Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Inflation’

The only viable solution is to get government out of the money business permanently

May 15, 2012 Leave a comment

Ron Paul

The Fed: Mend It or End It?

-
Last week I held a hearing to examine the various proposals that have been put forth both to mend and to end the Fed. The purpose was to spur a vigorous and long-lasting discussion about the Fed’s problems, hopefully leading to concrete actions to rein in the Fed.

First, it is important to understand the Federal Reserve System. Some people claim it is a secret cabal of elite bankers, while others claim it is part of the federal government. In reality it is a bit of both. The Federal Reserve System is the collusion of big government and big business to profit at the expense of taxpayers. The Fed’s bailout of large banks during the financial crisis propped up poorly-run corporations that should have gone under, giving them a market-distorting advantage that no business in the United States should receive. The recent news about JP Morgan is a case in point. JP Morgan, a recipient of $25 billion in bailout money, recently announced it lost another $2 billion. If a corporation shows itself to be a bottomless money pit of “errors, sloppiness and bad judgment,” the Fed shouldn’t have expected $25 billion in free money to change that or teach anyone a lesson in fiscal discipline. But it determined that this form of deliberate capital destruction was preferable to one business suffering bankruptcy. Clearly, some changes need to be made.

Several reforms for the Fed were discussed at the hearing. One was a call for the full employment mandate to be repealed, in order to allow the Fed to focus solely on stable prices.

Another reform calls for changes to the composition of the Federal Open Market Committee. Still another proposal was for outright nationalization of the Fed or of its functions. But if what the Fed does now is bad and inflationary, allowing the Treasury to print and issue money at-will would be even worse, and could possibly lead to a Weimar-like hyperinflation.

The problems and advantages of the gold standard were discussed at the hearing. The era of the classical gold standard was undoubtedly one of the greatest eras in human history. For a period of several decades in the late 19th century, the West made enormous advances. However, the gold standard was still run by government. The temptation to suspend gold redemption reared its head again with the outbreak of World War I. Once the tie to gold was severed and fiscal restraint thrown to the wind, undoing the damage would have required great fiscal austerity. Instead, the Western world proceeded to set up a gold-exchange standard which lasted not even a decade before easy money led to the Great Depression.

While returning to the gold standard would certainly be far better than maintaining the current fiat paper system, as long as the government retains the power to go off gold we may end up repeating the same mistakes.

The only viable solution is to get government out of the money business permanently. The way to bring this about is through currency competition: allow parallel currencies to circulate without receiving any special recognition or favor from the government. Fiat paper monetary standards throughout history have always collapsed due to their inflationary nature, and our current fiat paper standard will be no different.

It is imperative that the American people be educated on the dangers of the Fed and the importance of restoring sound money. The laying of the groundwork must begin today, so that the American people will be prepared for the day when the mirage the Fed has created evaporates completely. The full hearing footage is available on my website and I would encourage every American to take a look.

-

If you stop printing, another massive economic crash will occur

May 6, 2012 Leave a comment

Robert Wenzel: Economic Policy Journal

My Speech Delivered at the New York Federal Reserve Bank

At the invitation of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, I spoke and had lunch in the bank’s Liberty Room. Below are my prepared remarks.

Thank you very much for inviting me to speak here at the New York Federal Reserve Bank.

Intellectual discourse is, of course, extraordinarily valuable in reaching truth. In this sense, I welcome the opportunity to discuss my views on the economy and monetary policy and how they may differ with those of you here at the Fed.

That said, I suspect my views are so different from those of you here today that my comments will be a complete failure in convincing you to do what I believe should be done, which is to close down the entire Federal Reserve System

My views, I suspect, differ from beginning to end. From the proper methodology to be used in the science of economics, to the manner in which the macro-economy functions, to the role of the Federal Reserve, and to the accomplishments of the Federal Reserve, I stand here confused as to how you see the world so differently than I do.

I simply do not understand most of the thinking that goes on here at the Fed and I do not understand how this thinking can go on when in my view it smacks up against reality.

Please allow me to begin with methodology, I hold the view developed by such great economic thinkers as Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Murray Rothbard that there are no constants in the science of economics similar to those in the  physical sciences.

In the science of physics, we know that water freezes at 32 degrees. We can predict with immense accuracy exactly how far a rocket ship will travel filled with 500 gallons of fuel. There is preciseness because there are constants, which do not change and upon which equations can be constructed..

There are no such constants in the field of economics since the science of economics deals with human action, which can change at any time. If potato prices remain the same for 10 weeks, it does not mean they will be the same the following day. I defy anyone in this room to provide me with a constant in the field of economics that has the same unchanging constancy that exists in the fields of physics or chemistry.

And yet, in paper after paper here at the Federal Reserve, I see equations built as though constants do exist. It is as if one were to assume a constant relationship existed between interest rates here and in Russia and throughout the world, and create equations based on this belief and then attempt to trade based on these equations. That was tried and the result was the blow up of the fund Long Term Capital Management, a blow up that resulted in high level meetings in this very building.

It is as if traders assumed a given default rate was constant for subprime mortgage paper and traded on that belief. Only to see it blow up in their faces, as it did,  again, with intense meetings being held in this very building.

Yet, the equations, assuming constants, continue to be published in papers throughout the Fed system. I scratch my head.

I also find curious the general belief in the Keynesian model of the economy that somehow results in the belief that demand drives the economy, rather than production. I look out at the world and see iPhones, iPads, microwave ovens, flat screen televisions, which suggest to me that it is production that boosts an economy. Without production of these things and millions of other items, where would we be? Yet, the Keynesians in this room will reply, “But you need demand to buy these products.” And I will reply, “Do you not believe in supply and demand? Do you not believe that products once made will adjust to a market clearing price?”

Further , I will argue that the price of the factors of production will adjust to prices at the consumer level and that thus the markets at all levels will clear. Again do you believe in supply and demand or not?

I scratch my head that somehow most of you on some academic level believe in the theory of supply and demand and how market setting prices result, but yet you deny them in your macro thinking about the economy.

You will argue with me that prices are sticky on the downside, especially labor prices and therefore that you must pump money to get the economy going. And,  I will look on in amazement as your fellow Keynesian brethren in the government create an environment  of sticky non-downward bending wages.

The economist  Robert Murphy reports that President  Herbert Hoover continually pressured businessmen to not lower wages.[1]

He quoted Hoover in a speech delivered to a group of businessmen:

In this country there has been a concerted and determined effort  on the part of government and business… to prevent any reduction in wages.

He then reports that FDR actually outdid Hoover by seeking to “raise wages rates rather than merely put a floor under them.”

I ask you, with presidents actively conducting policies that attempt to defy supply and demand and prop up wages, are you really surprised that wages were sticky downward during the Great Depression?

