*Written by Rob Rimes.

I’m finally back home and have enough time to actually sit down and write. The drive back from Orlando last night, immediately after the debate was insane! Drivers on Interstate 4 are beyond awful and they have no regard for the written and unwritten rules of the road. I nearly died a few times and by the time I got home, I just needed to chill out with some rum and watch ‘Firefly’ on Netflix. I intended to write this immediately after the debate but it just wasn’t possible. Between the lack of sleep the night before, the traveling and the two days of heavy discussions and debate, I was a vegetable. Thank God for my own bed and a bottle of Cruzan Black Strap rum as I feel much more alive this morning.

To start the day, I rolled out of bed at 7:30, which was pretty hard considering I was up late writing and drinking the night before and I just couldn’t get to sleep in a strange bed. I’ve always had trouble sleeping on the road. In fact, the only hotel that I’m comfortable in is the Hampton Inn across the street from the New Orleans Convention Center. Hell, I even have a hard time sleeping in Vegas without a ton of alcohol as a sedative, which is still partially ineffective, as that oxygen they pump through the vents has me wide awake pretty quickly.

So I woke up, got ready and suited up for my day, packed my suitcase and took a few minutes to watch part of the first half of the Liverpool v. Manchester United game before I had to check out. I went downstairs about twenty minutes into the game and ate breakfast with my friends from the Libertarian Party of Collier County. Shortly after this, we headed into the banquet room for the Libertarian Party of Florida’s business meeting. I’m not going to discuss the details but the meeting was informative and entertaining. Like one would expect, peering behind the scenes of politics at any level, the meeting had it’s fair share of heated debates between different factions all vying for control of the Party. Don’t take this the wrong way, this isn’t a bad thing, it is a very healthy way of addressing issues and concerns. All in all, it was a cool experience to see how the Libertarian Party operates in Florida.

At around 11:30, we split for lunch and I took that time to go upstairs and meet with Gary Johnson one last time before the debate. It was your typical meet and greet but there were more people present at this one than the two that I went to on the previous day. I listened in for awhile but I didn’t really interject myself this round. I asked a lot of questions the day before and I felt it was only fair for those who missed out on the earlier meet and greets to have their chance at asking Governor Johnson whatever it was they wanted to know.

I left after about a half hour, as the subjects being covered were already addressed at the previous meetings. Plus, my claustrophobia was kicking in as ten to fifteen people in a small hotel room is too many. I went downstairs, had some killer buffalo wings and spoke to congressional candidate Calen Fretts. If you live in the Florida panhandle, you should vote for Mr. Fretts. He’s got a good head on his shoulders and is a true representative of liberty. I think that may have been an endorsement. Anyway, we all headed back into the banquet hall at 1:00 for the second part of the business meeting. At 3:00 the debate officially started.

Contrary to what I wrote before, Roger Gary was not a part of the debate. Also, Leroy Saunders, a candidate from the State of New York joined the debate. I don’t know much about Mr. Saunders but his involvement added some energy to the event. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a Facebook page or anything else on the social networking level and that can only hurt his campaign, in my opinion. He does have a decent website however. The other candidates were mentioned in an earlier article, they are Gary Johnson, R.J. Harris, R. Lee Wrights, Bill Still and Carl Persons.

Before the debate, those of us who are members of the Libertarian Party of Florida were asked to write down any questions they had for the candidates. Two of my three questions were used in the debate and in fact, they were the first two questions used after the moderators were done asking theirs. The first question, which I asked in an effort to give a boost to Bill Still, went directly to Mr. Still first – how’s that for luck? The question was “What’s your plan to bring about economic recovery? Is it as simple as abolishing the Federal Reserve, returning to a gold standard and significantly cutting spending?” The reason I wanted this question to go to Still is that he takes the stance that a gold standard isn’t the answer. I wanted to give him the opportunity to explain his position, which he did by stating that the majority of the gold is held by the elite, so it isn’t a good way to give control of money back to the people and that throughout history, the gold standard hasn’t been as great as many economists claim.

The second question I asked that was used was “Is there ever a time when U.S. military intervention is necessary?” Most of the candidates said “no”. Gary Johnson however pointed to the Afghan War and said that he was for us going over there and wiping out Al-Qaeda but that we should have come back six months after going to war, as we sent the “evildoers” running for the hills. Leroy Saunders pretty much agreed with Johnson and added that if we are attacked, we have the right to go after the attacker and seek justice but other than that, we need to stay out of the business of all these other countries, except for trade – which should be free.

My third question “How would you curb the Supreme Court from making unconstitutional decisions?”, wasn’t asked. In fact, there was nothing asked about how they would work with the judicial branch, which was unfortunate. This is a subject I don’t hear libertarians discuss very often.

While watching the debate, I noticed that there weren’t a lot of philosophical differences between the candidates. They had different ways to achieve certain goals but for the most part, everything they said, I found to be correct and pretty on point. It’s hard to do a proper critique of the content, as these men know their stuff and were all pretty damn effective at expressing it and hammering their points. It’s really different when you have a debate where the candidates aren’t idiots and they don’t have to constantly explain their stance to an idiot crowd. Libertarians are cut from a different cloth and they typically educate themselves on a variety of topics. They are a group that is constantly in the know and on top of things. I’m not trying to toot my own libertarian horn here but those who truly represent our beliefs, don’t need to have everything explained to them. They are the self-educated minority and have reached a higher plane in their political philosophy that one can’t get to by blindly following mainstream ideas and not questioning what they’ve always been taught.

In the end, I felt that Gary Johnson did a solid job and articulated himself well. Bill Still did really good when the questions were economic based but needed to say more on some of the other subjects. R. Lee Wrights was great and really won me over. Even though I hope Johnson gets the nomination, I’d love Mr. Wrights as VP. R.J. Harris did alright but I was expecting a little more thunder, especially after hearing all the positive things my friends and colleagues have said about him. I wasn’t disappointed by my expectations of him but I wasn’t really impressed either. Leroy Saunders did a pretty good job but often times went on some tangents. He needs to get his talking points down and sharpen his skills. He’s a young guy though and he has a lot of time to get it right, just not in this race. Carl Persons had some sharp insight but he just didn’t bring the fire. I honestly can’t see him as a leader, which is unfortunate, as I did like the things he had to say. Truth be told though, I would take anyone of these guys over Barack Obama or the GOP contenders minus Ron Paul.

After the debate, I immediately left and drove home. I wish I could’ve mingled some more and gone to the Libertarian Party dinner but I really needed to get back. All in all it was a great weekend, I got to spend a lot of time picking Gary Johnson’s brain and I met a lot of like minded people from all over the country. It’s not everyday that an average joe can sit down with a presidential candidate and ask them questions face-to-face. I got to do it twice in one day.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

*The picture is of Libertarian Party presidential candidates Gary Johnson and RJ Harris.

Sitting in my hotel room at the Orlando Airport Embassy Suites, I am trying to write about what has happened today, since I last left you. I’m currently distracted by Erin Burnett and her guests pontificating about taxes on my large hotel room flatscreen. Also, I am on my eleventh straight glass of cheap Canadian whiskey and sour mix. Technically it is a whiskey sour but it doesn’t really taste like one. Then again, I’m not used to having them made with rye-based whiskey. It could be that all the Labatt Blues I drank affected my taste buds. It’s all good – I’m not complaining, I’m just probably sharing too much of my inner dialogue right now. While I’m at it though, the steak I had at the bar was phenomenal! Okay.. okay, let me get to the point of this post, as I light up a Padrón 1964 and hope that the hotel staff doesn’t notice that I’m smoking out my non-smoking room. Crap, that reptile man James Carville is on T.V. now, I’ve got to hit the ‘power’ button and focus.

So I took a shower and threw on a three piece suit and made my way out to attend the small meet and greet with Gary Johnson that I was invited to. As soon as I opened my hotel room door, Gary Johnson was there pacing on his cell phone. I then realized that the room that the meet and greet was in was just a few doors down but the magical appearance of my second favorite candidate right outside my door caught me off guard. I had a million questions prepared in my head and I’ve never talked face-to-face with a presidential candidate before. Well, I did talk to Herman Cain in October of 2010 but that was way before he announced that he was running for the highest office in the land. Also, I didn’t really know much about him at the time.

Johnson put his phone away, said “hello” and reached out to shake my hand. I gave him a solid shake and immediately asked him how the Libertarian Party primary process worked. I kind of knew the answer but this just immediately popped into my head. He explained that all the states have their own votes and that the final vote and selection would happen in May at the Libertarian Party National Convention in Las Vegas. Johnson explained that the selection process was essentially like that of a brokered convention. The host of the get-together then led Gary and I inside the room and we were soon followed by a few others who were also invited.

The discussion started with Johnson talking about economics with one of the other people there. They discussed interest rates, housing and all sorts of stuff. I was distracted because I was trying to think of things to ask, as my million or so questions I had in my head on the drive up to Orlando, were seemingly nowhere to be found in my memory banks. In any event, I had four drinks at this point and they were really starting to set in, making me less nervous and causing me to start throwing questions around.

First, I asked Mr. Johnson if he had a strategy to bring in the Ron Paul supporters after Dr. Paul was eliminated from the race, assuming he doesn’t win the Republican primary – which isn’t looking good at this point. Gary said that he is a Ron Paul supporter and that he knows that Paul supporters are smart people that are already aware of him and the fact that his message is pretty much the same as Ron Paul’s. He doesn’t feel that he needs to do anything, as that support will shift towards him. Honestly, I disagree with this, as I know how most of us Paul supporters are feeling right now. We’re disenfranchised and so sick of the political system that if Paul isn’t on the ballot in November, many of us either won’t vote or we’ll write “Ron Paul” on the ballot. In fact, I know that a lot of people are planning to give Paul a write-in vote come November and because of that, Johnson will have lost people that he could’ve attracted if there were a real effort to grab those people and give them a second chance of hope. I think that rounding up the Paul supporters is essential if Johnson wants to come close to winning. I’m already on board and will give Johnson my vote, if Paul doesn’t get the Republican nomination.

I also asked Johnson if he was a Libertarian Party member for life or if there was the possibility of him running as a Republican candidate again, somewhere down the line, if he were to not win the presidential election in November. Johnson told us a story that he had bought a Libertarian Party shirt earlier in the day and that he was proud to wear it. He said that he never bought a Republican shirt but was given thousands of them for various groups and organizations over the years. He said that, regardless of owning many, he has never once worn a shirt promoting the Republican Party. He said that the reason was because he was never comfortable doing so because people typically have hostile reactions towards Republicans. He says that he feels it is due to their stance on most social issues, I agree. He said that as a Republican he was always expected to make excuses for the GOP in defense of many common criticisms of the party on social issues. He admitted that he was never able to wholeheartedly do this, as he more often than not agreed with the criticisms of the Republican Party on social issues. He finished by saying that he has never been more comfortable in his life at wearing a party’s banner. He said that he was always a libertarian and that he is focused on bringing the party to the next level.

Expanding on that, I asked him how he could bring the party to that next level. He pointed out that if he could get just 5 percent of the vote in the November elections, that it would bring in $90 million for the Libertarian Party. He explained that the Democrats and Republicans set the system up to be a two-party dominated game, as the money given to parties, is based off of how they perform in the presidential elections and for a party to get a substantial amount of cash (that being $90 million), they need to get at least 5 percent in the general election. So if a third party can generate the difficult amount of 5 percent against the ultra-rich powerhouses, they are entitled to get paid. Now with a third party getting $90 million with just 5 percent of the vote, imagine how much the Democrats and Republicans get regardless of how they finish! This is how they stay in power and dominate politics and this is what Johnson wants to fight against by getting at least 5 percent of the vote. He pointed out that he is currently polling at around 9 percent head-to-head-to-head with Obama and Romney. Gary Johnson can truly alter business in Washington and throw a wrench in the machine of tyranny, as far as the two-party system goes.

Now if Johnson can get 15 percent, he will be invited to the national debates between Barack Obama and the Republican nominee. Since he is polling around 9 percent, an increase in 6 points isn’t impossible before the October debates. Truth is, this is very doable and if he was able to participate, Gary Johnson could serve up some hardcore truth to the Democrat and Republican establishment. Gary told me that the rule of having 15 percent was established by both Republicans and Democrats back when Ross Perot ran for president in 1992 as a member of the Reform Party. It is essentially another establishment tactic to try and keep the power consolidated within the boundaries of just the two major parties.

The meet and greet was then broken up and I went down to the hotel bar to meet my friends from the Libertarian Party of Collier County. While waiting for them, I spoke to many of the libertarian attendees over drinks. Nothing really exciting happened other than typical networking jargon and business card passing. I promoted TheSwash.com and most of them either promoted their blogs, their local organizations or whomever candidate they were there working for. My peeps from the LPCC finally arrived and shortly after that, Gary Johnson made his way down to the bar area to chit-chat, providing me with a second opportunity for some deep and insightful discussion.

