Magox

Why should the R's agree to anything Obama proposes? Virtually everything he has passed has or is destined to failed. The economy sucks, debt is exploding, government is continuing to grow at an exorbitant rate, entitlements are being ignored and he passed a health care bill that is going to seriously !@#$ up the entire system come here shortly. Sorry, but everything the fool proposes ends up being detrimental to the economy. No thanks

You truly don't understand what markets are. Until you do, you will always remain clueless on this topic.

Oh my god!! It's the SPECULATORS!!! Run for your lives! They mean you harm!

I could agree that it could be linked to one another, and that I believe that is precisely what will happen. However, budget deficits are tied to lending through U.S bonds, not the printing of money. I can also fairly certainly say that what is driving gold prices higher isn't so much because of our ballooning deficits, even though it certainly plays a role, but much more so the devaluation of currencies across the board. The way investors should view gold is an alternate currency, as monetary policy becomes loose, the price of gold goes higher, as it tightens, the appeal drops off.

"Increasing the debt limit means you print more dollars" is a false statement.

Sheppard just doesn't seem to be able to cover enough ground, from what I've seen he always seems to hit the gap on those out wide plays a tad too late. I don't know if it's that his instincts aren't quite there to anticipate those players better or if he lacks the speed to make the play. In any case, I don't believe he is the answer.

I don't believe the debt has been the fundamental driver of gold over this past decade's bull run. It's more about currency devaluation than anything else.

I was just reading that the amount of money people are spending on gas – as a percentage of household income is at nearly 30-year highs.

That's a helluva observation there.

Oh the Irony

I agree that he should be replaced, but it is a new hole to fill, because with the current roster we have he would of been a starter.

The release of Barnett and Wilson are two of the better cap savings cuts we could have possibly made. If I'm not mistaken, the cuts of these two will save us over $7 M next year. I'm guessing they are saving cash for some re signings and new signings come FA.

I'd be perfectly happy if we selected Ansah with the #8 pick overall. In the senior bowl did you guys happen to catch how he sped out to the corner to make an open field tackle on Denard Robinson? Or in the first half when he had that impressive bull rush against the tackle, he drove that guy straight to the QB. He's got the speed and strength to be a stud at the next level, now what he needs is desire and more experience.

Ansah is nothing like Maybin. Plus he didn't even begin playing football until his sophomore year in college. So the one year wonder argument is absurd. And I disagree completely, he's got the speed to play OLB as the tweeter and plenty enough strength to play end. My guess is he will end up having one of the better careers out of all the pass rushers this draft.

Well, since I was pretty much forced out of metals, I haven't been keeping up nearly as much as I use to. I will say this, just look at a gold chart, you'll see that it has had an uncanny habit of making new highs every two years, the off year it sort of just muddles along, or as what bullish traders would say, creating a base for it's next launching point.

Even though Landry would be nice, there really isn't nearly the need at that position as let's say a WR. Considering that Chandler could be questionable for next year, I'd say Keller would seem like an intriguing prospect to become our TE.

For the record, I'm adamantly opposed to QE. And To be fair, some of that money is being circulated into the economy. It does create lower interest rates, it allows people to refinance their homes at lower rates, which in turn saves them on their mortgages that allows them to have more disposable income of which some of that flows into the economy. Secondly, there is a collateral impact on corporate bond issuance and rates. Corporate demand is higher because of lower rates, that allows companies to have more disposable cash for whatever purposes they need it for, which of course some of that flows back into the economy through more hiring and equipment. Third, there is the consequence of altering consumer and investor behavior. If an investor knows that he isn't making jack **** putting money away in his savings account or whatever bonds he's investing in, some of that money will then flow into riskier assets such as stocks, which of course has a short-term impact of higher stock prices that creates higher consumer confidence to spend money into the economy. Fourth, it does make our products more competitive, the lower the currency, the cheaper our goods are to foreign buyers with stronger currencies. So of course, this creates more demand for our products, which in turn leads to more profits and employment opportunities. In regards to your currency devaluation question. it's sort of like what Bill Gross says, the U.S is the "cleanest dirty shirt". Since the U.S dollar is fundamentally stronger than the Euro, the Dollar doesn't get devalued relative to the Euro. And since just about every other developed nation is doing the same, taking on monetary policy that devalues their currency, the Dollar really isn't dropping. However, if you place those currencies relative to tangible assets such as commodities, then they are for the most part getting devalued.

