http://ift.tt/2bTuApf Tyler Durden

Last week, following the recent dramatic decline to slam the Vancouver housing market after a 15% luxury real estate sales tax aimed at foreign purchasers, ground the local market to a halt, we reported that China’s angry consul general to Vancouver lashed out at the local government for finally bursting a housing bubble which doubled Vancouver real estate prices in the past decade.

“Why a 15 percent tax? Why now? Why this rate? What’s the purpose? Will it work?” Liu Fei, China’s infuriated consul general in Vancouver, said in an interview with Bloomberg. “The issue is how to help young people afford housing,” she added. “I’m not sure even a 50 percent tax would solve the problem.”

 

Arguing that the tax would halt the influx of hot Chinese money into Vancouver – which many have claimed is the reason for Vancouver’s stratospheric housing prices – Liu said that “this is a big country with a small population. It needs immigration to grow the economy.” The implication was that absent a hospitable housing market where Chinese hot money launderers can park their cash, it is Canada that would suffer.

Whether or not the conflicted Chinese consul is correct, remains to be seen, but for now one thing is undisputed: the Vancouver market is being roiled as the latest numbers from the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver confirmed. In August, the board reported that Vancouver home sales fell 26% from a year earlier, while prices slid as the 15% tax crimped demand. Compared to July, sales tumbled by 23% to 2,489 transactions. Detached properties were hit hardest as sales dropped 45% from a year
earlier. Transactions of attached homes such as town-houses dipped 25%
and apartment sales were down 10 percent.

 

Meanwhile, the average price of detached Vancouver properties crashed, dropping 17% on the month, and 0.6% on the year, to C$1.47 million ($1.13 million) in August, the lowest price since September 2015.

Dan Morrison, president of the real estate board, said in the press release that Friday’s data show the tax “appears to have added” to a slowing trend that started several months ago by “reducing foreign buyer activity and causing some uncertainty amongst local home buyers and sellers.”

“It’ll take some months before we can really understand the impact of the new tax. We’ll be interested to see the government’s next round of foreign buyer data”, Morrison said adding that there’s an “imbalance between supply and demand in most communities”, with the supply clearly overwhelming demand.

Needless to say, the realtor’s group opposed the tax after it was announced as it also applied to pending transactions, leaving many buyers shouldering an unexpected tax and sellers with scuttled deals. He said in the statement the board is seeing fewer detached home sales, particularly in the highest price points.

As sales slow and prices cool, new listings of properties increased only slightly from last year, rising 0.3 percent. “What we’ve seen in August is mostly buyers going on the sidelines, either being forced onto the sidelines because they were cut by the sales tax and decided not to proceed with sales, or folks out there saying ‘let’s see how the dust settles,’” Robert Hogue, senior economist at Royal Bank of Canada, told Bloomberg. “So far we haven’t seen necessarily a flood of properties being listed on the market.”

One look at the chart above, however, and what is so far only a trickle will become a flood shortly as local sellers “on the sidelines” realize just how big the drop now is.

Meanwhile, the bursting of the housing bubble is bad news for the local government: as the city cools, governments of all levels are deriving the biggest share of their revenue from housing and related activities, about 17%, in about two decades, according to a National Bank of Canada report this month.

Worse, the August swoon is just the beginning: the city is still the least affordable in the country. As reported previously, roughly 90% of a typical family’s income goes to service a mortgage and pay property taxes and utility bills in Vancouver, double the national average, according to a Royal Bank of Canada second-quarter report. The benchmark price of all housing types, a custom measure used by the real estate board which excludes some properties, showed the price of a home on that measure increased 31 percent from a year earlier in August to C$933,100.

If the Vancouver bubble has indeed burst, keep an eye on the blue line in the chart above whose rate of fall is only set to accelerate.

via http://ift.tt/2c9ABlN Tyler Durden

The physical gold delivery failure to clients of Deutsche Bank who own Xetra-Gold, the gold exchange traded commodity, was confirmed yesterday by Deutsche Bourse who said that the inability to deliver gold was not limited to Deutsche Bank and that other German banks were having “problems” delivering gold.