Kicking off round two, I asked Gary Johnson how he differed from Ron Paul. He said that he didn’t want to build a border fence and didn’t understand why Paul was for the idea. I agree with Johnson on this one, as I always questioned Ron Paul’s reasoning on wanting a border fence, as it will cost a ton of money and it has been proven to be ineffective. Johnson also pointed out that he believes in a woman’s right to choose where Ron Paul is anti-abortion. Gary Johnson also believes in marriage equality for all people, which really isn’t far off from Paul’s stance, so let me clarify this. Ron Paul said that if he was in Congress in 1996, he would have voted for DOMA or the Defense of Marriage Act. The reason being is that he believes that states should have the rights to either allow or prohibit same sex marriage. In a nutshell, the bill’s purpose gave states the power of being able to refuse to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states or countries. I side with Johnson over Paul here, simply for the fact that the federal government needs to stay out of it and shouldn’t be bothered passing such a law to begin with. They should instead, honor the Constitution and especially the 10th Amendment, which gives the states the right to do whatever the hell they want in this case.

I brought up the issue of the gold standard and Johnson said that it was a step in the right direction but added that there were still horrible cases of inflation under the gold standard before. He believes that we need a dollar backed by commodities but that just incorporating gold wouldn’t generate the best results. He also wants to end the Federal Reserve but doesn’t believe that this will fully fix the problem either. He went on to be critical of people who say that the Fed is a private entity. He says that the government owns it and that it is like something that we all own stock in but can’t vote on, so we are essentially powerless to do anything about it.

I asked Johnson about his thoughts on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s ‘Freedom Watch’ being cancelled by Fox Business. Johnson said that it was unfortunate and a blow to liberty and that the movement needs to keep moving forward regardless of losing such an important and honest show for the libertarian faithful. He also added that he will appear on the last episode, as he was asked earlier in the day and said “yes”.

That was pretty much it for round two. I took a step back and let all the other people ask questions, plus I was starving and tired of standing so I sat down at the bar and ordered a steak and whiskey. Bill Still, another Libertarian Party presidential candidate, came down to the lobby but quickly left before I even had the chance to approach him. A few minutes later, someone came over to me and announced that Mr. Still would be at the T.G.I. Friday’s down the street if anyone wanted to pick his brain. By the time I got and ate my steak, a lot of time and liquor had passed and I didn’t feel like drunkenly walking a third of a mile through the rain in the dark in an unfamiliar place was the best idea. I opted to go back to my room and write this article instead.

One thing I want to point out before I end this, is that no other candidate apart from Johnson and in the end, Mr. Still, even made an attempt to come down and mingle with the people who would ultimately be voting for them. Those who hold the fate of the candidates in their hands were only entertained by Gary Johnson and Bill Still, who weirdly took his show off-site. The fact that the lesser-known guys were M.I.A. was odd. You think they’d be out lobbying for support and in all honesty, I’m completely puzzled as to why they weren’t. Maybe they think that opposing Gary Johnson is a losing battle. If that’s the case, drop out, go home and let the big boys play the game.

Floyd Norris writes for the New York Times that it’s 1980 all over again.

Discussion of gold has gone from nonexistent a decade ago to the question of whether its price is in bubble territory, and now a policy question in the Republican primary. Ron Paul has been stumping for a return to the gold standard for decades, and the populace has finally caught up.

The issue resonates with young people who worry about a dire future with a dollar crash and nationwide poverty. The gold issue is hot enough that Newt Gingrich has promised to appoint a gold commission, with The Case for Gold coauthor Lewis Lehrman and Jim Grant as cochairman.

When Ronald Reagan went through the gold commission charade in 1981 to satisfy a campaign promise of studying the gold standard question, Lehrman cast one of two dissenting votes on the commission that voted in favor of maintaining the fiat money status quo. The other “no” vote came from Ron Paul himself. As Murray Rothbard explained,

The gold standard was the easiest pledge to dispose of. President Reagan appointed an allegedly impartial gold commission to study the problem — a commission overwhelmingly packed with lifelong opponents of gold. The commission presented its predictable report, and gold was quickly interred.

In similar fashion, Norris and the NYT look to explore the worthiness of a gold standard by citing aUniversity of Chicago survey of 37 economists asking if they agreed that “price-stability and employment outcomes would be better for the average American” if the dollar’s value were tied to gold.

Norris makes a point that among the 37 were advisers to both Democratic and Republican presidents. As if this insured some sort of impartiality. Like Captain Renault in Casablanca, you will be shocked — shocked! — to know that all 37 of the esteemed economists polled think a gold standard is a terrible idea.

The first statement the 37 economists responded to was

If the US replaced its discretionary monetary policy regime with a gold standard, defining a “dollar” as a specific number of ounces of gold, the price-stability and employment outcomes would be better for the average American.

CONTINUED at The Ludwig von Mises Institute. Written by Doug French.

As Chinese take up a big position on gold, COMEX commodity speculator positions begin to surge.

The spot market price of buying Gold climbed to $1728 an ounce Monday morning London time – a slight drop from last week’s close – while stock markets, commodities and the Euro all fell and government bond prices rose as European leaders met for their latest summit in Brussels.

The cost of buying Silver fell to $33.08 at one point – a 2.6% drop from where it ended last week.

Gold fell as low as $1718 per ounce Monday morning, dropping steadily during Asian trading, though this represented a loss of only 1% on Friday’s closing price.

CHINA

“Everybody seemed to be expecting profit taking out of Shanghai after the two Chinese bourses came back online,” said one Hong Kong dealer.

“As far as we can see, there wasn’t much of that.”

During last week’s Lunar New Year holiday, China saw a “gold rush”, with consumers spending more on buying gold than during the 2011 festival, according to a China Daily report.

“People seem crazy about gold, snatching it up more like a cheap cabbage than such a precious metal,” it quotes Beijing resident Miao Miao.

The value of sales at two of Beijing’s top gold retailers, Caibai and Guohua, reportedly hit 600 million Yuan ($95.28 million) – a 49.7% rise on last year’s sales, almost 50% increase in purchases! The gold price in Dollars meantime rose around 25% over the same period.

The Yuan also appreciated against the Dollar over that time, gaining around 3.6%, which implies a rise in Chinese domestic gold prices of around 20%.

CONTINUED at Commodity Online.

Was there every any doubt? Shaun White proved yet again that he is the world’s top halfpipe snowboarder with an unprecedented perfect score of 100 in the superpipe final at Winter X Games, winning his fifth consecutive gold medal in the discipline.

Two days earlier, an ankle sprain forced White to withdraw from a very competitive slopestyle event. There was some question whether he would be able to compete in Sunday’s pipe final, particularly after he failed to show up for Saturday’s pipe practice.

Then White came out with a bang at the elimination round Sunday afternoon, dominating the field and leading the qualification for the final round. He even broke his amplitude record set in last year’s gold medal-winning finals performance.

