!-- Go to www.addthis.com/dashboard to customize your tools -->
Hardinvestor HardinvestorTraduire: TraductionSuivre:  Hardinvestor sur TwitterHardinvestor sur FacebookVidéos Hardinvestor DailymotionVidéos Hardinvestor YoutubePartager:  Partager

Hardinvestor- Investir sur l’or et l’argent Hard Investor   |  Silver is King, Go gold!

Pourquoi et comment investir dans l’or et l’argent ? Plus qu’un placement d’opportunité, il s’agit avant tout de sécuriser le pouvoir d’achat de votre épargne contre l’érosion monétaire et les conséquences de la crise systémique mondiale, tout en déjouant les pièges que réserve le marché de l’or et de l’argent, à l’investisseur non averti.


 

 Partagez  |

l'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?

Voir le sujet précédent Voir le sujet suivant Aller en bas
MessageAuteur
Messagel'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?
par marie Lun 18 Oct 2010 - 14:24

les réserves d'or de l'allemagne seront 'elles immolées sur le front de la guerre des devises??

voilà un graph qui en dit long ..



l'article vient en réponse au scénario de Jim Rickards qui prétend que la fed pourrait mobiliser à volonté, non seulement ses propres réserves, mais celles des pays qui font gardienner leur or aux us.. et qui afait grand bruit, ces dernières semaines..
le postulat de base de Rickard étant bien evidemment que les us disposent réellement des réserves qu'ils prétendent avoir

mais ceci est une autre histoire.. pour l'heure
je retiens que l'allemagne a eu la bétise de garder 66% de ses réserves aux usa .. et qu'elles doivent être amah, depuis longtemps, parties en fumée.. prétées à des bullions banks ..

quand aux 21%, stockées à Londres.. elles ont du et pareillement, faire la joie des clearing members du LBMA et de ses réserves fractionnaires ..


http://www.chaostheorien.de/artikel/-/asset_publisher/haR1/content/currency-war-germany-about-to-lose-66-percent-of-its-gold-reserves?redirect=%2Fstartseite



© Marie Forum Argent Or. reproduction interdite : pas de copier-coller. Faites un lien vers ce post. Suivez Hardinvestor sur Twitter et sur Facebook

   marie

  Skipper
 Skipper

  avatar

  Inscription :   05/02/2005
  Messages :   19786

Revenir en haut Aller en bas
MessageRe: l'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?
par marie Jeu 21 Oct 2010 - 12:26

en appendice, je vous mets l'article de Truman, ancien économiste de la FED et ancien assistant au trésor us...appelant les usa à mobiliser leurs réserves..
ainsi que les commentaires de Chris Powell, et la réponse de Jim Sinclair

****************

www.lemetropolecafe.com


America Should Open Its Vaults and Sell Gold - What gold?
A response to the former Assistant US Treasury Secretary

October 15, 2010
This article was originally published in the London financial times by Edwin M Truman, former Federal Reserve economist and former assistant U.S. Treasury Secretary. I added a few thoughts of my own.
Chris Powell of gata.org writes “For years Truman has been turning up at the center of the gold price suppression scheme, but GATA and its supporters might agree with him in principle on this one, insofar as getting central banks out of the gold business is the first step toward a free market in gold.”
When I ran a google search on “No Gold Left in Fort Knox”, I got 275,000 results.

