Tuesday, March 28, 2023

THIS TECH BREAKTHROUGH WILL SAVE THE ELECTRIC CAR MARKET

0

by Ian Jenkins, via The Daily Sheeple:

A new technology is here that has the potential to reshape lithium production like fracking reshaped oil.

The global battery market is set to hit $120 billion in less than two years, and there’s a massive investor opportunity here in lithium—but this isn’t a mining play, it’s a tech play all the way.

As lithium continues to enjoy status as the hottest metal on the market, and as producers race to the finish line to bring new supply online, one little-known company just might hold technology that will give it a big edge.

In the swarm of new entrants on the lithium playing field, International Battery Metals (CSE:IBATOTC: RHHNF) stands out—front and center—because it’s sitting on a proprietary advanced technology that could push lithium into the production stage rapidly. It has signed an LOI with North American Lithium (NAL) to acquire all its lithium extraction process intellectual property and be restructured with NAL becoming an integral part of the company.

Where traditional solar evaporation technology takes up to 24 months to extract lithium from the brine, IBAT incoming CEO Burba says he can do it in 24 hours. That would put IBAT on the front line of new lithium coming online to meet the battery demand. And that demand is supplying our energy transition for everything from mainstreamed electric vehicles (EVs) to massive energy storage solutions and consumer electronics market that grows leaps and bounds.

The lithium game isn’t about exploration, it’s about innovation—and IBAT’s proprietary technology to be acquired from NAL was invented by the same game-changing inventor that came up with a similar tech for FMC Corp. (NYSE:FMC), one of the world’s four top lithium producers.

Lithium is currently produced through a grueling 24-month solar evaporation process that entails slowly extracting all other elements from the brine until only lithium remains.

IBAT’s technology is designed to remove evaporation ponds from the equation. As inventor-CEO John Burba puts it: “Our tech has such a high specificity for lithium that it can directly take the lithium out.”

With its eye on the lithium prize, IBAT is going for fast production and commercial scalability, at a time when lithium prices per metric ton are fantastic:

Disruptive technology changes everything, and if the deal with NAL completes and IBAT’s tech breaks through successfully, it could potentially do for lithium what fracking did to unlock shale for the U.S. oil and gas industry.

Here are 5 reasons to keep a close eye on International Battery Metals (CSE:IBATOTC: RHHNF)

#1 Big Lithium Doesn’t Hibernate in Evaporating Ponds

The technology IBAT has an LOI to acquire, and on acquisition is considering for licensing to third party lithium producers could be a significant key to unlocking $84 billion in lithium brine resources—by making it faster and cheaper to produce.

Production capacity is now at a critical juncture. It takes a minimum of 4 years for an average Lithium brine mine to come online–and another 3-4 years to reach full capacity.

The ambitious targets for EV deployment and energy storage applications require massive Lithium mining capacity to be built much sooner than current technologies allow.

That’s the chief reason why companies are aggressively pursuing new resources such as oil field brines, jadarite and hectorite clay. Lithium brine deposits are estimated to contain 66 percent of the world’s 14 million metric tonnes (MT) of Lithium. That’s Lithium worth $84 billion at current prices.

Unfortunately, recovery of Lithium from brine deposits is a painfully slow process. Traditional solar evaporation technology is an extremely time-intensive process, with a lengthy production cycle that can exceed 18 months.

Oilfield brines solve some of these problems due to their high Lithium concentrations. But, there’s a kicker here as well– oil field brines contain very high concentrations of dissolved ions (>100,000 mg/L), making commercial recovery of Lithium exceedingly expensive.

The technology IBAT is acquiring from NAL is based on a process that has been extracting lithium continuously in Argentina for almost 20 years.

Instead of going the traditional route of trying to isolate Lithium by removing all of those complex ions, the IBAT tech removes the Lithium directly.

According to IBAT CEO John Burba, the mastermind of this technology, the process takes the lithium out on a continuous basis. As the brine goes by, it collects lithium and lets the other impurities continue on and go straight back into the ground. The end-product is a diluted stream of lithium chloride and water that comes out as the brine goes by. That original solution has few impurities which are easily removed through an evaporation process.

The whole extraction process takes–24 hours, period—so it would mean the end of 18-24-month residencies.