The talk around Winter X was the sheer intensity of superpipe’s progression with double corks, back to back 12s and various stylized tweaks marking each of the eight riders in the final. Among the favorites to challenge White were Iouri “Ipod” Podlatchikov, who won last week’s pipe final in Vermont at the Dew Tour, and Luke Mitrani, who won the Grand Prix in Breckenridge, Colo., in December, qualifying second to White in the elimination round. Other not-so-wild-card contenders included just about everyone in the final: Louie Vito, Markus Malin, Christian Haller, Greg Bretz and Ryo Aono.

Yet none could match the ferocity of White who took a commanding lead after his first run, achieving a score of 94.

A second-run fall on his final hit enabled a fight to the finish. With White, Podlatchikov and Haller sitting 1-2-3, the race was on for the remaining finalists to make a charge for a podium spot.

Vito faltered on his final run, but then Aono put down a flawless run that put him in third. Matt Ladley, Bretz and Mitrani followed, yet none could put together a run worthy of an X Games medal.

White and snowboard cross champion Nate Holland are the only X Games athletes to win five gold medals in the same event.

In classic White fashion, however, the Carlsbad, Calif., native was not content with a commanding win and a history making five-peat. Dropping in a for a casual “victory lap” White broke new ground. Combing jaw-dropping amplitude, textbook skill and style and a technical difficultly never before seen, White executed the first truly perfect performance in Winter X Games history, including an 18-foot backside air, a 17-foot frontside double cork 1080, an 11-foot switch frontside double cork 1080, a 14-foot frontside cork 540, a 13-foot backside double cork 1260 and a 12-foot frontside double cork 1260 — the first back-to-back double cork in Winter X.

The judges with the the perfect 100.

A surreal moment for the global audience but not a speechless one for White.

“It was bizarre — and my coach Bud Keene was saying ‘They’re going to give you a 100 if you make it.’ ” said White. “I’m thinking he was very excited. But I don’t know, I just came through it and everything felt perfect. I was landing the 10 at the top and the cab double came through perfect. I don’t know if I have ever landed my double Mc12 as clean as I have tonight, so that just set myself up perfect for the frontside double cork 12. I guess it’s the first (time) ever to do back-to-back double cork 12s. What a night.”

Source: USA Today.

A combination of several factors, including a declining dollar and the Federal Reserve’s announcement that it would keep interest rates at virtually zero until late 2014, helped to send gold and silver prices soaring to multi-week highs. Analysts expect the upward trend to continue as paper currencies founder and gloomy news continues to dominate the economic headlines.

The spot price for gold was around $1,725 by 2 p.m. Eastern time after jumping more than $60 since the day before, up almost 30 percent from a year ago and more than 7.5 percent over the last 30 days. It smashed through $1,700 on Wednesday for the first in six weeks.

“At the moment everything points to even higher prices, given the strong risk appetite, the better mood among market players, the strong equity markets and the weak dollar,” Commerzbank analyst Daniel Briesemann told Reuters.

Analysts said the single most important factor behind gold’s strong rally was the Federal Reserve. On Wednesday, the privately owned central bank promised to keep short-term interest rates at rock bottom until late 2014, extending the date from its previous pledge to keep rates down until mid-2013.

Also bullish for gold — and bearish for the U.S. dollar, of course — was Fed boss Ben “helicopter” Bernanke’s veiled threat to unleash more so-called “Quantitative Easing,” known in simpler terms as creating new “money” out of thin air and pumping it into the economy by purchasing bonds. The dollar immediately took a hit against other major currencies.

“The framework makes very clear that we need to be thinking about ways to provide further stimulus if we don’t get improvement in the pace of recovery and a normalization of inflation,” Bernanke said during a quarterly news conference after the Fed’s report was released. Analysts and central bank critics, already concerned about massive monetary “easing” in recent years, lambasted the idea that more money would solve the economic problems plaguing America.

“If the Federal Reserve thought the economy was improving, it wouldn’t need this artificial prop to keep sustaining it,” said Euro Pacific Capital head Peter Schiff, noting that wild money printing was helping to drive the nation and its economy off a cliff. “The President and the Federal Reserve are now conspiring to create a much bigger crisis.”

The Fed claimed it would be targeting a 2-percent rate of annual inflation for 2012. However, few analysts take the government’s “Consumer Price Index” (CPI) measure of inflation seriously — especially as Core CPI, one of the most frequently cited figures, omits price increases in key sectors like food and energy.

According to Schiff, the government’s claim based on CPI that inflation for 2011 was 3 percent is completely bogus. It was actually much higher, he said, noting that officials were using phony measures like the CPI to mask the true rate of inflation. And it is likely to be even higher in 2012 before eventually morphing into a full-blown currency and debt crisis in the coming years.

“The reason they have to keep [interest rates] so low is to artificially support a phony economy,” Schiff explained. “This economy is a disaster waiting to happen — the only thing standing between us and economic Armageddon is zero-percent interest rates.”

But it can’t go on forever, and the longer rates are kept so low, the worse the looming crisis will be. For now, Schiff, whose business trades gold and silver, said investors should protect their assets by purchasing precious metals “before the price goes any higher.”

An analysis by Bloomberg published on Wednesday showed that gold — which has increased every year for more than a decade — provided the best return on investment over the last five years when adjusted for volatility. And heavy-hitting financial firms cited in the report including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are forecasting that gold prices will keep rising to around $2,000 in 2012 or 2013.

“People are still very under-invested in gold, and so there is a huge scope of that increasing,” explained UniCredit analyst Jochen Hitzfeld, the most accurate precious-metals forecaster tracked by Bloomberg over the past two years. Other experts noted that gold is widely and accurately perceived as a safe-haven in times of economic turmoil.

While gold prices have been extraordinarily volatile — spot prices hit $1,923 in September before crashing to $1,523 by the end of 2011 — the longer-term rally has so far been relatively consistent over the past decade. Just 10 years ago, gold was worth less than $300 per ounce.

Silver, which has also seen drastic price fluctuations, was less than $5 per ounce 10 years ago. In 2011, it surged to an all-time high of around $50 before dropping back down to about $33.35 today. The U.S. dollar, meanwhile, has not been doing so well — even when measured against other depreciating paper currencies.

Even billionaire investor George Soros, whose well-publicized sale of some 99 percent of his gold holdings during the first quarter of 2011 spooked precious-metals investors, has jumped back into the market. According to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings cited by Bloomberg, the hedge-fund manager had increased his stake in SPDR Gold Trust, an exchange-traded fund tracking gold prices, to almost 50,000 shares as of September 30.

Central banks around the world were also buying up multi-ton quantities of gold bullion, according to data cited in news reports. And the trend shows no signs of slowing down.