This is yet another example of a bank not making good on promises to redeem their gold investment products, as seen with ABN Amro in 2013 and indeed Julius Baer in recent months as we pointed out yesterday (see here). It is the latest example of the unappreciated risk of owning gold exchange traded commodities (ETCs), exchange traded funds (ETFs) and indeed most institutional gold investment offerings.

Xetra-Gold filed an official response yesterday regarding the physical gold delivery failure, one which can be read in German on the following page and was reported and commented on by Zero Hedge overnight:

What is notable is that instead of immediately refuting the story – as it should have done if there is no breach of prospectus covenants – and declaring that any and all physical gold demands have and will be satisfied, Xetra took a very circular approach to responding, one which in effect confirmed our concerns, that the issue was not so much with Xetra, but with the sponsor bank, in this case Deutsche Bank.

Furthermore, the author of the original godmode article, Oliver Baron, penned his own reaction, in an article titled “Deutsche Boerse takes a stand.” He writes that “yesterday’s article “Xetra-Gold: Nothing but a scrap of paper?” has struck nerves: Not only that GodmodeTrader was cited among others, at “Zero Hedge” a financial website influential on Wall Street, but also at Deutsche Bank and at Deutsche Boerse, where the article has caused quite an internal stir, as Godmode traders was informed.”

He further writes that Deutsche Boerse Commodities has released a fairly spongy formulated observation on the physical delivery of Xetra-Gold. The key phrases are:

“The Deutsche Boerse Commodities GmbH points out that holders of Xetra-Gold shares can at any time exercise the right to delivery of securitized gold. Deliveries are made via a branch of a bank indicated by the investor. The requirement is that the branch offers this service because the delivery can take place only through the depository bank of the investor.”

As we reported yesterday, what made this particular “failure to deliver” notable is that the original client had asked for delivery via a Deutsche Bank branch, the same bank as the ETC’s sponsor, which is why, as we noted before, this appears to have been a problem involving not Xetra-Gold, as much as Deutsche Bank itself.

Baron agrees. As he writes, “in other words, it depends, according to Deutsche Boerse Commodities, on the particular bank branch whether the physical delivery can be carried out.”

And, as we learned last night, it does appear that if the delivery is requested at a Deutsche Bank branch, the answer is no.

But this is where it gets even worse. As Baron adds, in a telephone conversation with the author, the Deutsche Boerse Commodities exchange was unwilling to supply further information to Godmode traders whether physical delivery is generally feasible at most bank branches or not. And worst of all, “the exchange was unable to name any bank which is in a position to deliver physical gold without problems.“

Baron’s conclusion: “the “right” for actual delivery at Xetra-Gold is theoretical: physical delivery is only possible if the respective bank branch also cooperates. Suspicious gold investors should consider Xetra-Gold as another form of paper gold and not as a physical gold investment.”

Our take is slightly different: while we already know that physical delivery at Deutsche Bank appears to have been compromised, according to the Deutsche Boerse response, the ability of any and every other bank in Germany to deliver gold is now likewise questionable. Which begs the question: where is all the physical gold?

The risks inherent in investing in gold exchange traded funds (ETFs) and exchange traded commodities (ETCs) is something that we have warned of since these new gold proxy investment instruments came on the scene in 2003.

See Beware of Exchange Trade Funds (ETFs) Bearing Gold and watch the Bloomberg video from 2012 below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=M-gfXeme6kA
Physical Gold Favored Over Derivatives at GoldCore: See Bloomberg Video Here

Paper, digital and financial proxies for gold are not real gold. Hence the importance of owning coins and bars either in one’s possession or in allocated and segregated storage in the safest vaults in the world.

Paper is paper, digits are digits and gold is gold. Gold is not a safe haven unless the buyer owns actual physical gold in the safest way possible.

Why take chances with your safe haven asset and money? Test your gold investment vehicle or provider today and see can you take delivery of at least some of your allocation to gold.