Read More @ TheDailySheeple.com

The Biggest Stock Market Crashes Tend to Happen in October

0

by Dimitri Speck, Acting Man:

October is the Most Dangerous Month

The prospect of steep market declines worries investors – and the month of October has a particularly bad reputation in this respect.

Bad juju month: Statistically, October is actually not the worst month on average – but it is home to several of history’s most memorable crashes, including the largest ever one-day decline on Wall Street. A few things worth noting about 1987: 1. the crash did not presage a recession. 2. its extraordinary size was the result of a structural change in the market, as new technology, new trading methods and new hedging strategies were deployed. 3. Bernie (whoever he was/is) got six months.

Regarding point 2: in particular, the interplay between program trading and “portfolio insurance” proved deadly (the former describes computerized arbitrage between cash and futures markets, the latter was a hedging strategy very similar to delta-hedging of puts, which involved shorting of S&P futures with the aim of making large equity portfolios impervious to losses – an idea that turned out to be flawed). Too many investors tried to obtain “insurance” by selling index futures at the same time, which pushed S&P futures to a vast discount vs. the spot market. This in turn triggered selling of stocks and concurrent buying of futures by program trading operations – which put more pressure on spot prices and in turn triggered more selling of futures for insurance purposes, and so on. The vicious spiral produced a one-day loss of 22.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} – today this would be equivalent to a DJIA decline of almost 5,000 points. Due to circuit breakers introduced after 1987, very big declines will lead to temporary trading halts nowadays (since 2013 the staggered threshold levels are declines of 7{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, 13{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} and 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}; after 3:25 pm EST the market is allowed to misbehave as it sees fit). Interestingly, program trading curbs were scrapped again. We mention the case of 1987 because we believe today’s markets will eventually be faced with a “positive feedback loop” problem as well. Many new trading strategies and products that have become popular during the Bernanke/Yellen echo bubble era have yet to be truly stress tested. There are numerous new systematic strategies (almost all of which use leverage in some shape or form), there are now more listed ETFs and ETNs than listed stocks, high frequency trading is responsible for a very large share of trading volume, and open derivatives positions have grown extraordinarily large relative to trading volume in the underlying cash instruments. Market volatility has all but disappeared over the past 18 months or so, but this is reminiscent of a pressure cooker. It seems highly likely that lot of “pent-up volatility” will eventually be unleashed (there is a very good reason to expect this to happen; extended periods of low volatility tend to go hand in hand with the gradual buildup of ever larger speculative positions which depend on its continuation; and this is usually accompanied by a steady increase in leverage with the aim of boosting returns. As an aside, lately we quite often come across articles that explain why the market cannot go down, no matter what (here is a recent example that reminds us a bit of the “keiretsu argument of stock market invulnerability” that was popular in Japan in the late 1980s). [PT]

Although the month of October delivers an acceptable performance in seasonal terms if one disregards outliers like the crashes of 1987 and 2008, these particularly strong declines over such short time periods are nevertheless scary: what use is it to anyone if the market performs well in October several times in a row, but then generates such a large one-off loss that all previous gains evaporate? And what about intermittent losses?

Let as examine these extreme market moves more closely. The following chart shows the 20 largest one-day declines in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Crashes that occurred in October are highlighted in red.

The 20 Biggest One-Day Declines in the DJIA – extremely strong one-day declines happen particularly often in October

 Source: Wikipedia
Source: Wikipedia

 

9 of the 20 strongest one-day declines occurred in October. That is an extremely disproportionate frequency. In other words, October has a strong tendency to deliver negative surprises to stock market investors – in the form of sudden crashes.

Outliers Are “Real”

Things look quite differently in the first half of the year. Only two of the 20 largest historical declines have taken place in these six months.

Investors must not allow themselves to be deceived. Such extreme price declines may be rare, but they exhibit seasonal tendencies as well. In most years it is more likely that gains rather than losses are generated, but as noted above, the losses frequently turn out to be exceptionally large.

October Moves Sideways on Average

October, it is actually not a particularly weak month on average. This is illustrated by the seasonal chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average shown below, which encompassing a very long time period. Seasonal charts are different from standard charts; they don’t depict actual prices over a specific, definite time period.

