PDA

View Full Version : Chavez move could drive gold through the roof - and put confiscation on the cards aga



Serpo
23rd August 2011, 03:08 AM
(http://adserver.adtech.de/?adlink%7C658%7C2747576%7C0%7C401%7CAdId=6256874;B nId=1;itime=93599242;key=key1+key2+key3+key4;)




































Chavez move could drive gold through the roof - and put confiscation on the cards again

The theory that governments and bullion banks may not have the gold they claim to hold will be put severely to the test as Venezuela seeks to call in its overseas gold holdings
Author: Lawrence Williams
Posted: Monday , 22 Aug 2011



LONDON -
Long dismissed by the mainstream as conspiracy theorists and a fringe organisation which appeals only to right wing gold fanatics, the Gold Anti Trust Association (GATA) is at last beginning to feel totally vindicated by events. Over the years since its foundation the organisation has unearthed some telling official evidence of government and central bank meddling in the gold market - perhaps to try and stabilise currencies, given gold is seen by many as a bellwether of the health of the dollar and, by association, of most of the world's other currencies. True, some of GATA's ‘findings' may revolve around making the facts it has uncovered fit the founders and supporters of the organisation's basic theories, but it seems that many of the pressure group's warnings and predictions are beginning to come true and find more favour with some key economists.
At the heart of many of GATA's arguments is the theory that much of the world's gold reserves held by central banks, and by the bullion banks, is no longer really there - or if it is there that title is held to each gold bar by a large number of different organisations and people simultaneously. Much of the Central Bank and bullion bank gold holdings are claimed to have been leased, loaned or sold over the years and although the banks may theoretically hold title to this gold much of it, according to GATA, has disappeared into the broader financial markets and is unlikely to be recoverable by its purported banking sector holders.
If this is actually the case - then a move such as that by Venezuela to repatriate its gold holdings held in foreign vaults in New York, London, Zurich et al - could exert a serious squeeze on the gold markets as the bullion banks and central banks try to source the physical gold that may have disappeared from their vaults to deliver to Venezuela. Either that, or they default - or are protected by some newly, and rapidly, imposed government strictures on physical gold exports to obscure the situation even further. Chavez would, of course, cry foul but there might be little he, or his government, could do about it apart from confiscation of any remaining foreign-owned assets which have not yet entered his nationalistic grasp. We wait and see what actually happens.
If gold is in as tight a supply situation as GATA claims, then without government protection the bullion banks and central banks will have to between them somehow lay their hands on a massive 211 tonnes of the yellow metal to send to Venezuela. Don't expect them to accomplish this in a hurry - and even if they can manage to pull this amount of physical metal together the impact on the gold price could be massive.
Should Chavez get his physical gold without any fuss, or serious impact on the gold price, then perhaps GATA will have been barking up the wrong tree in their analysis of global gold holdings and this would be very bearish for the gold price. However should banks and governments start putting obstacles in the way of such a transfer, GATA will have even more ammunition for its campaigning stance - and the gold price would likely skyrocket to new highs..
A sobering thought too for physical gold holders is that any government legislation aimed at protecting the central banks and their gold holdings from a growing move to take delivery of physical could also be extended to individuals' gold holdings. Could confiscation of gold be a step nearer again?






http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page33?oid=133930&sn=Detail&pid=102055

midnight rambler
23rd August 2011, 05:30 AM
Why in the world would there be a need for confiscation?? Bernanke recently told Dr. Paul that gold isn't money and that they only held it because it's "tradition".

iOWNme
23rd August 2011, 06:11 AM
I think the word 'confiscation' is misleading.

The Feds didnt 'Confiscate' gold in 33'. They asked to 'borrow' the gold of the people on a 'promise to repay' all of it back to the people within 90 days.

Next Roosevelt changed the price of Gold from $25oz to $35oz. AFTER the system had all of the Gold. Then, after the gold had been voluntarily leant, Roosevelt passed another EO that said if you asked for your Gold back YOU GO TO JAIL. That is when the FRN's replaced the USN's.

He did all of this crap including the 'New Deal', all within the first 100 days of his admin. Sound familiar?

How many people would voluntarily 'lend' their gold to the Feds nowadays? The thing is, the people who love the Feds DONT HAVE ANY GOLD. And the people that have the Gold, KNOW who the real enemy is.

I say any Gold 'confiscation' is a red herring, IMO.

iOWNme
23rd August 2011, 06:22 AM
I think you are giving way too much credit to Roosevelt...he was only speaking/acting for the bankers and had no plan himself.

I think you are reading something i didnt type.

Roosevelt was the WORST President we have had in the past 100 years. BY FAR.

What i meant was the PEOPLE patriotically and voluntarily turned their gold in, there were no tanks in the streets or Military with guns. I mean we are trying to discuss the truth, arent we?


I don not see that happening again. Hence the using of the word 'confiscation' is misleading.

wrs
23rd August 2011, 06:26 AM
Where do you get that they asked to borrow the gold? The EO's I have read say that the gold had to be turned in and people were given paper FRNs in return. I didn't see anything about any "request" in those Executive Orders.