*********************************

America Should Open Its Vaults and Sell Gold
By Edwin Truman
Financial Times, London
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
The original article can be found here:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2bbd4dbe-d5fe-11df-94dc-00144feabdc0.html
or google search: Edwin Truman gold
Gold is back in the news. Its price is soaring in what some analysts say is a reflection of a weak economy and a lack of confidence in government policies. (Stating the obvious) Naturally, investors are looking at a new sure thing in the expectation that prices will continue upward. (Subtly criticizing gold investors by calling it a “sure thing,” and insinuating that gold is in a bubble, with no supporting facts) My advice to the US government, however, is that this may be the best time -- to sell. Doing so would help President Barack Obama and Congress reduce indebtedness, at little cost. (If the dollar price of gold WAS ACTUALLY at a multi year peak, it might be the best time to sell, but that is clearly not the case. Only a return to sound fiscal and monetary policy by the federal government would cause that to happen, and what are the chances that politicians will suddenly turn honest? Also, the entire REPORTED gold supply of the United States Treasury and federal reserve would only bring in less than $400 billion at current prices. The fed creates that much currency for free in two seconds to spend on needless foreign wars, bailouts for its cronies, stimulus that doesn’t create jobs, and Mrs. Obama’s 20 Whitehouse staffers (servants). Not to mention, the US ACTUALLY OWNS ZERO OUNCES OF GOLD BULLION as reported by the Reagan Gold Commission in 1982. It is all owned, however much is now left, by the federal reserve as collateral for the national debt.)
It is an article of faith in bullion markets that the US will be the last country to dispose of its gold stock. (Idle speculation to cover the fact that it’s already been disposed of) For 30 years it has had a no-net-sales policy for reasons ranging from resistance by US gold-producing interests to concerns about the international monetary system. That assumption may remain plausible. Yet the administration has an obligation to re-examine its policy. (What policy? You can’t sell what you’ve already sold.)
The market price of gold has risen for more than a decade (and the dollar now buys 65% as much goods and services as a decade ago, so what’s your point?) propelled by low interest rates, the hype of the bullion dealers (holding large inventories)(Hype, what hype? Inventories? What inventories? Those are the LAST reasons that people are buying bullion today at these prices), and no doubt the normal amount of fraud and misinformation accompanying asset price bubbles.(blah, blah, blah Can you provide a few facts, please?) The Financial Times has reported that the precious metals industry expects the price to increase by a further 11 per cent over the next year. (A blatant underestimate. Gold has been appreciating an average of 17% annually in dollar terms over the past decade, and is currently accelerating.)
Meanwhile, the US Treasury holds 261.5 million fine troy ounces of gold. (I’ll believe THAT when I see the results of next year’s audit. And only if they assay the bars, not just count’em) The government has been sitting on it since the Great Depression, receiving no return. At the current market price of $1,300 per ounce, the US gold stock is worth $340 billion. The Treasury secretary, with the approval of the president, has the power to sell (and buy) gold on terms that the secretary considers most beneficial to the public interest. Revenues from sales must be used to reduce the national debt.
If the US were to sell its entire gold stock at the current market price, it would reduce the gross government debt by 2 1/4 per cent of gross domestic product. ( A drop in the bucket. About 1/4th of our current annual deficit, 1/10th of our annual federal budget) (US net government debt would decline by essentially the same amount because the US gold stock, listed as an asset on the balance sheet, is valued at only $42.22 an ounce.)(Yes, this would reverse the effect of a falsified accounting entry) Based on the average interest cost from 2005 to 2008, this reduction in debt would trim the budget deficit by $15 billion annually. (How wonderful! This would lower our current $1.5 Trillion dollar annual budget deficit by a staggering 1%, on a one time basis, and our entire national cache of gold bullion would be gone forever. This amounts to less than a rounding error.) Thus, the Obama administration would be doing something about the US fiscal debt and deficit without reducing near-term support for the ailing economy. (Yes, they would be making a token gesture to camouflage the extent of government’s continual theft of the people’s savings through inflation of the money supply.)
This proposal has other benefits too. First, the US would be obeying the maxim to buy low and sell high. (Oh, please! When did the US govt ever buy any gold bullion? They stole it from the people in exchange for worthless bits of paper. Not to mention all the gold that was deposited with the fed during the 1930’s by Europeans seeking shelter from the invading Germans, which the US govt has still never returned. And sell high? Compared to what? The govt paid $20.67 an ounce for the gold they confiscated under threat of imprisonment from the US citizens in 1933. Adjusted for inflation, they would be getting about the same amount of federal reserve notes back. This sale will obviously never take place.)
Second, it would be performing a socially useful function. Demand for gold exceeds normal production, driving up the price. To the extent that the gold craze (another slight to gold investors) is being fed by concern (rational or irrational) about government policies, public welfare would be enhanced by giving citizens something tangible to hang around their necks or place in safe deposit boxes. (Well, that is true enough. Getting the gold back into the hands of the people would be a positive thing. But this is a meaningless threat for the purpose of continuing to suppress the true market price of gold in today’s dollars. The federal government has little or no physical gold to sell. Jawboning the price down is the only weapon left in the arsenal now to prop up the failing dollar) Third, if the price is a bubble, as seems likely, the sooner it is burst, the better for the average investor. (I can’t see how exactly, please explain. Wouldn’t this depend on when the investor purchased, and whether or not he was savvy enough to sell at the peak?)
Some people point to possible costs. Aside from political pressures from those who want to protect the value of their holdings, above or below ground, two principal arguments are made against US gold sales. The first is that they would disrupt the market. But the US can be cautious in its sales, avoiding disruption of the sales programmes of other countries, as it has in the past. (Sure, if it had any actual bullion left to sell) There is little risk. In recent years, sales under the Central Bank Gold Agreement have dwindled, and some other central banks are buying gold. (A lot more central banks are buying now than the few central banks that are actually selling) (The US is not a party to the agreement.) Also the International Monetary Fund has completed more than three-quarters of its own planned sales of 403.3 metric tons.* (In 2009, the world’s central banks became net buyers of gold bullion after 19 consecutive years of net selling. The parties to the most recent Central Bank Gold Agreement failed to meet their sales quota for the first time. This year (2010) I would be extremely surprised if they managed to meet even 1/4th of their quota, that is, if the agreement doesn’t disintegrate completely. Central bankers are not stupid enough to continue selling a finite, appreciating asset such as gold in exchange for one that is constantly inflating and will eventually become worthless, just like every other fiat currency has throughout history. Today the world’s longest running fiat currency is the British Pound, one of the weakest currencies among all developed countries, and at greatest risk of failure.)
Another counterargument is that the US should hold on to its stock in anticipation of a return -- by itself alone or with other nations -- to a monetary system based on gold. But returning to the gold standard would reinstate a system associated with unstable prices, wages, output, and employment.(On the contrary, the most stable period of wages and prices in history was during the classic gold standard from 1590 up until 1914, when the classic gold standard was finally abandoned to finance WWI. It was never fully reinstated, although gold coins continued in circulation as US legal tender until 1933) It has not existed for a century; and will not make a comeback. (On the contrary, China has already been laying the ground work for a gold backed currency by initiating currency swaps with Indonesia, Brazil, Australia, and other countries that have natural resources to sell, accumulating gold secretly until June 2009 when they announced that their central bank had increased their holdings by 400 tons, and legalizing gold ownership by their citizens for the first time since the Maoist revolution. Not only did they legalize it, they are encouraging it. You can now buy gold coins as small as 3 grams at any post office in China, and their govt has been running advertising campaigns on TV urging the citizens to put their retirement savings into gold and silver bullion (that much more to confiscate once the time comes). Once this gold backed currency is established, the US dollar will have no value at all other than the current exchange value into Chinese currency at that day’s exchange rate, and for payment of US taxes. On that day, both the Chinese Yuan and gold coins will become accepted as payment for purchases in the United States.) Official discussions of the reform of the international monetary system do not include any advocates of a return to gold(big surprise, the monetary bigwigs want to preserve the status quo), and the IMF articles of agreement prohibit it. The sooner thoughts of such a return are laid to rest, the better. (Better for whom? The money printers, of course.)
A related argument is to keep the US gold stock as a "rainy day" precaution. But after the recent economic and financial crisis and with the prospect of misery for several more years, how much more rain must pour before the US acts?
End of London Financial Times Article

