No problem, Pibe. I was not prepared to let him off so easily this time. If he wants to make outrageous comments I only ask that he bring a little more fact based evidence to support his claims or they are not credible. I don’t enjoy hearing the blame game as a substitute for proper analysis of market dynamics.

oooooo bird man and glen luke diss up to YO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OHuwwni8ts ! bye bye

You have to define “free market”.

I agree that Goldman or whatever can do what it wants to do. The organizations just have the deep pockets needed to accomplish what the desired outcome is.

And the expertise, Al. They have some of the best talent on the planet on their payroll.

OK Al. I think I will return to biting my tongue on the whole topic of conspiracy and manipulations. I lost my temper with Gary yesterday but probably that is a waste of everyones time. Better to be peaceful.

Certainly everyone is entitled to their own point of view. All I am really saying is that it is mathematically impossible for the Federal Reserve and a handful of key banks to materially affect the outcome of normal market activities. That is not to say that some funny business is not happening. We did have the Libor scandal after all and that is certainly documented proof of how insiders can rig markets.

In these other cases though the probability of backroom shenanigans drops simply because of the vast level of liquidity, market size and the numbers of participants. The Federal Reserves daily bond buying activities represents barely 1% of the daily volume of gold trades in London. We would have to make some pretty wild assumptions of leverage to come close to accepting that the Fed and their friends really have the power to do much influencing on that score.

Not that 100 to 1 leverage ratios are impossible but lets not forget that the purpose of buying bonds is to create assets on their balance sheet. How is that even leaking out into the world where the manipulators live? We would need to discover the mechanics of how that would work first and then also set aside the fact that many of these supposed price suppression schemes are actually money losing propositions.

So then where do those massive losses end up? Who is absorbing them?

There is obviously this idea that the Fed can just create unlimited electronic money entries and then do as it pleases but in reality that is not quite true. They would have to hide the evidence and just that single aspect of a price suppression program makes the whole idea preposterous. We are not talking petty cash here after all.

Combined values for global equities markets, currency trades, bonds and commodities runs into the hundreds of trillions of dollars annually! That is why I am saying it is a mathematical impossibility for ANY one group, country or agency to significantly alter the outcome of our markets on a reliable basis.

There is just no evidence for it in any case and we might easily imagine the paper trail left but such an organized program would be a mile wide. I must therefore refuse to accept Gary’s arguments that manipulation is playing much of a significant role in what is now taking place. There is no master pulling all the strings behind a curtain and no forces capable of significantly altering market behaviour.

And that is perhaps a scarier thought than the idea of manipulation because it means we really are adrift and investing at the whims of forces well beyond our control. It means nobody can save us either. Fed interventions and those of the other major Central Banks have been unable to materially change the business cycle as they might have intended.

We are seeing proof of this in how commodity markets are failing before our eyes. Had those agencies th power to move prices as they chose would they not already have done it?

Talking from a psychological point of view (being psychology and economics my two main majors):

Wishful thinking: involves believing something is true because we want it to be true, not because there is evidence that it’s true.

Rationalization: is defined as a defense mechanism in which the individual attempts to justify his assumptions with faulty logic despite evidence to the contrary.

Denial: is defined as a psychological defense mechanism in which confrontation or with reality is avoided by denying the existence of reality.

Unfortunately Gary Savage is using these 3 defense mechanisms when he states that the government is manipulating the markets with the small sum of 85 billions per month and refuses to acknowledge the hard core evidence to the contrary.

Again; this is science and Gary’s statements compared to hard core data. Not bashing.

You are a pretty smart guy, Pibe

Thanks Pibe. I agree this is not “Gary Bashing”. All we are doing is putting a little match to the myths that have become so prevalent that they are accepted as facts by many who follow the markets. Just a few moments spent analyzing the hard numbers though will save us a lifetime of heartbreak and misunderstandings. I absolutely agree the Federal Reserve is influential of course. The global community of investors do indeed look to them for leadership and what they do on US soil can materially impact all parts of the globe. What they cannot do though is change prices other than through efforts at modifying sentiments and behaviours of the millions who participate daily. The Fed is more paper tiger than a lion with sharp teeth. We note how most of their influence is achieved through little more than speeches and FOMC press releases than through the physical clubbing of market participants like a bunch of harp seals. At the end of the day most investors want hope. They would prefer the Fed succeed in lifting the markets and our spirits and so the influence has traction in markets where it is seen that policy intitiatives can lead to positive investor outcomes.

By the way, I really enjoyed your psychological analysis. I will apply it to myself too!

Big Al, I hope you get this message. There is something called National Security. Protecting the dollar is a national security issue. The Feds protect the dollar for this reason alone. We go to war for this issue. Don’t think we wouldn’t go to war over this. The value of the dollar means many things. Paying the pensioners is only a small part of this. I don’t know where you are coming from Big Al but you are not 2013 sir. I respect you. But, you have to put yourself in the place of the Fed. They got a lot of mouths to try and feed. If people gotta suffer on account of metals manipulation that is OK. They want to make it OK for as many as possible and stupid metals savers gotta be the sufferers that is OK. This is a managed market sir.

What are you talking about the big guys hate gold? They are trying to maintain the status quo so the pensioners can stay alive and the bankers can stay solvent.

Get your mind right Big Al. You are thinking in the gutter.

Glen

Once this paridigm is broken mr Big Al there is going to be a lot pensioners that will be broken. They will have to depend on family members for their bread. I am not looking forward to this since I live on the fringe. But, it is going to happen. Market manipulation? Go to the GATA sight sir. I know, that takes effort. You can’t punch the necessary keys to get to Chris Powells archive of information nor can Birdman. Too much trouble to learn something new sir? No biggy. We pensioners only have a few more years to live. Unless something changes. And, I don’t think it will. mr Al? Wake up sir. I respect you because you have this sight. You have no interest in learning the truth. And, in fact you want to continue investing in stocks.
There is no panacea in the near future coming up.

Thanks for sharing your views,Glen.

I will repeat, Bill and Chris are personal friends. I have spoken at their conference and I have hosted fund raising events for them.