In present day America, the government focus has changed a bit. In the new focus, the government  attempts much more to prop up the unemployed by extended payments for not working. Is it really a surprise that unemployment is so high when you pay people not to work.? The 2010 Nobel Prize was awarded to economists for their studies which showed that, and I quote from the Nobel press release announcing the award:

One conclusion is that more generous unemployment benefits give rise to higher unemployment and longer search times.[2]

Don’t you think it would make more sense to stop these policies which are a direct factor in causing unemployment, than to add to the mess and devalue the currency by printing more money?

I scratch my head that somehow your conclusions about unemployment are so different than mine  and that you call for the printing of money to boost “demand”. A call, I add, that since the founding of the Federal Reserve has resulted in an increase of the money supply by 12,230%.

I also must scratch my head at the view that the Federal Reserve should maintain a stable price level. What is wrong with having falling prices across the economy, like we now have in the computer sector, the flat screen television sector and the cell phone sector? Why, I ask, do you want stable prices? And, oh by the way, how’s that stable price thing going for you here at the Fed?

Since the start of the Fed, prices have increased at the consumer level by 2,241% [3]. that’s not me misspeaking, I will repeat, since the start of the Fed, prices have increased at the consumer level by 2,241%.

So you then might tell me that stable prices are only a secondary goal of the Federal Reserve and that your real goal is to prevent serious declines in the economy but, since the start of the Fed, there have been 18 recessions including the Great Depression and the most recent Great Recession. These downturns  have resulted in stock market crashes, tens of  millions of unemployed and untold business bankruptcies.

I scratch my head and wonder how you think the Fed is any type of success when all this has occurred.

I am especially confused, since Austrian business cycle theory (ABCT), developed by Mises, Hayek and Rothbard, has warned about all these things. According to ABCT, it is central bank money printing that causes the business cycle and, again you here at the Fed have certainly done that by increasing the money supply. Can you imagine the distortions in the economy caused by the Fed by this massive money printing?

According to ABCT, if you print money those sectors where the money goes  will boom, stop printing and those sectors will crash. Fed printing tends to find its way to Wall Street and other capital goods sectors first, thus it is no surprise to Austrian school economists that the crashes are most dramatic in these sectors, such as the stock market and real estate sectors. The economist Murray Rothbard in his book America’s Great Depression [4] went into painstaking detail outlining how the changes in money supply growth resulted in the Great Depression.

On a more personal level, as the recent crisis was developing here, I warned throughout the summer of 2008 of the impending crisis. On July 11, 2008 at EconomicPolicyJournal.com, I wrote[5]:

SUPER ALERT: Dramatic Slowdown In Money Supply Growth

After growing at near double digit rates for months, money growth has slowed dramatically. Annualized money growth over the last 3 months is only 5.2%. Over the last two months, there has been zero growth in the M2NSA money measure.This is something that must be watched carefully. If such a dramatic slowdown continues, a severe recession is inevitable.

We have never seen such a dramatic change in money supply growth from a double digit climb to 5% growth. Does Bernanke have any clue as to what the hell he is doing?

On July 20, 2008, I wrote [6]:

I have previously noted that over the last two months money supply has been collapsing. M2NSA has gone from double digit growth to nearly zero growth .

A review of the credit situation appears worse. According to recent Fed data, for the 13 weeks ended June 25, bank credit (securities and loans) contracted at an annual rate of 7.9%.

There has been a minor blip up since June 25 in both credit growth and M2NSA, but the growth rates remain extremely slow.

If a dramatic turnaround in these numbers doesn’t happen within the next few weeks, we are going to have to warn of a possible Great Depression style downturn.

Yet, just weeks before these warnings from me, Chairman Bernanke, while the money supply growth was crashing, had a decidedly much more optimistic outlook, In a speech on June 9, 2008, At the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston’s 53rd Annual Economic Conference [7], he said:
I would like to provide a brief update on the outlook for the economy and policy, beginning with the prospects for growth.  Despite the unwelcome rise in the unemployment rate that was reported last week, the recent incoming data, taken as a whole, have affected the outlook for economic activity and employment only modestly.  Indeed, although activity during the current quarter is likely to be weak, the risk that the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so.  Over the remainder of 2008, the effects of monetary and fiscal stimulus, a gradual ebbing of the drag from residential construction, further progress in the repair of financial and credit markets, and still-solid demand from abroad should provide some offset to the headwinds that still face the economy.

I believe the Great Recession that followed is still fresh enough in our minds so it is not necessary to recount in detail as to whose forecast, mine or the chairman’s, was more accurate.

I am also confused by many other policy making steps here at the Federal Reserve. There have been more changes in monetary policy direction during the Bernanke era then at any other time in the modern era of the Fed. Not under Arthur Burns, not under G. William Miller, not under Paul Volcker, not under Alan Greenspan  have there been so many dramatically shifting Fed monetary policy moves. Under Chairman Bernanke there have been significant changes in direction of the money supply growth FIVE different times. Thus, for me, I am not at all surprised at the current stop and go economy. The current erratic monetary policy makes it exceedingly difficult for businessmen to make any long term plans.  Indeed, in my own Daily Alert on the economy [8] I find it extremely difficult to give long term advice, when in short periods I have seen three month annualized M2 money growth go from near 20% to near zero, and then in another period see it go from 25% to 6% . [9]

I am also confused by many of the monetary programs instituted by Chairman Bernanke. For example, Operation Twist.

This is not the first time an Operation Twist was tried. an Operation Twist was tried in 1961, at the start of the Kennedy Administration [10] A paper [11] was written by three Federal Reserve economists in 2004 that, in part, examined the 1960′s Operation Twist

Their conclusion (My bold):

A second well-known historical episode involving the attempted manipulation of the term structure was so-called Operation Twist.  Launched in early 1961 by the incoming Kennedy Administration, Operation Twist was intended to raise short-term rates (thereby promoting capital inflows and supporting the dollar) while lowering, or at least not raising, long-term rates. (Modigliani and Sutch 1966)…. The two main actions of Operation Twist were the use of Federal Reserve open market operations and Treasury debt management operations.. Operation Twist is widely viewed today as having been a failure, largely due to classic work by  Modigliani and Sutch….

However, Modigliani and Sutch also noted that Operation Twist was a relatively small operation, and, indeed, that over a slightly longer period the maturity of outstanding government debt rose significantly, rather than falling…Thus, Operation Twist does not seem to provide strong evidence in either direction as to the possible effects of changes in the composition of the central bank’s balance sheet….

We believe that our findings go some way to refuting the strong hypothesis that nonstandard policy actions, including quantitative easing and targeted asset purchases, cannot be successful in a modern industrial economy.  However, the effects of such policies remain quantitatively quite uncertain. 

One of the authors of this 2004 paper was Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke. Thus, I have to ask, what the hell is Chairman Bernanke doing implementing such a program, since it is his paper that states it was a failure according to Modigliani, and his paper implies that a larger test would be required to determine true performance.