**************************
*On September 28, 2009, the IMF's Executive Board approved gold sales of nearly 13 million ounces, representing one eighth of the Fund's total holdings. During October and November 2009, the Fund sold half of this quantity to the Reserve Bank of India, the Bank of Mauritius, and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. On September 7, 2010, the Fund sold 10 metric tons to the Bangladesh Bank. They have been selling the rest gradually into the market to suppress the gold price, but not very successfully. The recent surge in gold prices may indicate that this quantity has been exhausted.
http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/goldfaqs.htm
We must have owed those countries a big favor. Dozens of countries around the world would have been more than glad to exchange some of their country’s reserves, composed of depreciating assets such as US Treasuries and Agencies, and various foreign currencies, for any hard asset, especially precious metals. My guess is that Sri Lanka, Mauritius and Bangladesh have some sort of natural resource that the US govt needs, probably rare earths. And India is a valuable ally in a very strategic location. We probably need them as a place to spy on Pakistan and China, and as a place to refuel our ships.
The IMF declined to reveal the price at which it sold 200 tons of gold bullion to the Central Bank of India on November 3, 2009, but the closing price that day at the NYBOT was $1084.50 The IMF claims on their website that their gold sales are conducted at market prices.
Looking at last week’s price of $1379.50, it looks to me like India got a pretty good deal, a 27% profit in less than a year, with many more years of appreciation to come. How long can these sales continue? Certainly not indefinitely with the annual world production of gold falling short of demand now for over ten straight years, and considering that the quantity of physical gold ostensibly held and traded by the world's central banks, bullion banks, and futures exchanges is significantly overstated, according to gata.org
Edwin Truman's entire article is just one big smokescreen to preserve the misconception that the US govt's gold supply is still intact and the same as they claimed to have forty years ago. If that was true, why would the federal reserve be so adamant about not allowing an audit of Fort Knox? This would be routine at any private corporation, is required by law, and would only serve to quiet concerns if the gold WAS STILL ACTUALLY THERE AND UNENCUMBERED.
"Gold is a barometer of the common stock of a country, and right now gold is sniffing out weakness in the management of the United States as a business."
Jim Sinclair, gold investor
Mr. Sinclair became famous in the business community when he sold 900,000 ounces of gold at an average price of $810 in early 1980, just before the price peaked.