Allow me to answer you in this way. Remember, the goods of this world for the most part are traded in a market. Whether it's regulated or not, a market is a market, which means prices are determined by individuals and entities who willingly accept the underlying purchase and sale price. So, when you have monetary policy that is loose, in this particular instance QE, which is the printing of money, then there is first and foremost an impact on the currency itself. Market participants in most cases will reach an outcome of a lower value of that particular currency, simply because there is more of that currency available. General rule of thumb in most markets is that the more there is available of any underlying product, the lower the price that it will be. Same goes for the inverse. So now that we've established that the value of X currency is lower, how does that translate into higher commodity prices? So if you have an individual or entity that has a lower valued currency purchasing the same underlying product vs. a relatively higher valued currency, the individual or entity making that purchase of that product will pay more for the price because it takes more of that currency to purchase the same amount of that particular product than the person who has the higher valued currency. That's the main reason. Now of course there are collateral impacts to currency devaluation. Why do some central banks believe that devaluing their currency will stimulate their economies? There is an argument that can be made that these actions do stimulate the economies in the short-term, that produce more overall demand in those economies for virtually all goods, which leads to higher prices. But that's not the main reason why prices go higher due to currency devaluation.

Are you talking about interest rates?

You guys understand the concept of "baselines" right? The way I see it is that a result of ongoing loose monetary policy, the baseline for the price of oil is continuously rising. Having said that, that baseline or trend doesn't always move up or down in a consistent linear fashion. Think of it in a prism of a long-term chart. Of course there are plenty of fluctuations and volatility in the price of oil, but when you look at the charts there are other factors that affect the price of oil, such as supply, supply disruptions, demand, geopolitical risks etc. http://futures.tradi....com/chart/CO/M (I tried to paste image but was unable to) If you see, the trend for the past years has been rising. You can imagine drawing a line right through the trend line. If you see, with the exception of the big crash of 08/09, the lows are consistently getting higher. That's the baseline. There are two main factors that drive these markets, or for that matter in this case inflation, which is growth and currency. There are some years that growth/demand is the primary driver of the market and other years it's currency devaluation. In the earlier to mid to mid late part of the last decade, we had both growth and Dollar depreciation occurring which led to an explosive rise in commodities. Then of course we had the crash, which led to a significant drop off in demand and a run to safety to the dollar which led to its precipitous fall. In the beginning of the global "recovery", there was significant action from both the Fed with QE, which led to the erosion of the value of the dollar and we had lots of global stimulus in China, India and the US, which led to a increase in growth and demand, so we had both engines temporarily working again which led to a rapid rise in prices. Once stimulus wore off, growth world wide began to decline. So now, we have one of the two main engines that has broken down, which is growth. Since there isn't much of an appetite for more "stimulus" from governments across the world, actions from governments through out the world have relied on their central banks to try to help stimulate their own economies. The actions taken have been to further erode the value of their currencies in order to make their own goods cheaper and more competitive for exports to their global partners. In essence a currency race to the bottom. So we do have ongoing currency devaluation through out the world, which means we have one of the two engines that are operational. Growth: No Currency devaluation: Yes So even without growth, we still have prices that are slightly rising. Reason being is not because of a refinery shut down, or supply disruption or seasonality, those are just the day to day reasons why the markets move, the reason why the baseline is continuously and steadily rising is because of global monetary policy. If the world were to begin growing again at a normal healthy growth rate, then we would be seeing significantly higher prices. At least $120 a barrel Domestic oil and $135 Brent Crude. What will make this "bubble" end for the long-term, which is the term that TPS incorrectly likes to use will be the rise of currencies. Policy makers across the world will focus their shift to combat rising prices, which will become the predominant concern at some point moving forward, and monetary policy will change to a more hawkish stance, and then we will see both interest rates and currencies trend higher which will lead to the end of the commodity rise and flushing out of inflation.

Dude, I've spent a fair amount of time trying to explain this to him. No luck How so? That they taught those evil speculators a lesson?

Thank you for the link. Pretty much nailed it

So what was the "message" and objective of the release of the SPR suppose to be? Why did you applaud it if it achieved virtually nothing? Also can you link me the thread so that I can see exactly what i was responding to? Thank you for bringing this up, because it pretty much backs up my account, which was that you supported the release of the SPR, because you did believe that it would have an impact. Sorry, but a 1-2 day impact on prices affects no one other than traders. Also I seem to remember that I made this prediction before the release of the SPR and we both argued over it's impact then and after the release of the SPR. Correct? And when you said this What was the point that you were making? If you "agree" that it doesn't have a long-term impact, and let's be real here, you only agreed with it once you realized that it didn't have an impact on prices as I told you that it wouldn't, then why support the release of the SPR?

I can safely say you have no clue in what you are saying. Remember when you incorrectly believed that the release of the oil reserves would have an impact on the price oil and I told you that it wouldn't? Ya, that was hilarious And the only person who ignores facts here is you.

Exactly