I ask, is the Chairman using the United States economy as a lab with Americans as the lab rats to test his intellectual curiosity about such things as Operation Twist?

Further, I am very confused by the response of Chairman Bernanke to questioning by Congressman Ron Paul. To a seemingly near off the cuff question by Congressman Paul on Federal Reserve money provided to the Watergate burglars, Chairman Bernanke contacted the Inspector General’s Office of the Federal Reserve and requested an investigation [12]. Yet, the congressman has regularly asked about the gold certificates held by the Federal Reserve [13] and whether the gold at Fort Knox backing up the certificates will be audited. Yet there have been no requests by the Chairman  to the Treasury for an audit of the gold.This I find very odd. The Chairman calls for a major investigation of what can only be an historical point of interest but fails to seek out any confirmation on a point that would be of vital interest to many present day Americans.

In this very building, deep in the underground vaults, sits billions of dollars of gold, held by the Federal Reserve  for foreign governments. The Federal Reserve gives regular tours of these vaults, even to school children. [14] Yet, America’s gold is off limits to seemingly everyone and has never been properly audited. Doesn’t that seem odd to you? If nothing else, does anyone at the Fed know the quality and fineness of the gold at Fort Knox?

In conclusion, it is my belief  that from start to finish  the Fed is a failure. I believe faulty methodology is used, I believe that  the justification for the Fed, to bring price and economic stability, has never been a success. I repeat, prices since the start of the Fed have climbed by 2,241% and there have been over the same period 18 recessions. No one seems to care at the Fed about the gold supposedly backing up the gold certificates on the Fed balance sheet. The emperor has no clothes.  Austrian Business cycle theorists are regularly ignored by the Fed, yet they have the best records with regard to spotting overall downturns, and further they specifically recognized the developing housing bubble. Let it not be forgotten that in 2004, two economists here at the New York Fed wrote a paper [15] denying there was a housing bubble. I responded to the paper [16] and wrote:

The faulty analysis by [these] Federal Reserve economists… may go down in financial history as the greatest forecasting error since Irving Fisher declared in 1929, just prior to the stock market crash, that stocks prices looked to be at a permanently high plateau.

Data released just yesterday, now show housing prices have crashed to  2002 levels. [17]

I will now give you more warnings about the economy.

The noose is tightening on your organization, vast amounts of money printing are now required to keep your manipulated economy afloat. It will ultimately result in huge price inflation, or,  if you stop printing, another massive economic crash will occur. There is no other way out.

Again, thank you for inviting me. You have prepared food, so I will not be rude, I will stay and eat.

Let’s have one good meal here. Let’s make it a feast. Then I ask you, I plead with you, I beg you all, walk out of here with me, never to come back. It’s the moral and ethical thing to do. Nothing good goes on in this place. Let’s lock the doors and leave the building to the spiders, moths and four-legged rats.

-

Footnotes

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Incorrect-Guide-Depression-Guides/dp/1596980966/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335313972&sr=8-1

[2] http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2010/press.html

[3] ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt

[4] http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Great-Depression-Murray-Rothbard/dp/146793481X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335314537&sr=8-1

[5] http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2008/07/super-alert-dramatic-slowdown-in-money.html

[6] http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2008/07/alert-collapsing-credit.html

[7] http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20080609a.htm

[8] http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/04/announcing-epj-quarterly-economic.html

[9]http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2008/07/super-alert-dramatic-slowdown-in-money.html

[10] http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2011/el2011-13.html

[11] http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2004/200448/200448pap.pdf

[12] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/federal-reserve-watergate-iraqi-weapons_n_1400645.html

[13] http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/Current/

[14] http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/visiting.html

[15] http://fednewyork.org/research/epr/04v10n3/0412mcca.pdf

[16] http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/02/checkmate-new-york-fed-as-totally.html

[17] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/business/economy/survey-shows-us-home-prices-still-weak.html

Special thanks to the following, who helped me research and collect data for this paper: Stephen Davis, Bob English, Jon Lyons, Ash Navabi, Joseph Nelson, Nick Nero,  Antony Zegers

Commodity Money and Fiat Money: A Bushel of Wheat for a Penny

April 12, 2012 2 comments

A Bushel of Wheat for a Penny Part 1

by Steve Elwart, IDB Folio Specialist
Republished with permission from Koinonia House 

-
This is Part 1 of a three-part series on money: where it comes from, how governments use it to control our lives, and how modern money policy makes the prophecies in the Book of Revelation seem very close to fulfillment.

Everyone reading this article is being robbed. We all use paper money and every day, governments are lowering its value. That value is being stolen from us. To understand how this is happening, we need to get to the basics of money. What is it?

Commodity Money

We learn in Genesis that Abram (renamed later by God to Abraham) was a rich man. How do we know? We are told that “he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.”1 In Biblical times, these things were all media of exchange. No king decided this; he didn’t call in his magi to decide what the medium of ex-change would be. Ordinary people, or “the market” made the decision. Let’s say a king did decree that rocks could be used as money. Would anyone use them? Probably not, because they would not know the value of those rocks. Unless you are building a lot of things (or stoning a lot of adulterers), rocks fail to meet a standard for money: they have no intrinsic value.

If a civilization was to advance though, it had to come up with a convenient way to save and exchange value to buy things. Leather was used in ancient Rome. (Contrary to popular belief, Roman soldiers were not paid in salt. The term salary [from the Latin salārium] was money given to Roman soldiers to buy salt.2) Animal pelts, whiskey, and tobacco leaves were used in the former British Colonies, wampum (strings of beads) was used by the American Indians, dried fish were used in the Canadian maritime colonies, maize or corn was used in Mexico, and salt, iron and farming tools were used in Africa. These things are called “commodity money.” As civilizations became more complex, most forms of commodity money be-came very cumbersome. (Who would want to give or get 300 sheep to buy a car?) Another medium of exchange had to be found.

Over the centuries, the answer came to be the precious metals, gold and silver. These two metals became the basis for money in most of the world. Gold and silver were used as money for very specific reasons and they were chosen by “the market.” People decided that these two metals had all the qualities that made for a good medium of exchange:

  • They were easily portable. They had high value to weight ratios. (So if you want to buy a car, you only have to bring 16 ounces of gold rather than 300 sheep.)
  • They are fungible. Every ounce is like every other ounce no matter where they were mined. People didn’t have to worry about the quality of the pure metal.
  • They are highly divisible. They can be divided into very small parts or coins. The term “pieces of eight” came from the practice of taking a Spanish dollar, a real de a ocho and breaking it up into eight pieces or reales to make change. Diamonds fail the test of being divisible because if you break up a gem-quality diamond, it loses its value. (For that matter, sheep aren’t easily divisible either unless you are very hungry.)
  • They are highly durable; the thirty pieces of silver paid to Judas are still in existence today.
  • They are naturally scarce. They can’t be multiplied.