© Marie Forum Argent Or. reproduction interdite : pas de copier-coller. Faites un lien vers ce post. Suivez Hardinvestor sur Twitter et sur Facebook

   marie

  Skipper
 Skipper

  avatar

  Inscription :   05/02/2005
  Messages :   19786

Revenir en haut Aller en bas
MessageRe: l'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?
par marie Mer 27 Oct 2010 - 13:54

le toujours aussi excellent Douglas revient sur le papier de Truman.. qui comme vous le savez n'est pas n'importe qui, puisque c'est un ancien économiste de la FED..

et pour un économiste.. il propose une bien curieuse solution .. pour sauver le soldat $



http://www.gata.org/node/9210

Adrian Douglas: Could U.S. government really be that stupid about gold?


Submitted by cpowell on Tue, 2010-10-26 15:42. Section: Daily Dispatches
By Adrian Douglas
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
On October 12, 2010, Edwin (Ted) Truman wrote an article for the Financial Times of London in which he suggested that the US Treasury should sell all of its gold reserves:
http://www.gata.org/node/9150
Ted Truman is not just anybody. He is a former Federal Reserve economist and is well connected. This means that we should not write off his comments as idle chatter. Although it seems highly unlikely that such a wholesale liquidation of the U.S. gold reserves could ever be approved, it is interesting to study the implications if it were to happen. I will show you why it would be the most stupid thing the government could ever do.
Let's first revisit what has been the evolution of the U.S. dollar. Until 1933 the United States was on a gold standard. Money was gold. Gold was deposited in banks for safekeeping and bank notes or Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) were given in exchange. These notes were redeemable at any time for the gold on deposit at the rate of $20.67/oz (increased to $35/oz in 1933 by the Franklin Roosevelt administration).

