Forum Replies Created
I have been reading Armstrong since he was putting out the typewritten samizdat stuff from prison. He is a hard person to size up. I have a pet conspiracy theory (just a theory) that he cut some kind of deal to get out of prison in exchange for becoming a relentless gold basher on behalf of the powers that be 😉 
Since he got out of prison and started his new blog, without playing too much of an armchair psychologist – I can't help but detect a whiff of manicness to his posts (with a side-order of paranoia, although given what he's been through, who wouldn't be manic and a tad paranoid?)
But I am very wary of people who are "never wrong", there is a certain class of economic prognosticators and financial advisors who fall nicely into this category. While they would never profess to being infallible, they are pretty vehemently right about absolutely everything.
Armstrong's recollection of history is awe-inspiring, that is the main reason I read his stuff. When he starts talking about cycles and 2015.75 vs 84 months, whatever, my eyes start to glaze over. (I put it in the same mental file as Elliot Wave Theory – an elegant model with only one problem: it doesn't actually work).
Personally, I don't bother with "models" that predict exactly when some tectonic shift will occur down to the minute, those who get it right – occasionally – are lucky and nothing more (one piece of good luck can make an entire career, just look at Bob Prechter).
For me, just look at the extremes. When it comes to gold, Martin Armstrong is just another voice that adds to an overall timbre of "maximum pessimism" – and I think that is lot more accurate than any kind of precise cycle theory or computer model out there. When nobody wants to touch something (like gold) and everybody is pontificating on why it has nowhere to go but down (Armstrong, et al) it's probably a fairly safe time to be setting up for the contrary upmove. It worked for Templeton and it works for pretty well every value investor out there.
I had planned on starting a new thread here tonight "What's with Armstrong and gold bashing anyway?" when I read his latest in a string of gold bearish commentaries:
Which starts out with:
Gold never actually broke out in real terms – only nominal. Adjusted for inflation, gold has actually been one of the worse investments since 1980.
Which is a curious statement on a number of fronts. Gold never having exceeded its 1980 highs in inflation adjusted terms (which it hasn't) is to me actually an argument for a continuation or extension of the current secular gold bull (1999 – ????) – not a damning bear case.
Next, it's easy to make any investment look bad if you just pick arbitrary starting points, like he has pretty deliberately done here. Start in 2000 and compare returns on the DOW vs Gold and it looks different.
When you read between the lines of Armstrong's stuff you sometimes see oblique references to an eventual, bona fide gold bull market, sometime after 2017 or so.
Even so, let's say he's right, none of this still convinces me not own gold now.
It is hard to understand Armstrong's anti-gold thesis because it seems to be dissonant with his anti-government, anti-central bank observations. He's basically hammering on the view that hyperinflation will never happen and that is why gold will never go up.
But the possibility of hyperinflation is not the only driver of the gold price, not to mention confidence can be lost in one or more currencies without hyperinflation ever occurring.
Still, with all the money being printed it's hard not to expect rising inflation at some point (or, out here in the real world where we are all paying more for less, it's hard not to expect an eventual acknowledgement of inflation at some point. Unless they start reporting CPI "ex-everything").
 My pet conspiracy theory posits that several former gold advocates were personally compromised and coerced to swing over to the bearish side for purely propaganda purposes, including Martin Armstrong and Damon Vickers (long story)
whoa, I just saw my multiple posts now, sorry about that, not sure what happened.
After wrestling with goldmoney for about 6 weeks to get my old old account upgraded to a full holding, I wired them some money from my business (only my business is setup to easily send wire transfers) and they are sending it back because the wire source is different from my account.
I don't want to send it to them personally because that would mean taking the funds into my own hands which is taxable (kiss half of it good-bye)
So to send funds from my business I need to create a business account. A basic business account can only send and recieve funds from the same bank account, to attach multiple bank accounts to the business account I then need to do a full business account which apparently, by their own admission "is lengthy and cumbersome".
What I'm trying to accomplish is to amass savings in the form of precious metals outside my own country (this is money I've already paid taxes on, so there is nothing illegal going on) and if TSHTF and I need to relocate (in case it suddenly becomes illegal to not be on welfare) I want to be able to receive said funds into my hands in another country.
I just talked to a rep at bullionvault and again, you can only have a single bank account for in/out – but "in a pinch" (it's hard, again, by their own admission) you can get the physical stuff out. I have to read the document they just sent me.
This is harder than it sounds.
I've written two parts of a 3-part "Understanding Bitcoin" series on my own blog.
While I think the price action of late was undeniably a bubble, Bitcoin itself is somewhat of a game-changer.
I wouldn't put all my money into it or expect to "get rich" on it, but it won't hurt to build up a position in it, to compliment other hedges, safe havens and tools to avoid bail-ins, confiscations, etc.
In my case I've opened one of my web services business to accept Bitcoin payments, so it's just another payment method for us.
Part 1: BitCrash: Suck It Up Buttercups
Part 2: Bitcoin as an Evolutionary Monetary Response to "Calvinball Finance"
This is the crux of my point. While the kinds of people who frequent this board may or may not own guns (I don’t), the problem now is that “preparing” in itself has now been stigmatized. (Perhaps “more stigmatized”).
The media spin is basically: Nutcase “prepper” stockpiles guns, crazed son uses said guns in spree.
So to answer your question:agitating prop wrote:
Do people associate preparing with owning semi-automatic weapons?
They will now.
I run an internet company and for a few years we were the only one in our space that accepted e-gold as payment. I had some reservations about e-gold because compared to other DGC’s (Digital Gold Currencies), their governance was crap and I felt they were an accident waiting to happen – but they were ubiquitous so I went with them.
I just made sure to out-exchange the gold as fast as it came in, I used xgold.ca out of Quebec and whenever we amassed our threshhold in e-gold, we’d use it to buy gold maple leafs, US eagles or Krugerrands which they’d then ship to our office.
We pulled the plug on this as e-gold ran into problems, but it lasted long enough to build up a decent sized stash.
I am revisiting this now and am going to look at once again accepting some DGCs online, in particular I’d like to accept goldmoney(.com) (in fact we moved a portion of our earnings into goldmoney years ago and it’s still there) and have used pecunix in the past.
So it’s an interesting way to accumulate physical: you earn digital gold online via a DGC and then you out-exchange it for physical.
Like I said, it’s not for everybody. But if you’re a geek, .com-person, techie, programmer, etc. this is one way to do it.