Fiat Money

There is another type of money besides commodity money, called fiat money. (Fiat from the Latin fiat, meaning “let it be done.”) This is an item, usually paper or low value metal coins, that is decreed to have value by a government.

A government puts fiat money into circulation first by connecting it to a gold or silver standard, but then cuts the link and says that gold and paper are no longer convertible, making the piece of paper “legal tender for all debts public and private.” It is obvious that debtors would be very happy if the pa-per money lost its value because they could pay their debts with inflated currency. In a letter to Edward Carrington in 1788, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Paper is poverty … it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself.” Jefferson died bankrupt because of the early United States money (monetary) pol-icy based on paper.

It is not that fiat currency is a new invention. Fiat currency actually made its appearance over 1,000 years ago. China was the first country to issue true paper money around the 10th century A.D. Although the notes were valued at a certain ex-change rate for gold, silver, or silk, conversion was never allowed in practice. The bills were supposed to be redeemed after three years in circulation, but as more bills were printed with the older notes being refused redemption, inflation became evident. Government measures to prop up the currency were unsuccessful and it fell out of favor.3

In Europe, fiat money came into being around the 12th century. Villagers would store their gold and other valuables in their lord’s castle for safekeeping. But during this time of the Crusades and other European Wars, noblemen were always strapped for cash. When times were particularly bad, the noblemen would confiscate the villagers’ gold and silver and issue notes for it, to be redeemed later. Needless to say, the notes weren’t always honored or if they were redeemed, the holder of the note received less of their gold back than what they were promised. This is an early case of price inflation.

Today, fiat money will always bring on inflation for two reasons: 1) Politicians like to induce inflation because it gives the people the illusion of prosperity and 2) its declared value is much higher than the cost of producing it. Whether it is a $1 or $100 bill in fiat money, it costs only 4 cents to produce. In today’s electronic age, the production cost for new money is zero since money creation is just a keystroke and an entry in cyber-space. On the other hand, in history, if you had a $20 gold piece, the cost of that gold piece, less the cost to produce it, was about $20.

The Gold Standard

History of Gold Standard

If the relative value of gold is tracked over the years, one can see how fiat money loses its value over time.

By the 1400s, most countries that had complex trading systems were using gold and silver for transactions. Prices held relatively steady through the early 20th century, except for lo-cal shortages and wars. In the United States the price of gold and the things it bought held its value with exceptions for war-time when the government printed paper money to cover its war debts. After the emergencies and the country went back on the gold standard, prices went back to about where they were. During the First World War, most countries involved in the war suspended the gold standard so they could print enough money to pay for their involvement in the war. After the war, these countries went back to a modified form of the gold standard, but abandoned it during the “Great Depression.”

In 1941, most countries adopted the Bretton Woods system, which set the exchange value for all currencies in terms of gold. Countries that signed the Bretton Woods agreement were obligated to convert their currencies held by foreign countries into gold valued at $35 per ounce. However, many countries just pegged their currency to the U.S. dollar, thus making it the de facto world currency.

In the 1960s the United States had done something unprecedented in its history. The country fought two wars at once. The United States fought a war halfway around the world in Vietnam and a second war at home, the “War on Poverty.” To do this, the United States started to borrow massively and brought on double digit inflation. To curb the inflation, the United States government started to deflate the dollar. 1963 marked the entrance of the new Federal Reserve notes and the disappearance of the $1 silver certificate. This marked the point that no longer did the U.S. Government have to pay in “lawful money.” Finally, in late 1973, the U.S. government decoupled the value of the dollar from gold altogether and the price shot up to $120 per ounce in the free market.4 Since the United States went off the Gold Standard, a dollar is worth only one-sixth of what it was in 1973. (At this writing, gold is priced at $1,220 per ounce.5)

Inflation Always Follows Fiat Money

The history of price inflation in the United States is repeated in every country that uses paper money. Keep in mind, rising prices are not always bad. If a good becomes scarce, its price will go up and may provide the motivation to introduce a new, better product for the market. The reason petroleum became so popular so quickly was because of the rising cost of whale oil. If governments propped up the price of whale oil to keep whalers and whale oil processors employed, it would have taken decades for the world to embrace petroleum as a substitute. And someday, petroleum will go the way of whale oil as long as market forces dictate the transition.

When a government inflates its currency, it increases prices by reducing the purchasing power of the money. The short-term effects though, can seem to be positive. Like a drug addict, inflated money gives the illusion of prosperity, making people feel good. But like the addict, withdrawal follows the high.

At first, the surge of more money makes people feel good be-cause they can pay off their debts with cheaper money and they seem to have more disposable income. As prices catch up, people then find it more expensive to live. In addition, their tax burden goes up, since many government taxes are progressive in nature, meaning the percentage tax increases as in-come or asset values (houses, cars, etc.) increase. Eventually the market will try to correct itself and a depression will follow.

At this point, people start to feel the pinch of their money buying less. They demand that their government do some-thing. Since studies have shown that voters only have a memory of one year when it comes to politics, politicians will make sure that the economy is good in an election year.6 They will artificially stimulate the economy to give voters the illusion that times are good again and reelect the incumbents. This lasts only so long and inflation, with its problems kick in again. This cycle of increasing the currency supply and price inflation ultimately ends with the collapse of the currency, sometimes preceded by hyperinflation. (Hyperinflation and its cultural effects will be covered in Part 3 of this series.) Surprisingly, the country has not learned its lesson and the devalued fiat currency is replaced with yet another fiat currency. Greece is a perfect example of this cycle.

The Greek drachma was minted in gold and silver in ancient Greece and made its reappearance as a fiat currency in 1841. Since then, the value of the drachma decreased. During the German-Italian occupation of the country from 1941-1944, hyperinflation ravaged the country, ending with the issuance of 100,000,000,000 (100 billion)-drachma notes in 1944. After Greece was liberated from Germany, old drachmae were ex-changed for new ones at the rate of 50,000,000,000 to 1. Only paper money was issued, again a fiat currency. Greece then went on a program of deficit spending for social programs and inflation started once again.

In 1953, in an effort to halt inflation, Greece joined the Bretton Woods system and the drachma was revalued at a rate of 1000 old drachma to one new drachma. In 1973 the Bretton Woods System was abolished; over the next 25 years the official exchange rate gradually declined, from 30 drachmas to one U.S. dollar to a ratio of 400:1. On January 1, 2002, the Greek drachma was officially replaced as the circulating currency by the Euro (again a fiat currency).7

Today, Greece is once again is in trouble. After years of continued deficit spending and the government’s easy monetary policy, Greece’s financial situation was badly exposed when the global economic downturn struck. Very quickly, the government’s “creative accounting” practices were exposed. The national debt, put at €300 billion ($413.6 billion), is bigger than the country’s entire economy, with some estimates placing it at 120 percent of gross domestic product in 2010. The country’s deficit—how much more it spends than it takes in—is 12.7 percent.