So the dollar was a deposit slip for gold. If you wanted to buy something, you could retrieve your gold from the bank by redeeming dollars and paying with gold. However, the seller of the item would probably deposit the gold in a bank and receive dollars in return. It was simpler to pay with dollars. So gold was the money while dollars were only a convenient proxy for the money; the dollar was the circulating currency but was not intrinsically worth anything except in being able to retrieve a gold deposit.
In 1933 the U.S. government confiscated privately held monetary gold. The dollar was still a proxy for gold but a citizen could not redeem his bank notes. Only foreign central banks could redeem dollars for gold. President Nixon suspended even that much convertibility in 1971.
The only change was in the redeemability of dollars. The dollar was not redefined. In fact Nixon "temporarily suspended" convertibility of dollars for gold; that temporary suspension is still in force today. This means that all dollars issued represent a claim against the U.S. gold reserve, but it is an irredeemable claim.
If you think that doesn't make sense, let's consider another example.
ExxonMobil issues shares in the company. The value of these shares is principally driven by the oil reserves the company owns. But the shares cannot be redeemed for oil or any other asset of the company; rather the shares are a claim against the assets of ExxonMobil. If the company were to sell its oil assets and liquidate the company, a shareholder would be paid a percentage share of the liquidation value based on his percentage ownership of the company.
To explain the dollar and its relationship to gold I have written a parody which is as follows:
In 1913 a company is established called the Federal Valet Parking Board (FVPB). FVPB establishes branches all over the country. You take your car to FVPB and you are given a valet parking ticket (VPT). At any time you can redeem your ticket and get your car back. FVPB brokers a special deal with the government that allows people to use their VPT as currency. A law obliges everyone to accept these VPT as payment. No one objects because the tickets can be redeemed for a car at any time. People find it convenient to spend their VPTs.
Unfortunately, the FVPB is corrupt and prints more Valet Parking Tickets without parking any more cars in the parking lot. People start to suspect a scam. They rush to redeem their VPTs and take back their cars. The first ones to redeem think they are lucky because they get their cars back, but latecomers are told there are no cars in the parking lot.
"How can this be?" the people demand. "I have a Valet Parking Ticket so I want my car back."
The FVPB is in trouble. The government steps in and makes it illegal to own a car. This promptly prevents anyone from asking for his car to be returned. Even the people who were lucky enough to get their cars back are told that they must return their cars to the FVPB or risk a fine or imprisonment. These hapless individuals dutifully cave in and return their cars and they are given VPTs in return. The people are still forced by law to accept VPTs as currency but the corrupt FVPB continues to print and issue more of them. As no one can retrieve a single car from the parking lot with a VPT, there is no restraint on how many VPTs the FVPB can issue.
In 2010 an economist who is also a car expert remarks that the FVPB has millions of cars gathering dust that are of no use. He proposes that the FVPB should sell them all. The government and the FVPB think this is a terrific idea. One fine day the parking lots are opened up and the people flock in to buy the cars. And what does the FVPB accept as payment for the cars?
Why, VPTs, of course! But due to the massive printing of VPTs that has gone on over the years that has increased the supply of VPTs while the stock of cars has remained constant, the FVPB insists that the people have to give 100 Valet Parking Tickets to be given a car instead of the one ticket originally issued for each car. At the end of the operation the people have the cars and the FVPB has all the tickets.
If the FVPB has only tickets and no cars, what do you think the street value of these VPTs is? Absolutely worthless.
The parallel with the U.S. gold reserves should be obvious. The gold reserve belongs to the people but the Treasury holds it and refuses to give it back. It instead issues Federal Reserve Notes using the gold reserve as collateral, but the FRNs are irredeemable in gold. If the government could truly be that stupid to adopt Ted Truman's proposal to sell the U.S. gold reserve in exchange for Federal Reserve notes, then for the first time since 1933 and only "while stocks last" the FRNs could be exchanged for gold. This would allow a lucky few to buy gold in exchange for the FRNs. The government would no doubt brag about what a great deal it has have made by getting billions of dollars for the gold but, just like the VPTs, with the underlying collateral having been disposed of, the FRNs would have zero value.
The government claims to have 261.5 million ounces of gold but this doesn't belong to the government; it belongs to the citizens. By being the custodian of the gold and refusing to give it to the holders of FRNs, the government appears to have a very valuable asset, but the truth is that this asset is offset by the corresponding liability of all the FRNs that have been issued against it. So in fact the government has no net assets, just like the FVPB had no net assets of its own.
If the asset is sold off for FRNs, then the FRNs will become worthless and with no collateral it would be impossible to issue a new currency that anyone would accept. The solution that would no doubt be top of the list would be to confiscate the gold back again.
This is why I ask: Could the government really be that stupid?
But I expect it is Ted Truman who thinks that gold investors are that stupid to think it would be gold and not the dollar that would suffer and that they could be intimidated to dishoard their gold in a panic by just suggesting in his article that the United States should sell its gold reserves.
Nice try, Mr. Truman, but no cigar.
What is revealed by this analysis is that if the U.S. gold reserve has already been sold off surreptitiously or partially or entirely encumbered in some way, then confirmation of that would be extremely detrimental to the dollar. Once you realize this you can grasp why an audit of the U.S. gold reserve is not an academic exercise and why the Federal Reserve is vigorously opposing GATA's Freedom of Information Act request to determine if the gold reserve has been subject to swap arrangements.
-----
Adrian Douglas is publisher of the Market Force Analysis letter (www.MarketForceAnalysis.com) and a member of GATA's Board of Directors.

