Browns Bullion Sale Explained?
Discussion
Interesting hardly begins to cover this. For years, Brown has taken the flak for the sale of bullion reserves at stupendously low prices and information about why this was done has been thin on the ground.
However, following yesterdays announcement that some information will be released regarding the sales there are two articles to read today
The Telegraph has this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance...
But possibly far more interesting, Zerohedge has this - http://www.zerohedge.com/article/did-gordon-brown-...
Was the great Bullion sale, at the expense of the taxpayer, actually the first round of Bank Bail outs?
Was part of our national wealth really thrown away to cover the potential short position exposure of companies like AIG and Rothschilds?
However, following yesterdays announcement that some information will be released regarding the sales there are two articles to read today
The Telegraph has this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance...
But possibly far more interesting, Zerohedge has this - http://www.zerohedge.com/article/did-gordon-brown-...
Was the great Bullion sale, at the expense of the taxpayer, actually the first round of Bank Bail outs?
Was part of our national wealth really thrown away to cover the potential short position exposure of companies like AIG and Rothschilds?
The second article makes some interesting points, it’s a pity that there is little in the way of supporting evidence and the author is a “Tyler Durden” and not a names individual (not that I could blame any person for wanting to protect their privacy from thsi government). As the Telegraph points out, the details of the sale haven’t been completely disclosed. I’m also very sceptical of any story that looks to shift blame for a government decision away from winky and onto “the banks” , as its exactly the sort of disingenuous manipulation that has over the past 13 years, become a Nazi/Socialist/scum/labour party trademark
Far more likely is the generally held view, that the sales took place, simply to provide capital for "labours economic miracle", which enabled the Nazi/Socialist/Scum/Labour party to invest in their election promises and pet projects, without having to make savings elsewhere.
Interestingly, it was only following the bullion sales, that PFI became the preferred method of infrastructure funding, which to me at least would indicate strongly that they had indeed blown all the money on pet projects and were looking to continue "the miracle" with off balance sheet private investment, a convenient option.
Far more likely is the generally held view, that the sales took place, simply to provide capital for "labours economic miracle", which enabled the Nazi/Socialist/Scum/Labour party to invest in their election promises and pet projects, without having to make savings elsewhere.
Interestingly, it was only following the bullion sales, that PFI became the preferred method of infrastructure funding, which to me at least would indicate strongly that they had indeed blown all the money on pet projects and were looking to continue "the miracle" with off balance sheet private investment, a convenient option.
Edited by AndrewW-G on Thursday 25th March 07:47
AndrewW-G said:
The second article makes some interesting points, it’s a pity that there is little in the way of supporting evidence and the author is a “Tyler Durden” and not a names individual (not that I could blame any person for wanting to protect their privacy from thsi government). As the Telegraph points out, the details of the sale haven’t been completely disclosed. I’m also very sceptical of any story that looks to shift blame for a government decision away from winky and onto “the banks” , as its exactly the sort of disingenuous manipulation that has over the past 13 years, become a Nazi/Socialist/scum/labour party trademark
Far more likely is the generally held view, that the sales took place, simply to provide capital for "labours economic miracle", which enabled the Nazi/Socialist/Scum/Labour party to invest in their election promises and pet projects, without having to make savings elsewhere.
Interestingly, it was only following the bullion sales, that PFI became the preferred method of infrastructure funding, which to me at least would indicate strongly that they had indeed blown all the money on pet projects and were looking to continue "the miracle" with off balance sheet private investment, a convenient option.
Fully agree - Most things could be looked at as theft to fund vanity projects for the Labour government - I say vanity as most of them haven't worked or have only benefited a minority.Far more likely is the generally held view, that the sales took place, simply to provide capital for "labours economic miracle", which enabled the Nazi/Socialist/Scum/Labour party to invest in their election promises and pet projects, without having to make savings elsewhere.
Interestingly, it was only following the bullion sales, that PFI became the preferred method of infrastructure funding, which to me at least would indicate strongly that they had indeed blown all the money on pet projects and were looking to continue "the miracle" with off balance sheet private investment, a convenient option.
Edited by AndrewW-G on Thursday 25th March 07:47
I just wish that the opposition would list everything and bang it home to the average Joe, who don't get involved enough in politics to do a bit of research (those that take the BBC as Gospel...), exactly what Labour have really done to the country over the last 13 years.
They had no obligation to tell the markets in advance. It was deeply stupid to do so, if you assume they were genuinely selling.
The banks was a lot more complex. Labour have long wanted to Nationalise all the banks, it was on their manifesto in the 1980s. Quite possibly their de-regulation was intended to recreate the situation running up to the Wall St Crash and thus allow it. If so, they were partially successful. Which should worry you!
The banks was a lot more complex. Labour have long wanted to Nationalise all the banks, it was on their manifesto in the 1980s. Quite possibly their de-regulation was intended to recreate the situation running up to the Wall St Crash and thus allow it. If so, they were partially successful. Which should worry you!
Dupont666 said:
why do they need to tell the market that they are selling as a government?
Is it law, or is it just Winky being a t
t?
I mean this with the gold.. (price goes into free fall)
Thinking of selling off the banks... (shares go into free fall)
there is a pattern here..
He's the worst combination of ignorance and arrogance.Is it law, or is it just Winky being a t
t?I mean this with the gold.. (price goes into free fall)
Thinking of selling off the banks... (shares go into free fall)
there is a pattern here..