In other bullish news for the precious metal, unconfirmed reports indicate India has started purchasing oil from Iran using gold rather than U.S. dollars. China could follow, too, according to news reports.

“It shows the exodus from the dollar is gaining speed,” noted precious-metals and currency trader Simit Patel on the investment analysis site Seeking Alpha. “With the major economies of the world facing $7.6 trillion in bond payments due this year, I think the tipping point for a shift out of dollars and into a new monetary system backed by gold is not as far off as it may seem.”

With the steep drop in prices during the last few months of 2011, some analysts and traders were reluctant to get back in the precious-metals market before the appearance of a solid bottom had solidified. But the big banks and respected analysts are forecasting that as long as the fundamentals — out-of-control money printing, sovereign-debt crises, wild government spending, and more — remain the same, gold and silver prices could see massive gains in 2012.

Source: New American.

Stocks Are Cheaper Than They’ve Been in Two Decades … U.S. stocks are trading at their cheapest levels since at least 1990, according to such commonly used valuations as price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios as well as dividend yield, Bespoke Investment Group says. This realization will lift the S&P 500 Index by 11 percent to 1,400 this year or maybe more, according to the research firm’s 2012 outlook report. “The S&P 500 is currently trading below its historical average P/E and P/B ratios, and these ratios are also at their lowest levels in the careers of a large percentage of money managers,” wrote strategists Paul Hickey and Justin Waters. – Fast Money/CNBC

Dominant Social Theme: Now is a golden buying opportunity!

Free-Market Analysis: OK, stocks are cheaper than they’ve been in 20 years. But cheaper than what?

This is actually a kind of power elite dominant social theme, in our view. We used to believe in the myth of the ever-abundant stock market but not anymore. Nonetheless, equity drummers keep pounding away. Stocks are just like any other widget. Sometimes they’re expensive according to historical indicators and sometimes they’re cheap. When they’re cheap you buy. When they’re expensive you … hold.

In the wonderful world of brokerage, the wisest customers never sell. In about five years from now – if the current system survives, and we doubt it will – there’ll be a virtual flood of articles about the few brave souls who managed to hold onto their equity positions for the past 15 years without flinching.

Now, we’ll be told, they’ll reap the rewards. Their stocks are up! Their patience has been rewarded. What we won’t read is the information about the lost opportunities, the funds tied up in failing stocks for a decade-and-a-half, the lack of capital to participate in gold and silver as both metals rose tremendously in value.

The rhetoric never changes. We remember the euphorias of the late 1990s and mid-2000s. Stocks, we were told, were like heirlooms. If you owned Kodak (oops) you never sold it. Or GM (oops), etc. You were supposed to pass these certificates down from generation to generation, like silverware. Here’s some more from the article:

The S&P 500 is already on track to reach or exceed this forecast, up more than four percent in 2012. Better-than-expected economic data and an emerging bailout solution in Europe are behind the gains.

To start 2012, the benchmark had an earnings multiple of 13, the lowest since 1990 and below the 80-year average of 15, according to Bespoke. It would take a move back to 1,484 to get the benchmark back to this long-term mean P/E.

The price-to-book ratio is 2.05, below the average since the late 1970s of 2.43. To get back to that average P/B, the benchmark would need to increase to 1,491.

So trading multiples are low and so is price-to-book. Sounds exciting but even the most trustworthy and historical numbers can lie. In this case, we’d point out, the analysts are looking at statistics instead of the larger business cycle.

It’s the Austrians who helped invented business cycle analysis, FA Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, and everyone who’s anyone on Wall Street is well aware of it. Central banks print money and generate stock-market bubbles. Then the markets and the bubbles collapse and the cycle starts all over.

But really, that’s not the whole truth because there are cycles within cycles. From at least 1980 to 2008, for almost 30 years, the US Federal Reserve in particular inflated the economy at the first sign of a slowdown.

Alan Greenspan did much of this by raising and lowering short-term interest rates gradually. But the result was a steady inflation of the US (and the world’s) economy. Of course, that can’t go on forever. What such endless amounts of monetary inflation do to an economy is entirely poisonous. They destroy it.

Sooner or later, larger economic forces reject the extra money sloshing around in the economy. Too much has been built, too much created, too much excess capital has been misplaced and mis-allocated. The economy collapses and central bankers rush to inject yet MORE money.

It’s the reason the banking sector (central banks’ distribution arm) is probably the largest or at least most important industry in the world right now. No matter what happens, banks aren’t allowed to fail.

The same cannot be said for the stock market. No matter how the powers-that-be try to prop up the stock market, the larger equity marts reflect the larger economy. When that slumps, so do stocks in aggregate. And it’s a fact that large economic slumps are an inevitable result of central banking monetary “crack.”

Today, and really for the past decade, the world has been in the grip of a fiat-paper bear market. It was most seriously affected during 2008 when the dollar reserve system basically collapsed. The chances are in our view that the fiat-money bear market may last several more years – even as many as four or five more.

Of course, we’re on record as wondering if this market cycle will go that far. We have a feeling that as gold approaches its higher-highs, the powers-that-be will have had enough. The dollar reserve system (which is basically no more, in our view) will be replaced by something else. Some sort of gold standard, we figure.

Of course, we likely won’t be in a favor of it. A potential new monetary standard, whatever it’s supposed to be, will no doubt be suggested and perhaps implemented by the same group that has saddled the world with 100 or more central banks.

This Anglosphere power elite will NEVER let the market have its way. They are determined to impose their will on human events at the expense of whatever human suffering is necessary. We can see them lining up the options already – a state-mandated metals money or perhaps the IMF‘s SDRs, supported by a larger basket of currencies.

Of course, whatever happens over the next few years will be reflected in the stock market. If the world does end up with a new monetary system, we can’t imagine that will be bullish in the short-term for equities. The market is no fan of uncertainty.

And for this reason, we return to our initial question – stocks are cheap, historically, but cheaper than what? Different “investments” are valued differently at different times during the artificial central-banking business cycle that we must function under.

In this case, we would argue, stocks are more likely reflecting potential chaos to come than a buying opportunity. Sure, there may be rallies during this fiat bear market but they should be considered within the context of the larger trends.

What bothers us most about these kinds of analyses is that if you mention the reality of the business cycle to many people on Wall Street, they’ll grant its existence and influence. But then they’ll go right back to banging the drum for equities as if the market can be evaluated solely on its own. (True, if pressed, they’ll suggest a government or corporate bond during a downturn.)

Likewise, regulations have been created without taking business cycle economics into account. Most SECregulations tend to narrow the strategic richness of the opportunities that people have to invest just when they are needed most. What regulations do, therefore, is to create an even more artificial and brittle marketplace where everyone is investing the same way – or trying to leave through the same door.