This time though, Greece just can’t inflate their way out of the problem. Now that they are on the Euro (in the “Euro-zone”), they have little control over their monetary policy. All their loans are in Euros and they must pay back the loans in Euros. One way to balance the national books is to implement harsh and unpopular spending cuts. Another way is to default on their debt. This would seriously damage the Euro as other countries look at default as a way out of their financial problems. (In fact, financial experts are predicting the demise of the Euro in as early as five years.8) A third way out is to separate itself from the Euro, go back on the drachma (fiat currency again) and then set an exchange rate of the drachma to the Euro at an artificially high number. The cycle of fiat money would then begin again.

As long as a country is on a fiat currency, inflation is sure to follow. Using a fiat currency could well reduce a civilization to work an entire day for a “bushel of wheat.”

In Part 2 of this series we will look at central banking and how the banks can change a society.


Notes:

  1. Genesis 12:16b (KJV).
  2. “The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition”. Answers.com. Retrieved 2010-06-05.
  3. Ramsden, Dave (2004). “A Very Short History of Chinese Paper Money.” James J. Puplava Financial Sense.
  4. History of the Gold Standard: http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/p/gold_history.htm
  5. Monex Precious Metals: http://www.monex.com/monex/controller?pageid=prices.
  6. “Voters Respond to Economic Woes” Economics and Public Policy: http://knowledge.wpcarey.asu.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1668.
  7. Greek Drachma, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_drachma#First_modern_drachma.
  8. “Euro ‘will be dead in five years’”: http://www.telegraphic.com.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/7806065?Euro-will-be-dead-in-five-years.html

150 Years Of U.S. Fiat Currency

April 9, 2012 1 comment

-

5 days ago saw the 150th year anniversary of an event so historic that a very select few even noticed: the birth of US fiat. Bloomberg was one of the few who commemorated the birth of modern US currency: “On April 2, 1862, the first greenback left the U.S. Treasury, marking the start of a new era in the American monetary system…. The greenbacks were originally intended to be a temporary emergency-financing measure. Almost bankrupt, the Treasury needed money to pay suppliers and troops. The plan was to print a limited supply of United States notes to meet the crisis and then have people convert the currency into Treasury bonds. But United States notes grew in popularity and continued to circulate.” The rest, as they say is history.

In the intervening 150 years, the greenback saw major transformations: from being issued by the Treasury and backed by gold, it is now printed, mostly in electronic form, by an entity that in its own words, is “set up similarly to private corporations, but operated in the public interest.” Of course, when said public interest is not the primary driver of operation, the entity, also known as the Federal Reserve is accountable to precisely nobody. Oh, and the fiat money, which is now just a balance sheet liability of a private corporation, and thus just a plug to the Fed’s deficit monetization efforts, is no longer backed by anything besides the “full faith and credit” of a country that is forced to fund more than half of its spending through debt issuance than tax revenues.

More on the history of American fiat from Bloomberg:

At the start of the Civil War, the U.S. didn’t have a national paper currency. Instead, the money supply consisted of U.S. coins and a collection of paper notes issued by private banks. Technically, the federal government began issuing its own paper currency in 1861. That year, the Lincoln administration issued $60 million in demand notes, a variant of a Treasury note that was redeemable “on demand” for gold coins at the Treasury or any sub-Treasury.

These notes were overshadowed in 1862 by the issue of $150 million in a new fiat currency officially known as United States notes and popularly known as greenbacks or legal tenders. By the end of the war, close to $450 million worth of greenbacks were in circulation.

The name greenbacks referred to the reverse of the notes, which were printed in green. The name legal-tender notes referred to the text that originally appeared on the back, which began, “This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.” This provision made the currency a valid form of payment on par with gold and silver, which was a very controversial action at the time. It made the United States note a fiat currency — meaning its value was established by law alone and wasn’t based on some other unit of value, such as gold, silver or land.

Many Americans during and after the Civil War believed the creation of a fiat currency was unconstitutional. The Constitution explicitly stated that only gold and silver could be considered legal tender. In 1871, in the case of Knox v. Lee, the Supreme Court settled the matter by declaring that making United States notes legal tender was indeed constitutional.

By this time, the greenback was at the center of a countrywide debate on monetary policy. When the post-Civil War economic boom ended in the panic and depression of 1873, many people, especially farmers, blamed the Treasury’s policy of contracting the currency — that is, removing United States notes from circulation in an attempt to go back to the gold standard, which would require that a $1 note could be redeemed for $1 in gold.

As a consequence, there was a call for the expansion of United States note circulation or an inflation of the currency. This belief became joined with a political ideology that opposed big business and banking interests, resulting in the birth of the Greenback Party in 1874.

Opposing the Greenbackers were more conservative interests, sometimes known as “gold bugs,” who found support in the Republican Party and in elements of the Democratic Party. Gold interests proved the stronger contestant in the debate and in 1878, the total circulation of United States notes was fixed at a little over $346 million and the notes eventually became redeemable in gold (at least until 1933, when this provision was removed).

During the 20th century, United States notes became ever less important in the nation’s money supply, though Congress supported their continued circulation. They were increasingly replaced by currency issued by the Federal Reserve System, which came to look almost identical to the United States note. The Federal Reserve note thus became the new greenback.

In 1966, Congress allowed the Treasury to start removing United States notes from circulation. The last delivery of the notes by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to the Treasury was made in 1971. In 1994, the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act eliminated the issuance of the notes altogether.

So instead of real money, America has an impostor “which came to look almost identical to the United States note” with the full complicity of everyone in charge, just so that when needed, any and all untenable debt burdens can be inflated away. And while the latter is a topic of a whole different discussion, we present another chart which, unlike the 150th anniversary of fiat, should be something discussed far more broadly… Because in a fiat world superpower status is always relative.

-

Source: ZeroHedge

Related Articles:

Government admission of price suppression: Report by South Carolina State Treasurer’s Office

April 6, 2012 1 comment

South Carolina Treasury Office Seal-
[Active updates: Developing stories] The South Carolina Treasurer’s Office, acting upon a directive from the state legislature, has recently published a report on the advisability of investing in gold and silver. Basically, the state legislature wanted to know if it’s wise to invest public funds under it’s custody in gold & silver.

 Here’s what the Treasurer’s Office has to say about itself:

Our mission is to serve the citizens of South Carolina by providing the most efficient banking, investment and financial management service for South Carolina State Government. Our commitment is to safeguard our State’s financial resources and to maximize return on our State’s investments.