Read More @ Acting-Man.com

CHINA IS ON GOLDEN WEEK HOLIDAY AND THUS THE CROOKS WILL RAID ALL WEEK

by Harvey Organ Blog, Harvey Organ Blog:

SURPRISINGLY NO GOLD OR SILVER LEFT THE GLD OR SLV: I WONDER WHY?/BILL HOLTER’S IMPORTANT PAPER..A MUST READ…

GOLD: $1274.25 down $8.25

Silver: $16.60  down 8 CENT(S)

Closing access prices:

Gold $1271.10

silver: $16.60

SHANGHAI GOLD FIX:  FIRST FIX  10 15 PM EST  (2:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)

SECOND FIX:  2:15 AM EST  (6:15 SHANGHAI LOCAL TIME)

SHANGHAI FIRST GOLD FIX: $n/a DOLLARS PER OZ

NY PRICE OF GOLD AT EXACT SAME TIME:  $n/a

PREMIUM FIRST FIX:  $8.24 (premiums getting larger)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SECOND SHANGHAI GOLD FIX: $n/a

NY GOLD PRICE AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $/na

Premium of Shanghai 2nd fix/NY:$13.00 (PREMIUMS GETTING LARGER)  

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LONDON FIRST GOLD FIX:  5:30 am est  $not important

NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME: $not important

LONDON SECOND GOLD FIX  10 AM: $1283.10

NY PRICING AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. 1283.10

For comex gold:

OCTOBER/

NOTICES FILINGS TODAY FOR SEPT CONTRACT MONTH: 28 NOTICE(S) FOR2800OZ.

TOTAL NOTICES SO FAR: 439 FOR 43900 OZ  (1.3654 TONNES)

For silver:

OCTOBER

 

 19 NOTICES FILED TODAY FOR

 

95,000  OZ/

Total number of notices filed so far this month: 304 for 1,520,000 oz

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

end

Let us have a look at the data for today

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In silver, the total open interest FELL CONSIDERABLY BY  1464 contracts from  184,424DOWN TO 182,960  CORRESPONDING TO ANOTHER RAID THAT SILVER UNDERTOOK IN FRIDAY’S TRADING (DOWN 14 CENTS ). WITH GOLDEN WEEK IN CHINA STARTING FRIDAY SEPT 29, OUR CROOKS BECOME EMBOLDENED TO CONTINUE THEIR WHACKING KNOWING FULL WELL THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL DELIVERIES FOR AT LEAST A WEEK.

RESULT: A FAIR SIZED FALL IN OI COMEX  WITH THE14 CENT PRICE RISE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAD A SMALL AMOUNT OF BANKER SHORTS COVERING AND THUS THEY HAD MILD SUCCESS.  

 In ounces, the OI is still represented by just UNDER 1 BILLION oz i.e.  0.152 BILLION TO BE EXACT or 131{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of annual global silver production (ex Russia & ex China).

FOR THE NEW FRONT OCT MONTH/ THEY FILED: 19 NOTICE(S) FOR 95,000OZ OF SILVER

In gold, the open interest FELL BY A SMALLER THAN EXPECTED 1800 CONTRACTS WITH THE FALLin price of gold ($3.75 ) WITH YESTERDAY’S COMEX TRADING.  The new OI for the gold complex rests at 530,883. WEHAVE NOW ENTERED GOLDEN WEEK (ONE WEEK OF CHINESE HOLIDAY)..SO EXPECT TORMENT FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK AS THE CROOKS DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PHYSICAL DELIVERIES FOR A WEEK.

 

Result: A SMALL SIZED DECREASE IN OI WITH THEFALL IN PRICE IN GOLD ($3.75) 

we had: 28 notice(s) filed upon for 2800 oz of gold.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

With respect to our two criminal funds, the GLD and the SLV:

GLD:   WOW

Tonight , NO CHANGESin gold inventory at the GLD AGAIN DESPITE THE CONTINUAL DRUBBING GOLD HAS TAKEN THESE PAST FEW WEEKS

Inventory rests tonight: 864.65 tonnes.

SLV

Today: a no changes in inventory:

INVENTORY RESTS AT 326.757 MILLION OZ

 

end

.