The regulators and the brokers are really two sides of the same coin. Stubbornly, neither will recognize the REAL business cycle or the culpability of the larger central banking system in its too-often ruinous behavior. With all the emphasis on risk, disclosure and asset diversification, this refusal to recognize the obvious is a little bit like ignoring the elephant in the room.

Of course, more and more investors are “getting it” these days, thanks to all the information available on the Internet. It is the Internet Reformation – as we call it – that is increasingly driving people’s investment behavior, and driving them away from mainstream equities as well.

As understanding about the real factors affecting the market continues to rise, we expect continued skepticism about mainstream stock markets and about the financial industry in general. Soon, we would not be surprised if the buying public begins to understand more about business cycle investing then the investment pros are willing to discuss. That will certainly make their jobs more difficult and lead to increasing confusion all around.

Conclusion: On the bright side, however, the talk about treating stocks like heirlooms may subside once and for all.

Source: The Daily Bell.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Let me start by saying that even though I’ve referred to other debates as the worst, this one definitely took the cake and showed us just how godawful these things can be. This debate came to us from Tampa, Florida and was hosted by NBC. Brian Williams was the moderator and he was a shitty one at that. To start, there were no intros and the audience was not allowed to participate in any way. This means that the crowd could not applaud, boo or get fired up like they have in most previous debates. While I understand that this is done to speed up the process and fit in more quality time with the candidates, it creates bad television and boring debates, especially when the candidates argue incessantly for long periods of time and the moderator is too chicken shit to break it up and stick to his own rules regarding time. My biggest regret about watching this goddamned thing is that I only had one beer in the whole fucking house. I was also too lethargic from a 20 oz. New York strip to get up and mix a stronger drink. At least the ecstasy I got from my giant piece of premium American red meat kept me from losing my shit and going completely insane throughout this episode of ‘Three Statists and a Constitutionalist’.

So we start with Newt Gingrich being asked to respond to Mitt Romney recently calling him “erratic” and a “failed leader”. Woohoo! Here we go already starting with the personal attacks over policy issues. Gingrich immediately dropped several Reagan references and was shocked that he didn’t get any applause. Oh yes, the crowd must stay silent or be forced to stare into the droopy eyes of Brian Williams who has been known to turn people into hipster liberals with just a quick glare. This didn’t bode well for Newt as he was waiting for the crowd to react to his empty one-liners. Gingrich said he was like Reagan, who ignored Carter and went on to win the election. Really Newt? You’re ignoring the attacks against you? Funny, because every show I’ve seen you on, you’ve just gone on and on about all the attacks against you.

Gingrich is immediately given a second question, as Williams asks him how he has changed since being Speaker of the House. Gingrich says that as Speaker he had four consecutive balanced budgets, which he says is unheard of. He also brags about how many jobs he created and how he reformed welfare. This is also funny because in a recent interview he took the Romney approach and said government doesn’t create jobs the private sector does. So which is it Newt?

Brian Williams then directs his attention to Mitt and I can already tell that Paul and Santorum are probably going to get the shaft on time this round. Romney is asked if he is electable, which is a dumb fucking question. It’s a dumb question when anyone is asked this, really. Romney talks about how he saved the Olympics and created tons of businesses. He doesn’t actually answer the question he just runs through his already well-known yet well-rehersed talking points. He then switches to attacks on Gingrich and disses him for talking bad about the Paul Ryan Plan and for aligning with Nancy Pelosi on several occasions.

Newt Gingrich says that he isn’t going to spend the entire evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation.” Yes he will, just keep reading. Gingrich says that the American people need a discussion on how the candidates are going to beat Obama and that they need to move passed the bullshit. Romney jumps in and points out that 88 percent of the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against Newt, which caused him to resign from his position in disgrace. Mitt also points out that Newt’s approval rating when he left Congress was 18 percent. Romney then takes a stiff shot at Gingrich when he says that we can’t retake the White House if the person leading the fight was in the pocket of Freddie Mac. This fight then goes on forever and Brian Williams just lets them duke it out regardless of time restraints and the fact that there are other candidates who haven’t even talked yet. Gingrich tries to explain how he left Congress, which is all bullshit and just leads to him arguing with Romney over who has the most inaccurate attack ads. I thought you were ignoring the attacks and weren’t going to spend the evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation”? Can we please discuss the real issues?!

Rick Santorum finally gets asked a question and as much as I loathe the guy, I’m glad to see him at this point. Of course he is asked to comment on the Romney-Gingrich spat because Brian Williams wants the two feuding idiots to be front and center to help discredit the GOP as a whole. Santorum rambles some nonsense about painting a positive vision for the country and adds that he creates a real contrast to Mitt and Newt. Um, not really homeboy unless you’re referring to the religio-fascist part. Santorum then claims to “..have a track record of being a strong conservative.” Well that depends on what your definition of a conservative is, as it varies greatly from candidate to candidate.

Brian Williams then takes a shot at Santorum and says that he lost his seat in the Senate by 18 percent. This was of course after Santorum bragged about winning the seat in a liberal state. Santorum responds to the criticism by saying that the Republican governor in Pennsylvania lost worse than he did that same year. What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Santorum also physically crouched down when he was rambling incoherently and actually said the word “crouch down”. Thanks for the visual buddy.

Finally Ron Paul gets brought into this thing! Williams reminds us that Paul once said that he never visualized himself as winning the nomination so why does he think he can win now. Paul says that he doesn’t sit around and dream about being in the White House like everyone else on stage. He points out that, according to polls, when he is put head-to-head with Obama he has a better chance at beating him than anyone else in the GOP. Paul also clues the masses into the fact that Iowa was just a straw poll and the real winner hasn’t yet been decided, as it will be the person who acquires the most delegates. He’s asked if he will run third party because every goddamned moderator has to seemingly ask this question. Once again, Ron Paul says that he has no intentions to do so. He is then asked if he would ever support Newt. Paul gives Gingrich props on his stance with the Federal Reserve and the gold standard but adds that he needs to change his stance on foreign policy. Newt responds by giving Paul some props on economic issues.

They then get into the boring topic of Mitt Romney’s tax returns which just shifts all the attention back to Tweedledum and Tweedledumber – that being Romney and Gingrich, you can choose which is which. Romney says that his income tax info will show how he made profits and rewards. He then goes on to claim that he’ll drop corporate tax rates while reshaping the entire tax code in an effort to simplify it. Gingrich jumps in and channels Mitt’s dad, who released a dozen years worth of tax information. Newt then says something about a Hong Kong tax model. This guy’s always pulling obscure shit from other countries. Romney jumps back in and says he and his father disagreed on many things and unlike his dad, he will only release a few years worth of his personal tax data. Romney then goes on to say that he inherited nothing and made his own mark in the world. He name drops Staples, Sports Authority and Steel Dynamics as ten minutes have passed without mentioning them. Truthfully, I think everything Mitt says is a pre-recorded statement and he just moves his lips to the words.

The mic in this rap battle is then passed back over to Santorum. He takes a shot at Newt and Mitt when he says that they claim to support capitalism but how can they make that claim when they supported the bailouts. Santorum says that we should have allowed these moronic financial institutions go through bankruptcy. What some people might not know though is that Rick Santorum wasn’t in office at the time of the bailouts so he couldn’t vote on TARP; so it is easy for him to say he didn’t support it. When looking a little deeper however, Rick Santorum did support the bailout of the airline industry. So would he have really rejected TARP? Based off of the $15 billion dollar airline bailout and his past voting record with other things, Santorum looks to be a pro-TARP motherfucker. Lucky for him he lost his seat in the Senate and didn’t get stuck with TARP on his record.

Newt is asked about more criticism from Mitt, who apparently claimed Gingrich “peddled influence” with Freddie Mac. Why couldn’t this be addressed the first time in this very same debate when Newt was asked to comment on Mitt’s criticisms? Time wasting bullshit! Newt said he never “peddled influence” and added that Romney’s approach about the Freddie Mac situation is nasty. Gingrich claims that he never lobbied for them and actually says that he brought in experts to teach his staff how to not lobby. Sorry, I just find that laughable. Romney quickly lashes back at Gingrich saying that Freddie Mac doesn’t pay “historians” as much as they paid Newt. Romney also points out that Gingrich was pushing GSEs every chance he got, which is a form of lobbying. Newt said he only made $35,000 per year, which is a lie. Why do people like either of these shady bastards? Aren’t Americans sick of criminals in power?

The Mitt-Newt show goes on for a long time as these two duke it out with no buzzer going off and Brian Williams sitting quiet – wasting our precious fucking time on this bitch fight. Williams, after minutes of this nonsense finally cuts in to stop it but only because NBC has to go to commercial break. Brian Williams has the spine of a squid.

After the commercial break, the issue of the housing crisis comes up. Santorum is the first person asked to address it. He claims that he saw the crisis on the horizon and tried to stop it. Yep asshole but you were about a decade behind Ron Paul on seeing it. Santorum, while explaining his fallacious knowledge on the subject, actually utters the phrase: “Let capitalism work.” Hilarious! This guy doesn’t know what capitalism is! Santorum immediately follows up his pro-capitalism line by saying that the government needs to step in and help the people who have lost their houses. Here we go with the doublespeak! Santorum continues by saying that people need the freedom to get out from under these houses and get relief. Really dude? Just “let capitalism work”?

On the same issue, Paul is asked if the government owes the people anything. Paul says that they owe the people a free market and sound money. He says that the interest rates were kept too low for far too long. Ron Paul says that he introduced legislation to help prevent the housing bubble from bursting years before it actually did. He declares that the bubble and the consequences of these actions were easy to spot but no one in Washington did. Paul says that the government needs to get out of the way. He then closes by saying that the Federal Reserve dumped so much debt on the taxpayers after wiping the slate clean with banks and corporations they bailed out.

Brian Williams, who apparently wants to suck Mitt’s dick, gives us another Mitt-Newt session when he brings them in on the housing issue. Romney says that the government has to help the people they fucked but immediately after that says that the government has to get out of it. Which is it bro? Gingrich says we need to repeal Dodd-Frank as it would improve the economy overnight. He says that the bill led big banks to get bigger. Newt is asked if the financial system is overregulated, which just proves how stupid Brian Williams is. Romney jumps back in to monopolize more time and says that the markets need regulation to work. What? What happened to capitalism? He then adds that we need up-to-date regulation not that old shitty regulation.

Williams, who wants to keep Romney in the spotlight, switches the subject and asks him about opening up Cuba. Mitt actually says that he’d be glad if Fidel Castro died and went to see his maker.. WTF?! Romney says we can’t talk about opening up Cuba but we need to support those in the country who want freedom. Okay, so how are we supporting them by contributing to making their economy shit? Why do you think that it is so easy for Castro to convince his people that America is bad? This is why! Romney wants to help Cubans by punishing them and not “giving in”.

Gingrich adds to Romney’s “glad when Castro’s dead” comment by saying that he won’t meet his maker but that he’ll essentially go to Hell. Newt starts talking about a “Cuban Spring”. He says that we need to reach out to younger Cubans who want freedom. Of course he, like Mitt, wants to do this without working with them in a productive and positive way. These guys must believe in magic.

When the discussion shifts back over to Ron Paul, he says that he has a lot to teach these guys on foreign policy. Ron Paul calls Newt and Mitt’s tactics “isolationist”. Funny watching Ron flip the script when every idiot out there calls him an “isolationist” as the idiots don’t really get what it means. Paul points out that the Cold War is over and the Cuban Missile Crisis was 50 years ago. He adds that we prop up Castro with our sanctions and embargo as it helps him stay in power by gaining support through pointing the finger of blame at the United States. Paul reminds the candidates that we used to talk to the Soviets and currently talk to the Chinese while we’ve had major problems with both. He even adds that we went in and talked to the Vietnamese after the disastrous Vietnam War. He says that we are living in the dark age if we are going to refuse to talk to Cuba.

Santorum, who apparently ignored Paul’s great insight, calls for us to use sanctions against Cuba until the Castro brothers die. He says that for right now we have to keep the current policy active and we shouldn’t embrace Cuba until the dictators are dead. Santorum then goes on a dumb tangent about how Cuba works directly with jihadists. Here we go with the fear mongering!

On Iran, Romney says we need to build a super strong military to scare the fuck out of everyone. Gingirch says that we are a country that likes peace and stability. Apparently he means between all the wars he wants to bring forth. Gingrich adds that he feels that we should defend the freedom of the sea. He then shares his thoughts on Obama, saying that Iran keeps testing us because our president is weak. Ron Paul gets in the Iran talk and says that our blockade of Iran’s strait is an act of war and tells us to imagine if the roles were reversed. Paul points out that Iran needs the Strait of Hormuz as much as we do. He warns us all that we have too many wars and the thought of invading Iran is ridiculous as we don’t have any money.