This is a tall order, hence we can assume that the report must be well researched and credible.  It concluded that it is not advisable to invest public funds in gold & silver because:-

  1. There’s escalating market speculation
  2. Current value (I think they mean price) is too high
  3. Market possibly in a bubble
  4. South Carolina Code of Laws states that the Treasurer has “ full power to invest” in  debt instruments of the US government and corporations, but makes no mention of investments in derivatives of gold & silver. Hence investing in gold & silver derivatives may “create a legal conflict”

South Carolina Treasurer Office's conclusion on the advisability of investing in gold & silverWhile the timestamp of the document was 27 Feb 2012, it can be assumed that the report was prepared soon after the end of September 23, 2011 due to this inclusion. Scuth Carolina Treasurer Office Report - Price of GoldFrom the perspective of a short term investment, that was a pretty good call, considering the fact that gold and silver have been taken down to $1624 and $31.40 respectively as I write.

However, this piece is not about how good the Treasurer’s Office was at making an investment call based on price. Neither is it about whether gold & silver is in a bubble. These conclusions (2) & (3) are opinions of the Treasurer’s Office, which are subjective. Of greater interest are the facts revealed in the body of the report.

Regular readers of this blog would have noticed that there are several key issues that are repeatedly discussed or highlighted here (through news feeds or third party contributions). They include:-

  1. Gold & silver prices are being suppressed
  2. Central Banks & major bullion banks are suppressing their prices
  3. Naked short selling is one of the price suppression mechanism
  4. Bullion Banks and exchanges practice fractional reserve bullion banking
  5. Stay out of gold or silver bank accounts, ETFs, Certificates, and all forms of derivatives
  6. The safest way to own gold & silver is to hold physical gold & silver

Items (1) to (4) are often disputed by the mainstream media and investors, sometimes referring to them as conspiracy theories. Hence, it is most interesting to see what this government published report has to say about these 6 issues.

Price Suppression is Real

Fed, JP Morgan, HSBC, LBMA in naked short selling & fractional reserve banking

In one short paragraph, this report confirms in no uncertain terms the truth behind the so called “conspiracy theories”. Not only does it confirm the existence of price suppression, it discloses the WHOs and the HOWs!

Risks of holding gold through ETFs, Certificates, Bank Accounts & other Derivatives

It has been repeatedly emphasized here that the only secure means of owning gold & silver is by holding physical coins and bars in your own possession or stored in a private vault outside the banking system. Anything else is a derivative – a paper or electronic representation of the real thing.

This report explains the nature of these derivatives and lists the risks associated with each, together with reasons why the Treasury’s Office advised against investing in them.

The full report in pdf is available for download at the South Carolina Treasurer’s website. Text from relevant sections is reproduced below with comments related to the 6 items above highlighted. Most of the remarks are self explanatory. There are, however, two groups of comments that warrant some discussion.

1. Allocated & Unallocated Accounts

Ways to Invest: Certificates
Unallocated gold certiñcates are a form of fractional reserve banking and do not guarantee an equal exchange for metal in the event of a run on the bank’s gold on deposit. Allocated gold certificates should be correlated with speciñc numbered bars, however it is difficult to prove whether a bank is improperly allocating a single bar to more than one investor.

Ways to Invest: Accounts
One of the most important differences between accounts is whether the gold is held on an allocated or unallocated basis. Another major difference is the strength of the account holder’s claim on the gold, in the event that the account administrator faces gold-denominated liabilities, asset forfeiture, or bankruptcy.

The above describes two products offered by banks to clients who want to invest in gold (or silver) without having to deal with the physical metals. For example, when a bank accepts $2,000 from a customer and issues a gold certificate or credits the customer’s gold account under the unallocated system, the bank is not obliged to buy and store 1.2 oz (at current price) of gold on behalf of the customer. It holds only a tiny portion of that amount in gold. Hence when many of its the customers decide to redeem their certificates at the same time, the bank will not have sufficient gold to deliver. This is what’s referred to as a “run on the bank’s gold on deposit”. The same applies when depositing cash in your bank. The practice of keeping only a tiny fraction of what’s rightfully belonging to the customers (gold or cash) is referred to as fractional reserve banking.

When selling allocated gold products, the bank is legally required to hold 100% of the customers deposit in physical metal. For example, if a customer deposits sufficient cash to own a 400 oz gold bar and is assigned a bar bearing serial No: AGR Matthey 156571, how can one be sure that the same bar or a portion thereof is not assigned to another customer at the same time? That’s the issue raised by the report – and the risk is real.

This brings us back to “the only secure means of owning gold & silver is by holding physical coins and bars in your own possession or stored in a private vault outside the banking system”. If you have to use a third party to store your metals, use specialized private vaults instead, because banks operate on a fractional reserve banking system.

There are many companies outside the banking system that offer secure vaulting services. Generally, they have very high transparency, including publishing audited client holdings on the web for public scrutiny (without any login required). Of course clients’ ID are anonymous, and known only to the operator and the client.

Try these links:
GoldMoney bar list and BullionVault client holdings. Their reviews can be found here.

Learn more about private vaulting services, including issues like ownership, custody, bailment, counter-party risks, and performance risks. 

2. Reason for not investing in physical gold & silver

The report listed 5 ways to invest in gold & silver – ETPs, Certificates, Accounts, Derivatives and physical coins & bars. Notice how it highlights & explains all the risks associated with ETPs, Certificates, Accounts and Derivatives and the reasons why it is not advisable for the Treasury to invest in these.

Notice also that there are NO risk associated with physical metals. The only reason given for not investing in coins and bars is “South Carolina does not have the capacity to store or funding to secure gold and silver bullion”.

What a lame excuse! Do they not know that in April last year, “The University of Texas Investment Management Co., the second-largest U.S. academic endowment, took delivery of almost $1 billion in gold bullion“?

-

Proviso 89.145 GP:
Gold & Silver Investments
Office of State Treasurer

-
GOLD AND SILVER AS AN INVESTMENT:

Historically, investors have purchased gold as a hedge against an economic, a political, or a currency crisis. A decline in investment markets, a growing national debt, a weak currency, increasing inflation, military conflicts and social unrest are the most common reasons for investment in gold. Currently, gold and silver are at historic highs leading many expert investors to conclude that a bubble has been created in the precious metals market. Since the US recession began, the value of gold and silver has increased as investment markets perform poorly, troublesome economic news is announced, and when uncertainty in international markets intensifies.

Similar to other commodities, the value of gold and silver is determined by supply and demand, as well as speculation. The Federal Reserve, The London Bullion Market Association, JP Morgan Chase, and HSBC Holdings have practiced fractional-reserve banking and engaged in naked short selling causing artiñcial price suppression.