If you can’t take delivery of physical gold, you don’t own gold. If you cannot hold your gold, you don’t own your gold. Possession remains 9/10s of the law. This will especially be the case in the coming global financial and monetary crisis.

Gold and Silver Bullion – News and Commentary

Gold steady ahead of U.S. jobs data (Reuters)

Gold prices gain in Asia as investors cautious ahead of nonfarm payrolls (Investing)

Gold Volatility Falls to Year’s Low as Investors Await Jobs Data (Bloomberg)

US Mint gold coin sales down 42% on year to 1.8 mt in August (Platts)

Shrinking manufacturing activity surprise blow to economy, market shifts on Fed (CNBC)

Deutsche Bank refuses clients’ demand for physical gold (RT)

TICKING FINANCIAL TIME BOMB? Deutsche Bank ‘refuses’ customer demands for gold withdrawals (Express)

Gold withdrawals from New York Fed are increasing (Zerohedge)

Giant Oil Companies Are Reaching Their Breaking Point (Casey Research)

How Silver Prices Get Set – Butler (Silverseek)

Gold Prices (LBMA AM)

02Sep: USD 1,311.50, GBP 987.95 & EUR 1,172.74 per ounce
01Sep: USD 1,305.70, GBP 1,985.80 & EUR 1,172.13 per ounce
31Aug: USD 1,314.45, GBP 1,000.30 & EUR 1,179.19 per ounce
30Aug: USD 1,318.85, GBP 1,008.39 & EUR 1,180.90 per ounce
26Aug: USD 1,324.90, GBP 1,002.95 & EUR 1,173.33 per ounce
25Aug: USD 1,324.50, GBP 1,001.06 & EUR 1,172.98 per ounce
24Aug: USD 1,337.30, GBP 1,010.73 & EUR 1,185.38 per ounce

Silver Prices (LBMA)

02Sep: USD 18.75, GBP 14.15 & EUR 16.76 per ounce
01Sep: USD 18.65, GBP 14.08 & EUR 16.73 per ounce
31Aug: USD 18.74, GBP 14.27 & EUR 16.82 per ounce
30Aug: USD 18.78, GBP 14.35 & EUR 16.82 per ounce
26Aug: USD 18.67, GBP 14.15 & EUR 16.54 per ounce
25Aug: USD 18.50, GBP 14.02 & EUR 16.39 per ounce
24Aug: USD 18.84, GBP 14.23 & EUR 16.70 per ounce

Recent Market Updates

– Avoid Paper Gold – “Gold Delivery” Refused By Gold Exchange Traded Commodity
– Debt Bubble in Ireland and Globally Sees Wealthy Diversify Into Gold
– “Why Case Against Gold Is Wrong” – James Rickards
– Obama To Leave $20 Trillion Debt Crisis For Clinton Or Trump
– Gold Bullion Averages Biggest Seasonal Gains in September Over Past 20 Years
– Gold Futures See Massive $1.5 Billion “Non Profit” Liquidation In “One Minute”
– Jim Grant Is “Very Bullish On Gold”
– Germans Warned To ‘Stockpile’ Cash In Case Of ‘War’
– Ireland’s Biggest Bank Charging Depositors – Negative Interest Rate Madness
– Rothchilds Buying Gold On “Greatest Experiment” With Money In “History of the World”
– Gold – “Mother of All Bull Markets Has Only Just Begun” – Grandich
– 45th Anniversary Of Nixon Ending The Gold Standard
– Gold In UK Pounds Collapses 38% Versus Gold and 56% Versus Silver Year To Date

via http://ift.tt/2bK1f0h GoldCore

At 7:02:44 am local time, a major, M5.6 earthquake hit 14km northwest of Pawnee, Oklahoma, and rattled a swath of the Great Plains, from Kansas City, Missouri, to central Oklahoma. The quake was especially felt in Oklahoma City, while residents as far as Dallas said the shaking continued for at least 10 seconds.