* * *

Join GATA here:
New Orleans Investment Conference
Wednesday-Saturday, October 27-30, 2010
Hilton New Orleans Riverside Hotel
http://www.neworleansconference.com/redirect.php?page=index.html&source_...

* * *
Support GATA by purchasing a colorful GATA T-shirt:
http://gata.org/tshirts
Or a colorful poster of GATA's full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal on
January 31, 2009:

http://gata.org/node/wallstreetjournal
Or a video disc of GATA's 2005 Gold Rush 21 conference in the Yukon:
http://www.goldrush21.com/
* * *
Help keep GATA going
GATA is a civil rights and educational organization based in the United States and tax-exempt under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Its e-mail dispatches are free, and you can subscribe at:
http://www.gata.org
To contribute to GATA, please visit:

http://www.gata.org/node/16



© Marie Forum Argent Or. reproduction interdite : pas de copier-coller. Faites un lien vers ce post. Suivez Hardinvestor sur Twitter et sur Facebook

   marie

  Skipper
 Skipper

  avatar

  Inscription :   05/02/2005
  Messages :   19786

Revenir en haut Aller en bas
MessageRe: l'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?
par marie Jeu 28 Oct 2010 - 23:32

pour le fun , d'après le financial times, la FED vient de rectifier à la baisse ( 40 % tout de même ) le nombre des pays pour lesquels elle stocke de l'or

ils sont magiquement passé de 60 à 36

notez bien comme d'habitude, l'excuse de changements dans la manière de comptabiliser ... SIC



Citation :
The revision is significant because the New York Fed's historic vault, built on the bedrock of Manhattan Island, is the world's largest repository of bullion with holdings worth about $290 billion, but very little is known about which countries store their gold there. Individual vaults have numbers so any visitors cannot tell which gold reserves belong to which central bank.

The New York Fed said the revision was the result of a change in the way it counts the countries that use its services to store gold. Its previous claim of "approximately 60" countries referred to the number of foreign central banks with accounts at the New York Fed, including those that did not hold any gold.
Its revised figure of 36 refers only to those foreign central banks that actually have gold stored at the US central bank's Manhattan vault, the New York Fed said.



http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/15bc74ea-e2b0-11df-8a58-00144feabdc0.html



© Marie Forum Argent Or. reproduction interdite : pas de copier-coller. Faites un lien vers ce post. Suivez Hardinvestor sur Twitter et sur Facebook

   marie

  Skipper
 Skipper

  avatar

  Inscription :   05/02/2005
  Messages :   19786

Revenir en haut Aller en bas
l'allemagne sur le point de perdre 66% de ses réserves d'or?
Voir le sujet précédent Voir le sujet suivant Revenir en haut


Page 1 sur 1
Permission de ce forum:Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Hardinvestor :: Argent - Or - Monnaie - Géopolitique / Forums publics :: Forum Or, Argent, Métaux précieux-
Sauter vers:




cours de l’or en dollar   cours de l’argent en dollar   cours du Hui   cours de l’or en euro   cours de l’argent en euro   ratio or argent