-- Published: Tuesday, 1 December 2015 | Print | Disqus
By Bill Holter
Over the Thanksgiving weekend I received over 1,000 e-mails in total, many suggesting potential topics to talk about. We'll talk about several topics on the surface, each one obvious in their own right.
First, I have been asked to speak about "climate change" as that is the current topic today for the world meeting in Paris. Let me first say this, I am no scientist and do not pretend to be one. From a big picture standpoint, didn't what is now currently known as "climate change" used to be "global warming"? I seem to remember hearing how some scientists who revealed some of the "global warming science" was faulty were fired. I even remember calls for prosecution of anyone who denies climate change. Maybe this is just an offshoot of the new American university system advocating censorship ...if what is said is contrary to the censor's opinions? That said, I believe if you put 100 scientists with no ax to grind into a room and had them vote, a very small percentage would believe and affirm "global warming". If you asked about "climate change", you might have a majority affirmation but no more than 50/50 would attribute it to "man".
In the interest of not being "prosecuted" (persecuted), I do not deny climate change. We now regularly are seeing droughts, floods, heat and cold in more severity and in more places than I can remember. I would simply ask what has changed in the last 40-50 years that might account for these changes? In the U.S., please do not tell me "carbon" because we lived in a far dirtier world in 1970 than we do today. Engines of all sorts are far more efficient (and cleaner) today than they were then. The production of electricity today is far more efficient than it was back then also. No one even considered the environment until Lake Erie actually "died", we have steadily become more responsible since then. China, not so much but can you imagine them actually paying the Rothschilds a "carbon tax" for their pollution?
The one thing I can see (with my own eyes) are chemtrails playing tic-tac-toe across our skies. Why did we not see these in the skies when we were little kids? Are the skies different today or are jet engines so radically different now from then? Please, do not insult my intelligence as these trails have been videoed being turned on and turned off. A very good source to learn more about "geo engineering" would be from Dane Wiginton. I would simply say this, maybe our climate is changing because the efforts of "man" to change the climate are actually having an effect? ...and they want to charge a tax for these changes? Why not try the most simple? Leave the climate to God for five or ten years and let's see what happens? Maybe the proposed global "carbon tax" (a scam in my opinion) will be "seen" as unnecessary ? One last question, who pays for or funds these sky writers anyway?
The last two subjects were both mentioned in my last article "Can you handle the ugly truth?". First, so many e-mails sounded of capitulation ..."this manipulation will go on forever". I assure you it will not. In fact, I probably received this link two dozen times from readers. This was posted at the (in my opinion, so I don't get pro-ersecuted) "anti gold" site Kitco. This article is a total joke as far as I am concerned. They quote both Barclay's and CPM Group, two leading apologists of the manipulation scheme for many years. They even disparage Peter Hambro for saying gold is very tight in London. Who would know one way or the other better than him? James Turk? He agrees! Of course his (their) opinion is supported by the backwardation in the gold market there.
I would also ask, has the registered category for deliverable gold on the COMEX EVER been this low? Something very very strange has also happened this delivery month, ONLY two contracts of over 7,800 were served on the first day. Why would this be? As I have written before, what incentive could ANY "short" possibly have to not deliver on the first day? Or even first three days? The short must pay "storage" for their physical gold right up until it is delivered and stand NO benefit whatsoever in stalling to deliver. This of course assumes the gold is actually there and "storage fees" are actually being paid...
The last topic today is the upcoming Fed meeting. Will they or won't they raise rates? As you know, I can't see any way they will do this, "data dependent" or not. Many say the rate hike depends on the unemployment number out this coming Friday. Really? The unemployment report has been shown by John Williams and others to be a bad joke in totally poor taste and virtually a complete fabrication. Zerohedge has come out with article after article showing the real situation in many reports and various market measures, the latest is seen here regarding ISM manufacturing. How is it possible the Fed is even contemplating a rate hike?
It cannot be because the financial system is so flush and the "punchbowl" needs to be taken away (this should have been done 20 or more years ago). From the financial side of things, stress is again beginning to build up, this chart:
clearly shows stress in high yield debt. Please understand this does not even include debt from the energy patch. How much stress do you believe is being felt there where their product has dropped over 60% in price and many are operating at giant losses! Will the Fed hiking rates help ease this pain?
From another standpoint, the dollar has become grossly overvalued and emerging markets are finding it more and more difficult to service their dollar debt. An interest rate hike will do what exactly to this situation? In my opinion the Fed is being driven out of fear. On the one hand they absolutely MUST raise interest rates as they have been zero bound for seven years ...in other words "when do we begin to move toward normal again"? On the other hand, I believe they are petrified as to what will happen if they actually do raise rates. It is not as if they have any precedent or history to look at as to how markets will react ...especially the behemoth $1 quadrillion plus in derivatives!
To finish, if the Fed does raise rates I will be shocked and petrified at the same time. If the Fed does ever actually shrink their balance sheet willingly I believe it is safe to say anyone reading this will no longer be living. This of course assumes the panicked sheep who believe "this can go on forever" are correct. I assure you they are not!
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.
The content on this site is protected
by U.S. and international copyright laws and is the property of GoldSeek.com
and/or the providers of the content under license. By "content" we mean any
information, mode of expression, or other materials and services found on GoldSeek.com.
This includes editorials, news, our writings, graphics, and any and all other
features found on the site. Please contact
us for any further information.
Live GoldSeek Visitor Map | Disclaimer
The views contained here may not represent the views of GoldSeek.com, its affiliates or advertisers. GoldSeek.com makes no representation, warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy
or completeness of the information (including news, editorials, prices, statistics,
analyses and the like) provided through its service. Any copying, reproduction
and/or redistribution of any of the documents, data, content or materials contained
on or within this website, without the express written consent of GoldSeek.com,
is strictly prohibited. In no event shall GoldSeek.com or its affiliates be
liable to any person for any decision made or action taken in reliance upon
the information provided herein.