First, here is an outline of what will be discussed tonight:

1. Today, we had the open interest in silver FELL BY1464 contracts from 184,424DOWN TO 182,960 (AND now A LITTLE FURTHER FROM THE NEW COMEX RECORD SET ON FRIDAY/APRIL 21/2017 AT 234,787) . IT  SEEMS THAT A TINY FRACTION OF OUR BANKERS WERE SUCCESSFUL IN COVERING THEIR SHORTS.  WITH GOLDEN WEEK IN CHINA, EXPECT THE BANKERS TO HAVE CONSTANT TORMENT THROUGH THIS COMING WEEK AS THEY TRY AND COVER AS MANY AS POSSIBLE OF THEIR SILVER/GOLD SHORTS.

RESULT:  A GOOD SIZED DROP IN SILVER OI  AT THE COMEX WITH THE FALL IN PRICE OF 19 CENTS IN FRIDAY’S TRADING. EXPECT CONSTANT TORMENT FOR THE REST OF THE WEEK.

(report Harvey)

.

2.a) The Shanghai and London gold fix report

(Harvey)

 

2 b) Gold/silver trading overnight Europe, Goldcore

(Mark O’Byrne/zerohedge

and in NY:  Bloomberg

3. ASIAN AFFAIRS

i)Late SUNDAY night/MONDAY morning: Shanghai closed /Hang Sang CLOSED / The Nikkei closed UP 44.50 POINTS OR 0.22{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Australia’s all ordinaires CLOSED UP 0.81{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}/Chinese yuan (ONSHORE) closed/Oil DOWN to 50.30 dollars per barrel for WTI and 55.60 for Brent. Stocks in Europe OPENED GREEN .  ALL YUAN FIXINGS CLOSED

Read More @ HarveyOrganBlog.com

The Fed Stares Reality in the Face

by Jim Rickards, Daily Reckoning:

Janet Yellen maintains a persistent belief in the Phillips curve, which assumes an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation.

As unemployment goes down, labor scarcity leads to wage increases above growth potential, which leads to inflation.

The only problem with the Phillips curve is that it has no empirical support. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, we had high unemployment and high inflation. Today, we have low unemployment and low inflation. Both results are the exact opposite of what the Phillips curve would predict.

In a recent speech, Fed governor Lael Brainard, an ally of Yellen, said the Phillips curve today is “flat.” That’s a polite way of saying there is no curve.

Yellen is also confused about what causes inflation other than the Phillips curve. She believes that monetary ease, acting with a lag, feeds inflation. Therefore, it is necessary to tighten policy before inflation appears to avoid getting behind the curve.

But money supply does not cause inflation. It may add fuel to a fire, but it’s not the spark. The Fed has created $3.5 trillion of new money since 2008 and there’s no inflation in sight.

What causes inflation is not money supply but psychology, expressed as velocity. Velocity is the speed at which money turns over through lending and spending. It depends on behavioral psychology, what Keynes called “animal spirits,” regardless of the amount of money around.

Assume GDP is $20 trillion and maximum real growth is 3{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. That means nominal GDP growth above $600 billion (3{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of $20 trillion) will be inflationary. Now consider two cases. In the first case, money supply is $300 billion and velocity is 2. In the second case, money supply is $250 billion and velocity is 3.

The first case yields $600 billion in nominal growth ($300 billion times 2), which is noninflationary because it matches potential growth. In the second case, nominal growth is $750 billion ($250 billion times 3), which is inflationary because it exceeds potential real growth.

In other words, the example with the larger money supply has lower inflation. Sorry, Janet.

In recent remarks, both at the FOMC press conference on Sept. 20 and a speech last Monday, Yellen left markets with the impression that the Fed would raise rates in December based on the arguments noted above (low unemployment and monetary policy acting with a lag).

At the same time, she noted that inflation has been going down sharply and that the Fed really doesn’t understand why (a refreshing note of humility).

Yellen dismisses the weak inflation data as “transitory” and clings to her forward-looking Phillips curve fears as a reason to raise rates in December. Markets seem to agree.

Yet as with all false belief systems, reality intrudes sooner or later. In this case, reality intruded at exactly 8:30 a.m. EDT last Friday, Sept. 29.

That was when the August core PCE year-over-year (YoY) inflation figure was released.