Santorum is asked how he would attack Iran when they have such a large target list. Santorum doesn’t answer that, he immediately goes right into the fear mongering he is so good at. He says that if Iran gets a nuke, the whole world will change. He then says that Obama’s Iran policy is a failure and feels that no one in power is serious about the Iranian threat. He then claims that Iran’s leadership is the equivalent to having a country ran by Al-Qaeda. He hammers the point that it is reckless to not try and stop Iran from building a nuke. He then flips the script and starts rambling about manufacturing and energy in Florida.

The candidates are then asked why it is okay for them to court voters in Spanish while they are all in favor of English as a national language. Gingrich says that the common bond that unites a country is one language. He says that there will be 300-400 languages used in the U.S. very soon so we need to unify the people with just one. Romney agrees with Newt before rambling about Massachusetts teachers teaching in other languages. Ron Paul steps in and says that we need to have one language at the national level but adds that if states want ballots in Spanish, such as Florida, it is their right to do so. Paul says that you can make English the official federal language without interfering in what the states want to do.

On illegal immigration, Newt says that the children of illegals should be allowed to join the military so they can go off and die for his senseless wars. Romney says he would not sign the DREAM Act in its current form but he would if it included military service. Romney then goes on a weird rant that illegals should “self-deport” themselves, go back to their country of origin and apply for legal citizenship. Santorum, who didn’t think the “self-deportation” comments were obscure, says that people have been self-deporting for awhile now due to our shitty economy. Santorum keeps referring to illegal immigrants as “they” as if they are something other than individuals.

Newt is asked about sugar and goes on to ramble about sugar types. Romney, who gets a bunch of money from Florida sugar farmers, says that we need to kill sugar subsidies. He then goes on a rant about homes in Florida, diverting his attention away from sugar. Romney says that too many homes in Florida are underwater. OMG! Global warming is drowning us! Oh.. wait.. that was a figure of speech.

Ron Paul is asked some dumb question about saving the Everglades and then we go to a commercial break. Why couldn’t they ask that dummy Santorum about the Everglades? He’s a snake, he’d have more invested in the issue. We also get Williams asking abut the Terry Schiavo case, which happened years ago and has nothing to do with anything that is going on right now. Gingrich and Paul address it but it is just a time-waster.

Romney is asked if space is a priority. He says “yes” but adds that Obama doesn’t have a real vision for NASA and because of that, Florida is suffering. Actually dude, I live in Florida and I’m doing okay, so don’t speak for me. Mitt says that the right mission for NASA needs to be determined by the president. Um.. I thought you were a capitalist guy? Romney then adds that NASA shouldn’t be solely funded by the government but that it should be funded by a collaborative effort of the military and companies that have ties and can benefit from the institutions work.

Keeping with Romney, he is asked what he’s done to promote conservatism. Mitt gives the stupidest answer when he says that he has created a family and worked in the private sector. Really, that’s your answer? Gingrich is then brought in and asked to comment on Mitt and replies with, “I don’t want to spend my time commenting on Mitt.” Well what the fuck was he doing the first half of this goddamned debate?! Santorum jumps in and rants and whines about a bunch of shit regarding Gingrich and Romney not being as conservative as he is.

Brian Williams then asks Ron Paul if Gingrich and Romney are insufficiently conservative. Why didn’t Williams ask if Santorum was? Ron Paul says that it all depends on what your definition of conservative is. He points out that conservatives have lost their way completely and asks how can a person be conservative when they’ll cut food stamps but won’t stop wasteful spending overseas. He adds that you can’t have smaller government if you keep creating all these wars. He also adds that you can’t promote personal liberty and then try to legislate all the crap that the GOP wants.

Mittens says that he has a solid conservative record, just look at it. Okay dickbag. He then diverts and brags about how Ted Kennedy had to take a loan out on his house to beat him in the governor’s race back in the 90′s. Yeah, he still beat you dude. He finishes his soulless rambling by saying he will repeal Obamacare and leave health care up to the states.

Gingrich is asked about his numbers being on the rise and what scares him the most about possibly becoming president. He just says that the next president will face enormous problems. No shit cuntpickle! He then warns that there are too many huge special interest groups working against the country and only for their own benefit. Somehow he expects to defeat that. This ends the debate, twenty minutes early and Brian Williams introduces NBC’s crack staff to analyze the debate for the remainder of the time. I turn off the TV.

God this shit was awful.

Grading Scale:
Grade B: Ron Paul
Grade D+: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Rick Santorum
Grade D-: Mitt Romney

Gold’s London AM fix this morning was USD 1,675.00, GBP 1,076.55, and EUR 1,294.94 per ounce.

Friday’s AM fix was USD 1,646.00, GBP 1,064.68, and EUR 1,274.29 per ounce.

Cross Currency Table – Bloomberg

Gold has risen in all currencies today and bullion up nearly 1 % to $1,675/oz. Gold rose 1.7% last week has risen more than 6% so far this year.

Gold jumped to its highest in more than a month as result of the uncertainty over of the Greek debt outcome and the growing geopolitical tensions with Iran and the US and Nato countries.

The Iranian geopolitical tension is supporting gold as Britain, America and France have delivered a clear message to Iran, sending six warships led by a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier through the highly sensitive Strait of Hormuz.

Reuters report that the EU has agreed to freeze the assets of the Iranian central bank and ban all trade in gold and other precious metals with the Iranian Central Bank and other public bodies in Iran.

According to IMF data, at the last official count (in 1996), Iran had reserves of just over 168 tonnes of gold. The FT reported in March 2011 that Iran has bought large amounts of bullion on the international market to diversify away from the dollar, citing a senior Bank of England official.

Currency wars continue and are deepening.

Many Asian markets are closed for the Lunar New Year holiday which has led to lower volumes.

Of note was there was an unusual burst of gold futures buying on the TOCOM in Japan, which has helped the cash market to breach resistance at $1,666 an ounce.

Investors are also waiting for euro zone finance ministers to decide the terms of a Greek debt restructuring later today.  This would be the second bailout package for Greece.

The risk of contagion in Eurozone debt and wider markets is leading to continued safe haven demand for gold.

Reuters Global Gold Forum

Silver surged 8% last week and is up nearly 20% so far in 2012 – thereby outperforming the other precious metals and nearly all assets.

Silver cut through resistance at $31 like knife through butter on Friday. Next resistance is $33 then and $35 and then the big $50.

Increasing speculation that the Fed will soon embark on another round of quantitative easing or QE3 is also supporting the precious metals and confirmation of QE3 could see gold reach $1,700/oz in short order.

Source: Prison Planet.

The recent bankruptcy of financial stalwart and Wall Street casino failureMF Global in the US, has claimed a new and unlikely victim. Following the company’s glorious collapse, Trends Research founder Gerald Celente had his own six figure gold investment account completely looted by chapter 11 trustees, and he is fighting to get it back.