It’s not yet clear whether the earthquake caused any injuries or damage. Earthquakes hit Oklahoma frequently, but they are typically below 4.0 magnitude and rarely are felt in the northeast part of the state, according to Tulsa World.

USGS Ntl Equake Info Cntr has determined an preliminary magnitude of 5.6, 14 Km NW of Pawnee @ 7:02 am. Aftershocks may occur. #earthquake

— USGS in Oklahoma (@USGS_Oklahoma) September 3, 2016

 

People in Kansas City, Missouri, Fayetteville, Arkansas, and Norman, Oklahoma, all reported feeling the earthquake at about 7:05 a.m. Saturday.

The shake map:

A seismograph of the quake when it hit, just after noon GMT.

 

 

The USGS has said on its twitter account that it hopes the M5.6 quake is not a foreshock of a similar or larger quake.

The Prague earthquake of 2011 was preceded by a strong 4.5 M quake. Hopefully this 5.6 was not a foreshock of a similar or larger quake.

— USGS in Oklahoma (@USGS_Oklahoma) September 3, 2016

via http://ift.tt/2chPS0S Tyler Durden

Submitted by Christopher Irons, Quoth the Raven Research

On Friday, a potential conflict of interest regarding Herbalife and the California Attorney General's office may have gotten a push from “notable” to “alarmingly important”.

Back in late 2014, Quoth the Raven was the first to break that the California Attorney General may have a conflict of interest as it relates to Herbalife because she is married to a partner at Venable, LLP, a well known and reputable California law firm that has been retained by Herbalife as recent as 2013.

The California Attorney General has, in my opinion, done her constituency a fascinatingly horrific disservice by failing to either comment or act on a company domiciled in her state that the FTC recently deemed as “misleading” and a “business opportunity that rewards recruiting at the expense of retail sales”. Ipso facto, the FTC seemed to call Herbalife a pyramid scheme without using the terms. Other Attorney Generals, like Illinois’ Lisa Madigan have already sought and received restitution for victims.

The bar is significantly higher and more important for Kamala Harris in California. Why?

States like Illinois have no previous history with the company, whereas the California Attorney General has failed to enforce and act on an injunction that has already been in place in her state for 30 years, barring Herbalife from doing specifically what the FTC complaint alleges it has done: misrepresent themselves, make misleading income and health claims, and run an endless chain business focused on recruiting.

But wait, there’s more.

The Attorney General has not only failed to comment on the company at all, but she has failed to comment on her potential conflict of interest and she certainly hasn't recused herself from her position – an action I would deem appropriate in order to fairly assess the 1986 injunction and perhaps take legal relief necessary to help victims in her state. Focus on California continues to get more prominent, as a recent consumer watchdog group wrote a letter trying to compel California to act on this injunction which was put in place 30 years ago specifically to prevent the harm that the company has caused over the last 30 years currently being addressed by the FTC.

But even that’s not the worst part.

As part of the recent FTC settlement, Herbalife needs to appoint an administrator to help audit their North American business and make sure that 80% of their sales are going to retail end users. This audit needs to be done by an objective body agreed upon by both the Federal Trade Commission and the company.

It was reported on Friday in the National Law Journal that there are many offices vying for the contract of independent administrator. Among those is once again – you guessed it – Venable, LLP. The same Venable that has been retained by Herbalife in the past, and the same Venable who has a partner married to the California Attorney General.

Now, I’ll state the obvious. By my standards, Kamala Harris has failed in her duties to enforce the 1986 permanent injunction and she has failed to remove the appearance of a massive conflict of interest. She could have shut this company down years ago, cutting the head off of a path of consumer harm detailed at length by the FTC’s recent complaint.

Choosing Venable, LLP as administrator to enforce the FTC’s recent settlement would be an inherently horrendous choice for the FTC because it is a firm that has been retained by the company in the past and it is clearly linked to the California Attorney General, whose inaction on this matter I can only describe as baffling and grossly negligent.

via http://ift.tt/2cnPjGi Tyler Durden