There are several ways to invest in gold and silver: bars, coins, ETP’s, certificates, accounts, and derivatives. If a state were to choose to invest in gold (and silver), it would likely choose to invest by:

1. ETP’s-Exchange Traded Products. This allows the stakeholder to invest in bullion without having to store bars and coins. The ñrst gold ETF (Exchange Traded Fund) was created in 2003 and has been viewed largely as a success, but has also been compared to investing in mortgagebacked securities. The annual expenses of the fund (storage, insurance, and management fees) are charged by selling a small amount of gold represented by each certificate, so the amount of gold in each certificate will gradually decline over time. ETF’s are investment companies that are legally classified as open-end companies or Unit Investment Trusts (UIT), but differ from traditional open-end companies and U]T’s. The main differences are that ETF’s do not sell directly to investors and they issue their shares in what are called Creation Units. Also, the Creation Units may not be purchased with cash but a basket of securities that mirrors the ETF‘s portfolio. The Usually, the Creation Units are split up and re-sold on a secondary market.

2. Certificates- allow investors to avoid the risks and costs associated with the transfer and storage of bullion by taking on a set of risks and costs associated with the certificate itself. Banks may issue gold certificates for gold which is allocated (non-fungible) or unallocated (fungible). Unallocated gold certiñcates are a form of fractional reserve banking and do not guarantee an equal exchange for metal in the event of a run on the bank’s gold on deposit. Allocated gold certificates should be correlated with speciñc numbered bars, however it is difficult to prove whether a bank is improperly allocating a single bar to more than one investor. The US ñrst authorized the use of gold certificates in 1863. By the early l930’s the US placed restrictions on private gold ownership and therefore, the gold certificates stopped circulating as money, but certificates are still issued by gold pool programs for investment purposes.

3. Accounts- Many banks offer gold accounts where gold can be instantly bought or sold just like any foreign currency on a fractional reserve (non-allocated, fungible) basis. Pool accounts, facilitate highly liquid, but unallocated claims on gold owned by the company. Digital gold currency systems operate like pool accounts and additionally allow the direct transfer of fungible gold between members of the service. Different accounts impose varying types of intermediation between the client and their gold. One of the most important differences between accounts is whether the gold is held on an allocated or unallocated basis. Another major difference is the strength of the account holder’s claim on the gold, in the event that the account administrator faces gold-denominated liabilities, asset forfeiture, or bankruptcy.

4. Derivatives- The product symbol for gold futures is GC, and it is traded in a standard contract
size of 100 troy ounces. In the US, gold futures are primarily traded on the New York Commodities Exchange (COMEX). As of 2009 holders of COMEX gold futures have experienced problems taking delivery of their metal. Along with chronic delivery delays, some investors have received delivery of bars not matching their contract in serial number and weight. Because of these problems, there are concerns that COMEX may not have the gold inventory to back its existing warehouse receipts.

ADVISABILITY:
There is no statute preventing the State from investing in gold and silver. The various methods of investment in gold and silver each carry different and often significant risks, the foremost being speculation. As the US has experienced the recent bursts in the housing and tech bubbles, it is important to take caution when contemplating an unconventional investment. Taxpayer money (state funds and state pension) across the US has not typically been used to invest in gold or silver bullion.

Recently, with the uncertainty in global markets, the devaluation of the dollar, rising inflation, and a flat US economy, there has been a renewed interest in either moving back to a gold standard, investing in gold or both. The value of gold and silver has significantly increased in the last decade, meaning it would cost a great deal to invest at this time.

Risks:
1. Bars and coins- South Carolina does not have the capacity to store or funding to secure gold and silver bullion. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Office does not advise investing in gold and silver bars and coins.

2. ETP’s- The armual expenses and costs associated with this type of investment are high. In recent years there have been issues surrounding gold ETP’s. The purchase price provides the investor with a fluctuating amount (in weight) of the metal. Over time, as value increases and more investors participate in the fund, the amount of metal owner by the investor decreases. ETP’s can also be split and sold on the secondary market. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Ofñce does not advise investing in ETP’s for gold and silver.

3. Certificates- Certificates for allocated gold present an accountability problem. Allocated gold certificates are supposed to be correlated with speciñc numbered bars; however, it is difficult to verify whether a bank is improperly allocating a single bar to more than one investor. Also, unallocated gold certificates are a form of fractional reserve banking and do not guarantee an equal exchange for metal in the event of a run on the bank’s gold on deposit. This is in conflict with S.C. Code of Laws 1976 SECTION 11-9-660. For these reasons, the State Treasurer’s Office cannot advise investing in gold and silver certificates.

4. Accounts- Similar to the risks associated with gold and silver certificates, allocated and unallocated metals held in accounts produce similar accountability problems. The strength of the account holder’s claim on metals is subject to the account administrators liabilities, assets, and/or solvency. Per S.C. Code of Laws 1976 SECTION 11-9-660, the State Treasurer’s Office cannot advise investing in gold and silver accounts.

5. Derivatives- Over the last three years, gold futures traded on the New York Commodities Exchange (COMEX) have encountered significant accountability problems. Holders of COMEX gold ñltures have frequently experienced delivery delays of their metals. Once delivered, there have been many reports of inaccurate weights and serial numbers on bars that do not match the holder’s contract. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Office does not advise investing in gold and silver derivatives.

-

April 2012 God & Silver Smash

Gold: April 2012

-

Having read the above, it may now be easier to make sense of the sharp price decline for both gold & silver over the past 2 days. Lets now ask some questions. Was the price action due to:

  • Market forces or Price Suppression in action?
  • Falling Demand or Naked Short Selling?
  • Human Traders or High Frequency Traders (HFTs)?
Historically, investors have purchased gold as a hedge against an economic, a political, or a currency crisis. A decline in investment markets, a growing national debt, a weak currency, increasing inflation, military conflicts and social unrest are the most common reasons for investment in gold
Have any of the issues above that formed the rationale for purchasing gold (and silver) been resolved?
Recently, with the uncertainty in global markets, the devaluation of the dollar, rising inflation, and a flat US economy, there has been a renewed interest in either moving back to a gold standard, investing in gold or both.

The mainstream media attributed this week’s sharp price decline to  improving economy, low inflation and no imminent QE announcements following the release of the latest FOMC meeting minutes. Given that the above statement was published just 5 weeks before the FOMC minutes, who is lying?

-

Developing Stories

12 Apr:
Jason Hommel explains what Blythe Masters actually meant by “the underlying client position that we’re hedging”.

11 Apr:
Ted Butler, the pioneer of silver manipulation investigation finally broke his silence over the Blythe Masters denial video clip. By far, this is THE best, most level-headed, objective rebuttal to Masters’ famous words that they are “not running a large directional position”. Read “JPM’s TV appearance” posted at Silverseek.com.

10 Apr: 

-

7 Apr:
Mike Maloney on RT discussing gold & silver manipulation, Blythe Masters denial of JPM’s role in price manipulation, “First government admission of price suppression” & High Frequency Sheering. Must Watch!

