-- Published: Tuesday, 3 November 2015 | Print | Disqus
By Bill Holter
For years Martin Armstrong has denied market manipulation had any effect on markets. He has taken this stance while touting the ability of his "cycles and charts" to forecast future prices of various markets. In his latest writing he says "Throughout history, there has NEVER been a market manipulated TO ALTER its long-term trend Ė PERIOD." Martin Armstrong, Oct 30, 2015.
If you read the article he points out Bretton Woods would never have failed nor would the Swiss peg have broken. I would point out, the Bretton Woods agreement lasted in its original form for 27 years until it failed. During the 1960's, the London Gold pool was formed to defend the dollar peg at $35 per ounce. The "pool" is officially admitted fact, it is admitted effort at "manipulation". Maybe Mr. Armstrong does not believe 27 years is "the long term"? He went on to say "why invest in something that won't be allowed to rise"? In the case of Bretton Woods it is obvious, the gold price was being artificially suppressed and would one day break free ...which it did from $35 to over $800 in less than nine years! Wouldn't this qualify as a reason to invest in something that would "never be allowed to go up"? Were they not trying to price gold against Mother Nature's upward pull? I would ask, other than "severity" (the amount of zeros), is there anything different today than back in the late 1960's?
It is already well documented markets far and wide are manipulated against the true trend of Mother Nature. The stock market in Japan for example has been supported by the Bank of Japan buying up over 50% of equity ETF's. To this point it has worked, would Martin Armstrong counsel the purchase of Japanese equities because this "really isn't" an instance of manipulation? Would he counsel not selling something which will never be allowed to go down? Actually, why is there such a thing as a "plunge protection team" in the U.S. in the first place? Or does this not exist either?
Another Armstrong fallacy and I quote "The amount of capital that will trade against anything that moves against its long-term trend is endless. If you really believe all this nonsense, then you better trade a different market. Why buy something that is manipulated and can never rally? It makes no sense." Do you see the flaw here? He speaks about "endless capital", what entity(s) theoretically have endless capital? Why the central banks of course ...and who's capital is the "most endless"? Yes, THE FED! Just one last question, "who" has the motive to keep the gold price thermometer from rising? Could it be the central bank who issues the reserve currency and who's main competitor has ALWAYS been gold!? Yes, again THE FEDERAL RESERVE!
It is not rocket science and certainly not even speculation or conspiracy "theory" anymore, it is well documented that markets are in fact manipulated and done so in the directions central banks and sovereign treasuries wish. This is now FACT by admission of various central bankers, various sovereign treasury officials ...and various admissions of guilt from financial firms who were doing the dirty work!
So Mr. Armstrong, please do not insult the intelligence of those of us who can still add 2+2 together. Tell "these people" there is no manipulation, they will believe this ...or anything else for that matter. To run around and talk about the complete collapse of the Western financial world in one breath and scare people into selling their only crash insurance for protection in the next breath is dastardly indeed! I believe your opining the collapse of the Western fiat system is 100% correct, this however cannot happen without capital flooding and finding it's way into a safe monetary haven. What "is" the safe haven?
A few years back while opining of a market/financial collapse from behind bars, Mr. Armstrong was adamant that gold would move to $5,000+ per ounce or higher as a result. He called them cause and effect at the time and gold would be the safe haven from a dysfunctional system, what has changed? This is a very important question in my opinion... what has changed and why did this change immediately take place after they sprung the prison doors open? Did sunlight give him a change of "heart" (and logic) or was the federal "company mantra" part of the key to his release? According to Martin Armstrong (and Ben Bernanke), gold is not money! As George Straight has sung many times before ...I got some oceanfront property in Arizona ...and if you buy that I'll throw the Golden Gate in free! Enough said.
Bill Holter for;
Bill Holter writes and is partnered with Jim Sinclair at the newly formed Holter/Sinclair collaboration.
Prior, he wrote for Miles Franklin from 2012-15. Bill worked as a retail stockbroker for 23 years, including 12 as a branch manager at A.G. Edwards. He left Wall Street in late 2006 to avoid potential liabilities related to management of paper assets. In retirement he and his family moved to Costa Rica where he lived until 2011 when he moved back to the United States. Bill was a well-known contributor to the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) commentaries from 2007-present.
| Digg This Article
-- Published: Tuesday, 3 November 2015 | E-Mail | Print | Source: GoldSeek.com