Core PCE YoY is the one inflation metric the Fed focuses on. The Fed’s target for that measure is 2{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. Here are the data so far this year:

  • January: 1.9{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • February: 1.9{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • March: 1.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • April: 1.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • May: 1.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • June: 1.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}
  • July: 1.4{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}.

You get the picture.

The real data have moved in the opposite direction from the Fed’s 2{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} target by a full 0.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in seven months. That’s a big move, and that’s a long period of time to cling to the “transitory” explanation.

I told Rickards’ Intelligence Triggers subscribers on Thursday that if core PCE came in at 1.4{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} or lower Friday morning, it would drive a stake into the heart of Wall Street research departments and kill any chance of a December rate hike.

If it was 1.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, I said it wouldn’t move the needle much one way or the other. Yellen would take a “wait and see” approach. If it was 1.6{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} or higher, I said that would have increased the odds of a December rate hike and given encouragement to Yellen and her “transitory” theory.

So what did August core PCE come in at Friday?

Read More @ DailyReckoning.com

Thunder Down Under: Some Australian Junior Gold Miners Take Off

0

by John Rubino, Dollar Collapse:

Gold mining stocks have been treading water for what seems like forever. But in a remote part of Australia, a potentially big find by a tiny exploration company is generating some welcome excitement.

The story in a nutshell: Back in the 1990s, Newmont Mining geologist Quinton Hennigh came up with a novel theory about the origin of South Africa’s immense Witwatersrand Basin gold deposit. He left Newmont and spent the next couple of decades searching for similar geologic structures that he hoped would contain similar amounts of metal.

He eventually found one in a remote part of western Australia, and formed Novo Resourcesto explore it.

A few more quiet years ensued. But in mid-2017 the floodgates opened as reports of serious deposits – including large numbers of gold nuggets right near the surface, documented on YouTube – caught the imagination of some heavy hitters in the gold world, turning Novo’s stock into a ten-bagger and taking several other explorers with nearby claims along for the ride.

Now lots of people are paying attention. Here’s an interview with 321gold’s Bob Moriarty, an early Novo fan:

 

Bob Moriarty isn’t Selling His Novo Shares

 

Novo Resources (TSX-V:NVO, OTC:NSRPF) shares caught rocket fuel the week after my last interview with Bob Moriarty when videos of prospectors using metal detectors at Purdy’s Reward made the rounds on the internet.

We had the pleasure to catch up with Bob a couple of days ago after he returned from an expedition to Australia to have a look at Novo’s latest discovery, Purdy’s Reward. After a 300{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}+ run-up in the span of a month have the shares gotten ahead of themselves? And if not, how much more upside might be available to Novo shareholders?

CEO Technician: I want to start off by saying I am not currently a shareholder of $NVO even though I recently made nearly 100{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} on a short term trade in the shares (in which Trading Lab subscribers were able to monitor and participate in real time). What has you so interested in Novo Resources right now?

Bob Moriarty: The key to understanding it is that the Hamersley basin is an analog of the Witwatersrand Basin; same age, and gold got there the same way. Gold got there through precipitating out of salt water. This was the theory that Quinton Hennigh came up with 24 years ago when he was a doctoral candidate at the Colorado School of Mines. He was working for Newmont and he identified six basins around the world of a similar age and he told me you could go to one of these basins and find a lot of gold.

The way they found the gold at Purdy’s Reward was really interesting because it’s completely different from Beatons Creek and the type of gold mineralization in the Witwatersrand Basin; it’s at surface, it’s very high grade, they came out with assays today. Their first bulk sample which they just released had a 67 gram/tonne average. I’ll be real candid with you, I think it’s going to be a 2 ounce per tonne average across the resource.

CEO Technician: The market was enthused by the release of the first bulk sample results, but my question is how much of this news was already priced in considering how much the stock has run up in recent weeks? And how much can we decipher about the much larger property package from a couple of bulk samples?

Bob Moriarty: We have no idea of how thick the conglomerate area is, we have no idea if the entire conglomerate area is mineralized, we have no idea what the length of the conglomerate is, we have no idea if the conglomerate extends into the basin. However, if you accept Quinton’s theory that the gold precipitated out of water and that this is a Witwatersrand analog the answer is that there’s a lot of gold and they appear to have found some very high grades. The chances of that first sample being the highest grade sample they’ll ever recover is zero; they’ve been mining that area for 110 years and you have to understand the theory to understand that they’re all connected. It’s a big deal.