-

6 Apr: 

Further Reading:

-

Silver Eagles Soar

February 18, 2012 1 comment

Submitted by: Richard (Rick) Mills | Ahead of the Herd

-

As a general rule, the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information

In World War I severe material shortages played havoc with production schedules and caused lengthy delays in implementing programs. This led to development of the Harbord List – a list of 42 materials deemed critical to the military.

After World War II the United States created the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) to acquire and store critical strategic materials for national defense purposes. The Defense Logistics Agency Strategic Materials (DLA Strategic Materials) oversees operations of the NDS and their primary mission is to “protect the nation against a dangerous and costly dependence upon foreign sources of supply for critical materials in times of national emergency.”

The NDS was intended for all essential civilian and military uses in times of emergencies. In 1992, Congress directed that the bulk of these stored commodities be sold. Revenues from the sales went to the Treasury General Fund and a variety of defense programs – the Foreign Military Sales program, military personnel benefits, and the buyback of broadband frequencies for military use.

American Silver Eagle

The American Silver Eagle is the official silver bullion coin of the United States. It was first released by the United States Mint on November 24, 1986 and is struck only in the one troy ounce size.

American Silver EagleThe Bullion American Silver Eagle sales program ultimately came about because the US government wanted, during the 1970s and early 1980s, to sell off what it considered excess silver from the Defense National Stockpile.

“Several administrations had sought unsuccessfully to sell silver from the stockpile, arguing that domestic production of silver far exceeds strategic needs. But mining-state interests had opposed any sale, as had pro-military legislators who wanted assurances that the proceeds would be used to buy materials more urgently needed for the stockpile rather than merely to reduce the federal deficit.” Wall Street Journal

The authorizing legislation for the American Silver Eagle bullion sales program required that the silver used for the coins had to be from the Defense National Stockpile. By 2002 the DNS stockpile was so depleted of silver that if the American Silver Eagle bullion sales program was to continue further legislation was required.

On June 6, 2002, Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) introduced the Support of American Eagle Silver Bullion Program Act to “authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase silver on the open market when the silver stockpile is depleted.”

2002 - 10,539,026 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold.

2003 - 8,495,008 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold, silver averaged $4.88 an ounce for the year.

2004 - 8,882,754 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold. For 2004 the average cost of an ounce of silver was $6.67.

2005 - 8,891,025 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold. Silver averaged $7.32 an ounce.

2006 - 10,676,522 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold. Silver averaged $11.55 an ounce

2007 - 9,028,036 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold.

Silver Eagles Sales

2008 - 20,583,000 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold. Silver averaged $14.99 an ounce and almost 80% more Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold then in any previous year.

The US Mint suspended sales of the silver bullion coins to its network of authorized purchasers twice during the year.

In March 2008, sales increased nine times over the month before – 200,000 to 1,855,000.

In April 2008, the United States Mint had to start an allocation program, effectively rationing Silver Eagle bullion coins to authorized dealers on a weekly basis due to “unprecedented demand.”

On June 6, 2008, the Mint announced that all incoming silver planchets were being used to produce only bullion issues of the Silver Eagle and not proof or uncirculated collectible issues.

The 2008 Proof Silver Eagle became unavailable for purchase from the United States Mint in August 2008.

2009 - 30,459,000 Bullion American Silver Eagles were sold

On March 5, 2009, the United States Mint announced that the proof and uncirculated versions of the Silver Eagle coin for that year were temporarily suspended due to continuing high demand for the bullion version.

On October 6, 2009, the Mint announced that the collectible versions of the Silver Eagle coin would not be produced for 2009.

The sale of 2009 Silver Eagle bullion coins was suspended from November 24 to December 6 and the allocation program was re-instituted on December 7.

Silver Eagle bullion coins sold out on January 12, 2010.

The average cost of an ounce of silver in 2009 was $14.67

2010

No proof Silver Eagles were released through the first ten months of the year, and there was a complete cancellation of the uncirculated Silver Eagles.

Production of the 2010 Silver Eagle bullion coins began in January instead of  December as usual. The coins were distributed to authorized dealers under an allocation program until September 3.

In 2010 the US Mint sold 34,700,000 Bullion American Silver Eagle Coins.

2011

According to the USGS’s most recent Silver Mineral Industry Survey, silver production fell to 37 tonnes in October – compared to 53 tonnes year over year (yoy).

In 2011, the United States produced approximately 1,054 tonnes of silver – down from 2010’s production of 1,154 tonnes and down from 2007’s production of 1,163 tonnes.

Silver ChartThe US imported 6,600,000 oz of silver for consumption in 2011 – up from 2007’s imports of 4,830,000 oz.

In 2011 the US Mint sold 39,868,500 Bullion American Silver Eagle Coins.

2011 was the first year in which official coin sales will surpass domestic silver production.

Jeff Clark of Casey Research writes“For the first time in history, sales of silver Eagle and Maple Leaf coins surpassed domestic production in both the US and Canada. Throw in the fact that by most estimates less than 5% of the US population owns any gold or silver and you can see how precarious the situation is. A supply squeeze is not out of the question – rather it is coming to look more and more likely with each passing month.”

The US Mint is required by law to mint the bullion Silver Eagles to meet public demand for precious metal coins as an investment option. The numismatic versions of the coin (proof and uncirculated) were added by the Mint solely for collectors.

2012

United States Mint Authorized Purchasers (AP’s) ordered 3,197,000 Bullion American Silver Eagle Coins on January 3rd, the first day they went on sale. That opening day total catapulted January Bullion Eagle sales higher than half of the monthly totals in 2011.

As of January 25th 2012, 5,547,000 Bullion American Silver Eagle Coins had been sold.

Bullion Silver Eagles are guaranteed for weight and purity by the government of the United States and because of this the US government allows bullion Silver Eagles to be added to Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs).

Conclusion

The twin policies of zero interest rates and the continual creation of money and credit being enacted today, by all governments and central banks, means that the purchase of precious metals is the only way to protect the value of your assets.

“Mark my words, if the interest rates on U.S. government debt truly reflected both the real level of inflation in this country and the rising risk of some form of default, rates would already by sky-high and the U.S. would resemble a massive Greece.”  John Embry, Chief Investment Strategist, Sprott Asset Management

Investors are currently risk adverse and mining stocks are not well understood by the general investing public, but at least one thing is going to become very apparent to most -  the best way to hedge yourself against inflation could be owning silver.

Junior resource companies offer the greatest leverage to increasing demand and rising prices for silver. Junior resource companies are soon going to have their turn under the investment spotlight and should be on every investors radar screen. Are they on yours?

If not, maybe they should be.

Richard (Rick) Mills
rick@aheadoftheherd.com
www.aheadoftheherd.com

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 175 other followers