He thinks he knows best and either ignores the advice of experts or doesn't even ask for it in the first place.
Great, if you're a genius - unfortunately, he is not.
TVR Moneypit said:
Gargamel said:
Worse than selling it was that he told the markets IN ADVANCE that he was going to sell it.
I don't have the figures but from his annoucement to the actual trades the price of gold declined quite sharply.
Nigel Farage v Gordon Brown regarding that matter;I don't have the figures but from his annoucement to the actual trades the price of gold declined quite sharply.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDwQEEAZhWM
For some reason Winky seems to think that spunking it all away is funny. Well, I guess he would do when it isn't even his money.
t's face, the more I dream of hurting him badly.Digga said:
grumbledoak said:
They had no obligation to tell the markets in advance. It was deeply stupid to do so, if you assume they were genuinely selling.
As opposed to deliberately moving the price of bullion downwards as a means to another end. Possible....t.. no wait we sold it on the cheap instead... Damn!!I saw this graph on Douglas Carswells blog.
Douglas Carswell said:
This graph shows how many £s you would have needed to buy an ounce of gold in the UK since the early 1970s.
Notice what happens each time Labour get into office?
Pundits and commentators follow one another - and fall for passing fads. This index is a far more constant measure of how various governments have managed our economy over the years.
Look at the graph - then try to guess when quantitative easing started.
Is it gold prices that have been increasing, or the value of our paper currency that has been steadily falling?
Notice what happens each time Labour get into office?
Pundits and commentators follow one another - and fall for passing fads. This index is a far more constant measure of how various governments have managed our economy over the years.
Look at the graph - then try to guess when quantitative easing started.
Is it gold prices that have been increasing, or the value of our paper currency that has been steadily falling?
Edited by tank slapper on Thursday 25th March 14:23
Dupont666 said:
Digga said:
grumbledoak said:
They had no obligation to tell the markets in advance. It was deeply stupid to do so, if you assume they were genuinely selling.
As opposed to deliberately moving the price of bullion downwards as a means to another end. Possible....t.. no wait we sold it on the cheap instead... Damn!!tank slapper said:
I saw this graph on Douglas Carswells blog.
Very interesting - hadn't seen that before.Douglas Carswell said:
This graph shows how many £s you would have needed to buy an ounce of gold in the UK since the early 1970s.
Notice what happens each time Labour get into office?
Pundits and commentators follow one another - and fall for passing fads. This index is a far more constant measure of how various governments have managed our economy over the years.
Look at the graph - then try to guess when quantitative easing started.
Is it gold prices that have been increasing, or the value of our paper currency that has been steadily falling?
Notice what happens each time Labour get into office?
Pundits and commentators follow one another - and fall for passing fads. This index is a far more constant measure of how various governments have managed our economy over the years.
Look at the graph - then try to guess when quantitative easing started.
Is it gold prices that have been increasing, or the value of our paper currency that has been steadily falling?
Edited by tank slapper on Thursday 25th March 14:23
I wonder if you overlaid any number of indicators over that, that there would be many a correlation.
Gargamel said:
Worse than selling it was that he told the markets IN ADVANCE that he was going to sell it.
I don't have the figures but from his annoucement to the actual trades the price of gold declined quite sharply.
In this instance it makes perfect sense if the point of the sales was exactly to drive the price downward to protect those banks that were exposed.I don't have the figures but from his annoucement to the actual trades the price of gold declined quite sharply.
TVR Moneypit said:
Gentlemen, with the greatest of respect, are these serious and likely conclusions, or is it tinfoil hat time?
Have the read the Zerohedge article?If not, a snippet.
"In front of 3 witnesses, Bank of England Governor Eddie George spoke to Nicholas J. Morrell (CEO of Lonmin Plc) after the Washington Agreement gold price explosion in Sept/Oct 1999. Mr. George said "We looked into the abyss if the gold price rose further. A further rise would have taken down one or several trading houses, which might have taken down all the rest in their wake. Therefore at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was very difficult to get the gold price under control but we have now succeeded. The US Fed was very active in getting the gold price down. So was the U.K."
Who want's to have another pop at Gordon, you know you want to!
"Concerns over the continuing turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa also boosted safe haven demand for precious metals, with the silver price rising to a 31-year high of $39.77 an ounce. The price was last at this level in January 1980, when the global economy was in turmoil following the 1979 oil crisis.
After hitting new highs, the gold price closed in London at $1,462.93, up $26, while silver ended the day up $1.21 at $39.71."
"Concerns over the continuing turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa also boosted safe haven demand for precious metals, with the silver price rising to a 31-year high of $39.77 an ounce. The price was last at this level in January 1980, when the global economy was in turmoil following the 1979 oil crisis.
After hitting new highs, the gold price closed in London at $1,462.93, up $26, while silver ended the day up $1.21 at $39.71."
AndrewW-G said:
"labour's economic miracle"
Does anyone else remember Winky saying in an election interview that he'd invested the proceeds in Euros and that the value had rocketed? It was totally lost on him (and sadly also lost on the feeble minded BBC interviewer) that the only reason the value had increased was that Winky's idiotic incompetence had sent the value of sterling down the pan!
So whilst the articles make interesting points, I will stick with the original theory on the gold being sold; Winky is a stupid
!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff