The Mark Moss Show 1-29-24

I mean unsustainable debt. But then we have in the United States, we have a year and that's sure to cause some fireworks and volatility.

a settlement currency backed by commodities. As we've been told by the Russian Finance minister over and over and over again, will happen. But he also said something that I've been saying for over three years, and that is that we will see a unification of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Eurasian Economic Union with the Bricks. They're in essence the same countries and aligned very much the same, and

I believe that will happen. In fact, right before the end of the year, the President of Belarus called for this. He said, we need to get these groups together. We all have the same interests. And even though the Bricks did not come out and issue this unified currency, it doesn't matter to me. In fact, what they said was let's have the finance ministers go back to the drawing

board and present their findings. In the twenty twenty four meeting in Russia, one of two hundred Bricks meetings that we will see over the course of twenty twenty four in Russia, but we did see five countries formally apply and formally be accepted. Six applied, five were accepted, or I guess we could say. Argentina was asked to join and they were going to but the new administration declined. So we saw Egypt in Iran and the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia, and these are big.

These are very big. Of course, with UAE and with Saudi Arabia that's as big as it gets. With Ethiopia the fastest growing economy in Africa, very very resource rich, Egypt with its strategic shipping lines, the Straits of Hormuz and the Red Sea, and of course you know, if we look at this coalestion in terms of its significance with energy, I think it is huge. And when we talk a little bit about what's happened so far this year, I'll talk to you about what the United Arab Emirates did.

And I think it's the biggest shot across the bow. But it's big, and I don't think the fact that these things didn't happen immediately is a big deal. In fact, I think it adds credibility to the Bricks. I think the people in the West think that instant gratification is not fast enough. And if anything, look, this has been

a seventeen year deal with the Bricks. This hasn't just come out of nowhere, and they're doing things methodically, and they are doing things I believe well thought out, and I think This plays into Brett Johnson's milkshake theory, which I agree with. The dollar is still the strongest currency. Until it's not. This will be death by a thousand cuts, little by little, by little by little. I call it logarithmic decay, little by little, by little, by little by little. Bang.

At some point we see things shift. And it wasn't in twenty twenty three, and it may or may not be in twenty twenty four. But what I do see is a growing legitimacy to where now we've seen thirty countries thirty formally apply to this growing legitimacy, this growing union of countries pushing back against the West. So as far as bricks are concerned, Mark, I think that twenty twenty three was a big year. I think twenty twenty

four will be a bigger year. But all I can tell you is that in my mind, I believe at some point we see that all at once moment, when enough countries have joined together in the crypto space, I guess you would call it mass adoption. And I don't think we've seen mass adoption yet. But you add thirty more countries to now ten, with another twenty that have

informally applied. We're beginning to get to that mass adoption moment in GDP and military might and oil and gas production and all energy production and critical resources, everything, human population, you name it. And at that point, I think it becomes not only more likely, but much more credible that we see something like that happen.

do know that we've seen nations. I mean, if you follow Luke Grammin's work, which I'm sure you do, and I've had them on the show several times, we do see that they have been using less US treasuries and they've been moving to gold as a reserve for example, so not as a medium of exchange, but certainly as a store of value, reserve asset.

bond market. And if you look just over the last few years in terms of what we've seen in gold's appreciation. In twenty twenty, the price of gold, let me give you the exact number here in twenty twenty, the price of gold on average was Bear with me one second. Here we go seventeen seventy three in twenty that's twenty twenty, excuse me, twenty twenty one, seventeen ninety eight average price, twenty twenty two, eighteen oh one, twenty twenty three, nineteen

forty three. So you go all the way back to the beginning of the century, with the exception perhaps of a gain in bitcoin. I know, I know you have strong feelings about bitcoin, and I don't have any negative feelings about bitcoin whatsoever. But just speaking in terms of traditional assets, gold has been the tortoise, not the hair. And when you think about it in terms of using gold to replace the function of treasuries, look, I think

what gold offers is trust, and it's transparent trust. Whereas you could argue with what's been going on with the US, we are beginning, perhaps in some people's eyes, to lack a little bit of trust. When we look at the bond market, they said in twenty twenty three that gold it was the first time in forty five years that

gold had less volatility than the ten year treasury. So I think it's completely logical for countries to shed treasuries which have volatility issued by a country that perhaps is lacking a little bit of trust and appears to be choosing inflation over austerity. I truly do believe that that is a growing trend. You will see countries like China, like Saudi Arabia, like all these countries that are shedding

treasuries and look at the numbers. Twenty twenty three was the and twenty twenty two both biggest years ever one after the other central bank purchasing in history. So yeah, it appears. I think Loop's right. I think they are selling treasury slowly and accumulating gold as a form of a substitute, if you will, for a treasury and go

back to the beginning of the century. And it really does really kind of fit that bill in terms of safe, secure, no counter party risk, and watching it appreciated a slow, steady growth. I think the concept of using a government or a foreign government's debt as an asset from a historical context as but a very brief history. Gold not so brief, and I think we're kind of going full circle.

That would definitely be Brent Johnson's argument, and I'm going to have him on later to to make that case. You can't just replace the dollar, you know, the swift system, the correspondent banks, the deep bond market, et cetera, et cetera.

the scales of justice. And I don't care what side of the aisle you're on, can you argue that the current and the previous administrations have been treated equally? All of these things that made this country great, religion, nuclear family, you know, all of these things seem to be questioned right now. And I would say to you that the way that this works go back to what Zoltan Posar has been saying. Breton Woods three. I think we've talked about this briefly. Where Bretton Woods won at the end

of World War Two. As you just mentioned, we took over for the pound sterling the loose Bretton Woods too, and when we closed the gold window and then became the petro dollar, and now a system that will be, according to Zoltan backed or described or predicated on commodities and transparency. And this is the marriage of blockchain technology and commodities, and I think that's what the Russian finance

minister is getting at. And I agree, you don't need to replace the reserve status of the dollar to massively chip chip chip chip chip, chip away at the settlement status of the dollar. And I think Jim was very careful in his words that would be Jim Ricords when

he said settlement common settlement currency. But you continue to chip away at the settlement status of the dollar, at what point does it begin to dramatically affect the reserve status of the dollar and the bond market and interest rates and that unintended or maybe the intended corollary consequences, And this is where gold comes in, or bitcoin, something that would act for these countries as an asset that doesn't carry US counterparty liability, that would allow them to

take their excess cash and put it into something that would not only preserve its purchasing power, but potentially grow its purchasing power and in fact remove counterparty liability, whether it be US default liability, US inflation liability, or just the risk of rates going higher in this system where less and less and less settlement is being done in dollars, and all of those dollars slashing around make their way home, creating more and more and more inflation, which leads to

higher rates. And this is just a vicious circle. But I agree, and I want people to know. I mean, a lot of people would say Brett and I are on the opposite side of the table. In some respects, we are, but in most respects we're not. Because I agree his premise is very logical. But there is coming an inflection point. And I think the world looks at

the dollar, the world looks at our policies. I mean, right now, you got the Speaker of the House and the Senate talking about and the Biden administration backing not just the sanctioning of the Russian assets like we did with Iran, and we start giving them back their sanctioned assets, but now confiscating them and using them to fund the war in Ukraine because the Congress doesn't want to give

appropriations to more Ukraine funding. You cross that line of not just sanctioning under the guise of law, but actually confiscating and using against that country. And now the whole world looks at the trust. Really, where's the trust? And I think the world looks at the US very differently in that respect. Again, the rule of law is the rule of law what it once was. Is Lady Liberty

really blind or is she peeking out one eye? I don't know, but I think the rest of the world could look at things that way, Mark, And so I think ultimately the settlement status of the dollar will ultimately lead to the lack of use of the reserve status of the US bond market. And that, to me is where things start to get a little bit murky. And maybe that's what the role that gold will ultimately play

in this new growing union of countries. But until then, Brent's right, until then, the dollar is still the king. But you know one other thing I'd like to say, and you look at the lead economic advisor to the United States government, it's interesting a man named Jared Bernstein. His whole thesis is removal of the world reserve currency, and his report dethrone king Dollar. So you look at the moves we've made around the globe and you have

to ask yourself, I mean, was this intended? Could it or could it just be too stupid to be stupid. I don't know, but I do think in general the reserve status of the dollar will start to wane in the face of more and more and more settlement outside the dollar.

Gold Uh, you know, is sort of back up to its previous all time high, but when you adjusted for inflation, it's actually nowhere, not well, I don't want to say nowhere, but it's certainly not act to it's all time high. So you have to kind of take that into consideration. But let's just jump gears a little bit. So let's if we're looking forward to twenty twenty four. As I said, there's these three critical events that I see that I

think that are driving markets. So one is this massive amount of debt that's sort of forcing the hand of governments. Then we have the election year, and then potentially war. So let's talk through each of those. I know you've talked a lot about the debt, the amount of debt that the US government has and the assets they have to back this up, but the debt sort of puts the government in this rock in a hard place. The government is overspending, so that means they need more debt.

The deficit spending is growing. How do you think that affects this year twenty twenty four and even maybe into twenty twenty five. Do you think that this massive amount of debt at some point is going to blow everything up. I think we'd both agree on that. At some point you just can't sustain that anymore. I don't think that happens this year, but I think to me it means that they're going to continue spending in deficit, which means the markets will and will probably keep humming along in

an inflationary type environment. But what's your take on that? What do you think the debt?

a billion and can't be that big. But let's just first baseline it and say, for definition purposes, a trillion seconds ago was thirty one, six and eighty eight years ago. That's first and foremost. Who got Neanderthals walking around the planes of Europe a trillion seconds ago. That's one trillion seconds ago. And it took I don't know, like hundred and thirty years to accumulate our first two trillion dollars

in debt. Yet if you go back to January one of twenty twenty three, we are at thirty one point four trillion dollar debt, and you go to January one of this year and we're at thirty four trillion plus. We've grown by two point six trillion dollars. Over the course of the twenty twenty three calendar year, we saw nine hundred billion dollars in gross interest payments. And I think this is the point where I think we start to bring the milkshake theory or the dollar bowl theory

into focus. And it is simply this. The Congressional Budget Office tells us by their own estimation, and they're always wrong. They're going to be way way more I think, lenient on the facts then we could really expect to see. But they're telling us by their own admission that by twenty thirty one, in seven years, one hundred percent of all tax revenue will go just to pay the interest on the debt and a mandatory entitlement spending like Social Security.

Now social Security is off balance sheet, it's about seventy trillion in the whole seventy trillion, and you add in Medicare and Medicaid and government military pensions, we're about one hundred and thirty hundred and forty trillions so or but somewhere between one hundred and fifty and two hundred trillion

dollars in debt. But ask yourself, is how is it that we can expect to be the dominant financial and military power in the world when in less than seven years, one hundred percent of all discretionary spending, which includes military, will need to be borrowed. Why would anyone want to borrow us money? A country that will inflate will choose inflation. And I think that's becoming obvious because of all of the obligations we have, both on balance sheet and off

who the hell's going to pay for them? Let alone the ten million people who who have just walked into this country, mostly illegally. Who's going to pay for their schooling and their housing and their medical and what's going to happen to the wages of the American paying tax paying Americans who are these low income jobs that are now going to be much lower pay offer salaries because

you have all these immigrants looking for work. The whole situation is getting worse and worse, meaning the entitlements will go higher and hire, the obligations higher and hire. And how the hell do we pay for it? How do we pay for ten trillion dollars in bonds that come do this year? I got an idea, Let's borrow some more money.

In fact, it's only going to get worse. And when you talk about you know, the FED pivoting because it's an election year, well, I mean here again, they're just signaling that they're going to do at all governments have done, and that is to try and get reelected and choose inflation over austerity over the tough choices. And we're a government,

we have a government addicted to spending. And unless we pay much higher taxes and go through a world of much less government spending, which comes with much more pain, both areas ain't gonna change. And I don't think it does change.

you got to be out of your mind to do that. So, especially when you look at the way that we gauge inflation and the metrics by which we even get age on employment, they just revise the twenty twenty three numbers down by four hundred and forty thousand jobs sorry, we're off by forty percent, but we'll tell you that the

year after. So the point is is that we're being lied to by the Fed constantly, and I think the world is beginning to lose trust in us, in the metrics, in our management of the currency and our decisions, and the policy makers who are really inflating away the value of the world reserve currency. So when you talk about selling oil or any of these goods for a currency that is being inflated, let's not forget that part of the petro dollar deal as well was to go back

into US treasures. Well, how'd that work out the last few years? Volatility in the treasury market, inflation, And I just think that we are, like you said, we're between a rock and hard place with all of the government debt right now, with all of the personal debt, and look at the banks that are hanging on by a thread. You raise rates high enough, you blow up the whole system.

And they know that. So as much as they would like to have less inflation, I think they don't want to see the whole system blow up, especially in an election year, so they'll pivot, they'll do what they can, but ultimately you have to ask yourself, who's going to buy our bonds? And so if it falls back on the institutional traders, I believe that they will demand higher rates for the risk of default, for the risk of inflation, and for the risk of just higher rates. And so ultimately,

again all roads lead to the same place. But yeah, I don't think that we will see this won't this won't end well, And I don't I don't, you know. I think the mistake people make is say, yeah, it's going to be this year. Look, I think we're living on borrowed time. Mathematically, this stuff should have happened a long time ago. Logically, it should have happened a long time ago. But here we are, and I guess we'll just keep on humming along until the wheels fall off.

No president returning wants to lose an election, and certainly the Democrats in office do not want to lose that this year, and so you would think then, just rationally, that then they would use every tool at their potential disposal to make sure that does not happen, from lying about the data to your point, having the BLS data come out and having to revise it a year later, from lying changing the way CPI is calculated, to potentially pumping money directly into the markets like we've seen in

twenty twenty, et cetera. So my thinking is that they're going to do everything they can, including helicopter money if they have to, to make sure this doesn't happen. And so that's another big catalyst for this year.

office of the president. And you know, but I'll tell you this, this gentleman is too old, it seems, and he seems cognitively impaired and I think all of this is going to amount to nothing because I think, you know, I don't care what side of the aisle you're on. You have to ask yourself if Biden is the is the candidate for the Democrats, you have to wonder, I mean, is there enough confidence just in his ability to run another four years? So you know, all this stuff that

they're doing, is it going to be in vain? And I think more than anything, they've shown their hands to to really do things that are again chipping away at the culture of this country. And when you strip someone off the ballot, I mean, the last time that happened was Abraham Lincoln. We saw a civil war, and I

think that's the kind of feelings. Look, there was a report that came out recently by a small college in Virginia that said half of about fifty five percent of Democrats think violence is okay to get their results, and about forty five Republicans said the same thing. We are so divided, so divisive, uh, and red and Blue can't even talk to each other anymore. So I just think

that it's not a good situation at all. If there is any if there is any feeling of it being not a fair election, and I don't think that what they will do. I mean they're going to try. You can see that they're going to try and keep interest rates low, prop up the markets, make everything seem rosy. But if you look and see who's our president, I wonder if it if it amounts to a whole bunch

of nothing. Now, maybe we see a new Democratic candidate like Gavin Newsom show up and maybe that changes things. I don't know. But what they could they could say. They could say, hey Democrats, they.

But if people really understood what was happening outside the country, what was happening to the dollar and the d dollarization and all of the things that are happening, I mean, I wonder if it would be a different outcome. And you know, evidently you're a threat to democracy according to Al Gore, who says people watching you know, the alternative media crowd is a threat to democracy because we're saying

something different than what the mainstream is talking about. But look, Mark, all I can tell you is I think it's going to be an incredibly interesting year, and the election certainly will be the vocal point of it. And I hope, I hope there is no perception of this being anything but a very fair and lawful election. And if so, then let's see where the chips fall.

war could escalate. We have you know, obviously China, Taiwan. Now you know somewhat historically war has been good for the economy, good for defense stocks.

which is the largest regional military organization on the planet. What does it mean they're full fledged members. I don't know. But I don't think war is good at any time, and I think that's part of the problem. The world is getting tired of all of the war and maybe the fact that it just seems a military industrial complex is behind so many of these wars. I don't see it as being good for anything, but certainly it wouldn't be good I think for the economy or even the

stock market or the bond market. I can't see it being good because I think it's just an another Look, this whole thing is like a house agenda to me, and you keep pulling out pieces of of American heritage, of the American culture, and if we have to result to war to prop up the markets, I just think it's a very sad state of affairs. And I'd like to hope that we don't get embroiled in another war.

But look, you know, there's no coincidence that you're talking about this happening at the choke point at the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. But what people don't understand is that, look, you could argue when you talk about the countries that have just joined the Bricks, you've got the Suez Canal and the Red Sea surrounded. But this falls right into the hands of the Bricks and Russia with their brand new They've got this Northern Sea route which goes right up through the space where everyone else

has to go around the Cape of Good Hope. And so you know, and now you have the Bricks Naval Alliance that will be patrolling the Red Sea. And I think that this is a lot bigger than people think and certainly, if I had to guess, just like we went to war in Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction twenty years ago, we're still occupying their country. This is a critical choke point for oil and for trade.

So I would say there's probably a fairly good probability that we get into something deeper here in this spot right in the Yemen area with the hooties. And I don't know what it does to the economy, but I think it has a lot to do with the price

of oil and our influence in that region. But actually I think it actually plays right into the hands of the Bricks and all of their new roots and the Belt Road Initiative, all of these new roots that kind of circumvent traditional roots that are patrolled by the US Navy, and whether it be this Northern Sea Route or the North South Corridor that goes from Iran to India, and

you know, permission based transport. When you look at the Belt Road Initiative, this massive infrastructure program, it will be patrolled solely by military and commerce. So this is just more of the same. It's and there's no coincidence that the countries that have first applied or first been accepted. Not only are they energy rich, but they're also in very important choke points in terms of of global commerce,

and this is one of them. So if I had to guess yes, I would think we'll see an escalation in Yemen. And I don't know what it does for the economy. I just think it adds that much more resentment to the United States. Ultimately, not a good thing.

the audience had submitted ahead of time. But I would say Gerald Soilente, who have had on my show me several times, he always says that when all those spells, they take you to war, and that's from the debt standpoint, but also from the political standpoint as well. And so when the country is very divided, I think a lot of times they hope that war could then somehow bring people back together. I don't think that worked so well.

On Israel for bebe over there. But you know, potentially, if there's a war going on, I'm sorry, you know, in this election that could be a tight election. Potentially they could use war as a way to do that. But we'll see where that goes. So so we've sort of framed this up, I think pretty well. I want to get to some questions that I have, Like I said here from the audience, I kind of I threw them out to the list and they presubmitted him.

They were taken over the world. And here we are thirty years later, where the Dow Jones has gone from twenty one hundred to over what thirty six seven, thirty eight thousand, and the knik has at one point was down seventy five percent and it's never gotten back to where it was when I started in this industry thirty three years ago. The one thing I have learned is that markets go higher than anyone thinks possible, and bear

markets will fall further than anyone ever thinks possible. And that's a very, very I think, the only absolute that I can give you. But I will tell you this that when you see the most well informed, forget about the most well funded, that being the central banks, but the most well informed traders on the globe accumulating what the Bank of International Settlements called a Tier one reserve asset, the only one next to dollars and treasuries, Ultimately the

price goes higher than people will ever imagine. And that's the one thing I learned is that bull markets go higher than people think, and bear markets go fall further than people think. I think gold will ultimately go higher than anyone can imagine, and it will be pegged at some new system, a marriage to blockchain, a backing of the system giving it credibility, because who trusts China and Russia who trusts us? Well, how about a trustless system?

And I think that's what it will ultimately come back to. And why else would the BIS re class by gold is Tier one and not something else like special drawing rights from the IMF or whatever. Heck, even Kristallina Georgieva, the head of the IMF, said, if you don't peg a central bank digital currency to something, then it's just fiat. And when you see the massive acquisition by the most well informed traders on the globe, it tells me that

gold will have its day. Now. Is it going to be twenty twenty four, maybe twenty twenty five, don't know, but just look at what we've seen. It's average seven point eight percent per year for the last twenty four years and had a really nice run last year. Up I don't know, ten twelve percent, so I don't know. I think anyone who picks the number would be just guessing. But it will continue to move higher and ultimately we'll go much higher. Don't know if it's this year or not.

A lot going on this year, but I still feel comfortable saying that I would expect it to finish this year much higher. Than it did last year. Don't know what that number is.

our debt. We just revalue gold to a much higher level and then our ass thats are worth more than our debt and our balance sheet's fixed, just like that. That's not so crazy to think, because that's what he did. That's what he did back in nineteen oh seven or thirty three, rather when he confiscated gold and then devalued the dollar by forty percent, making gold worth forty percent more. Is it that crazy to think that could happen. No, I don't think it is, but just food for thought.

anyway that it is suppressed. Now there's interesting. There's an article that I think people should look at, and it's by the Pickaxe talking about the amazing amount of silver that is needed in all of these high tech weaponry systems. There's five hundred ounces in the tip of a Tomahawk cruise missile. There's much more than that in things like ICBMs. But it's needed in aerospace, it's needed in submarines. And

it's interesting and he cites all sorts of fact. And yet when you look at the Silver Institute number that will show another two hundred million ounce or plus in deficit versus supply. They don't even count military in it. You have an asset that is depleting in nature. It's found in nature in a form called epithermal, like your skin is epidermis. It's very near the surface. And no, my buddy Keith Numeier will be the first to tell you it's coming out of the ground right now, it's

seven to one. Yet it's priced at about eighty two or three to one. Something's wrong there. And I think country like India and China and all the countries that are accumulating it the way that they are so the central banks are buying it quietly tells a different story.

And when you look at an asset that has experienced monetary renaissance, that is used increasingly in greed and digital applications, is decreasing in nature, is coming out of the ground at a ratio about eleven times under its price ratio. Right now, it's averaged roughly forty two to one gold to silver ratio for the last one hundred and fifty years, largely because of gold's role is money. But the geologic ratio for five thousand years before that was sixteen to one.

Now it's seven to one. It's disappearing. You have an asset that is increasing in demand and decreasing in supply, and ask yourself, why the hell do you have four or five commercial banks with the largest short position concentrated short position of any commodity traded on COMEX. Why And I will simply tell you that I think silver is in my mind. Look, I don't sell gold and silver as investments. To me, their wealth, and I want that

to be very clear. Wealth that has lived for five thousand years, through two World wars, German hyperinflation, great depression, everything the world's thrown at it, every pandemic, you name it. But I do think that silver should be characterized as a strategic metal, non at industrial and by suppressing the paper price where right now in the registered category on COMEX, those are the bars backing the contracts that are issued. It's the same thing the Hunt Brothers saw in nineteen eighty.

There's over fifteen hundred percent more paper than there are bars standing behind it. They're suppressing the price. But for why and why are the commercial banks doing this? And I would simply tell you that to me, it is the buying opportunity or the value of a generation. And I'm dead serious about that. I think it is the value of a generation. But yes, it is underperformed, it

is counterintuitive, it is frustrating as hell. Does not change the reality in my mind that it is an asset that is needed in so many areas, and there's a lot of tom foolery. I guess you could say surrounding the price of silver at least on the exchanges. But my mind has always been that, look, here's food for thought. On the last day, on December twenty seventh, let me give you the exact number here on December twenty seventh, U, I want to give you the exact number because it's important.

On December twenty seventh, twenty twenty three gold or silver closed on the Shanghai Gold Exchange AT. I got this somewhere. One second shouldn't take but a second it closed on the Shanghai Goal Exchange AT. I want to say, I can't find it. Twenty six dollars and fifty cents closed in the United States at around twenty four the numbers, I can't find it, but I had it here somewhere.

The numbers on the Shanghai Goal Exchange the last day of the year were two dollars and thirty or forty cents higher announced ten percent higher in Shanghai than it was on the LBMA or on COMEX. Goal is averaged between six and ten percent higher in Shanghai than on the LBMA or on COMEX. And I believe you are

slowly seeing the arbitrage turned up, and they are. They're incentivizing the Western traders to arbitrage everything over there quietly here again, just like they're doing this whole bricks thing. The countries that are accumulating it. The only reason they're not bitching is because they're the ones buying it at these subsidized prices. So they're using the West's leverage to support the illusion of a strong bond market and a

strong currency. Because what is gold and silver? They're monetary metals. They they're the kryptonite to Superman. They're pulling the cape or the curtain, you know, at the Wizard of Oz and seeing it's a little frail man. And if you have gold and silver going much higher, you call into question the strength of the world reserves. So I believe that this suppression is being allowed to happen, and in fact, they don't care about it because we're dumb enough to

keep these prices artificially low while they buy it. And the four hundred million ounces or thereabouts that India bought is way more than this on the entire comex market right now. So no, silver is not dead, and silver will be one of these things where we wake up on a Monday morning, and it's there's no one stupid enough to let go of it at that price where

the comex gets rendered obsolete. And I believe, before it's all said and done that you will see rice setting for these kinds of commodities, a real one on the Shanghai Gold Exchange or others in that part of the world, like in Dubai, because they're the ones buying it all, they're the ones producing it all, they're the ones who understand its real value. And you can see slowly turn up that heat right now ten percent more. You can arbitrage if you're a big enough trader and have access

to those markets. You can buy in London or buy in the US and sell in China's immediately for ten percent gain. Now. I think you know, you're a pretty literate financial guy. You know that traders will arbitrage for a whole hell of a lot less than ten percent. And that's exactly what we're beginning to see. So no, silver is not dead. I think it's the buy of a generation.