CEO Technician: What are your major takeaways from your trip to Australia?

Bob Moriarty: I always want to know what the grade is and what the potential is. We went to the local gold buyer and he showed us gold from a town about 110 km away and you could look at it and tell it was absolutely identical to the gold from Purdy’s Reward. That told me that the potential is really enormous.

I said in 2012 that Novo had the potential to be a 10-bagger and at the time the shares were only C$.45 so they’re well on their way to being a 10-bagger, and the potential for being a 100-bagger is absolutely real.

Read More @ DollarCollapse.com

Thoughtful Disagreement – Ted Butler

by Ted Butler, SilverSeek:

I caught a good interview by Charlie Rose on Bloomberg TV the other night of Ray Dalio, founder and head of Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund with some $150 billion in assets under management. Dalio has been making the rounds recently in promoting his new book, “Principles”, in which he lays out his beliefs for the investment business and the business of life. Now in book form, Dalio previously offered his work for free and which was downloaded more than three million times. For very good reason, when Dalio speaks, he is listened to even more than EF Hutton.

One of the best things about Dalio (and if you’re unfamiliar with him, please do a search on Google) is his rags-to-riches real life experience and his strong belief that we learn through our mistakes. In his case, his biggest failure and the cause of his near financial ruin was a mistaken bet on a stock market collapse in the summer of 1982.  Instead of the market tanking for all the reasons Dalio had (correctly) anticipated, it exploded with a vengeance, creating losses and forcing him to lay off his employees (with whom he held close personal relationships) and resort to borrowing $4000 from his father to survive. For a more detailed version of the affair, here’s a good link.

http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/3751630/asset-management-macro/the-education-of-ray-dalio.html#/.Wcupk7le7bh

Staring into his own personal abyss, Dalio vowed to learn from it and set about to do just that, succeeding far beyond what anyone could have ever imagined. What resulted was an organized and disciplined approach to dealing with decisions and mistakes. Please recognize that I am paraphrasing in very simple terms what is a detailed plan for action on his part. In essence, Dalio’s design was to come up with investment ideas not currently widely-embraced (allowing for big rewards if correct), but then to subject those ideas to intense and deliberate critique. In Dalio’s words, the critique should take the form of “thoughtful disagreement”. Spend time and energy uncovering and developing new ideas, but then spend just as much effort in trying to uncover what’s wrong with the new ideas (before the market tells you that the idea was flawed). All in all, pretty good stuff.

The reason I bring all this up is because I feel it directly relates to silver as an investment idea and, all along and quite unknowingly, I may have been applying Dalio’s principles in my analysis of silver. Certainly, silver meets Dalio’s prerequisite for a profitable investment idea since it is far from widely embraced by the investment community, but there is a lot more to it than that. In fact, Dalio has been a long-time and strong proponent for gold and in the interest of full disclosure, some six or seven years ago, I wrote to him and his chief investment officer, Greg Jensen, about the merits of investing in silver. I remember having to print out and snail mail my thoughts to Dalio and Jensen because no email contact was available on the Bridgewater website.

Just like the vast majority of my attempts to contact those of great influence in the investment world on silver, I received no reply from Dalio, not that I was really expecting one. That mattered little, since I promised myself long ago that I would do whatever I could imagine to get others to see what I saw in silver and no response wasn’t a crushing blow or deterrent. So why am I bringing up Dalio’s principles?

Unbeknownst to me, it seems that I have been following Dalio’s advice about seeking serious critique for my ideas on silver, particularly of the thoughtful disagreement variety. How else would you characterize what I do? By writing on a public and semi-public basis, including to those at the very top of regulation and the organizations I claim are manipulating the price of silver (JPMorgan and the CME Group), I would contend that what I am doing is nothing but looking for thoughtful disagreement (including perhaps from Dalio himself). Sure, I get plenty of personal insults from some, mostly anonymous, but serious critique about the body of what I write?  Never.

Here are the issues. Silver (and gold) prices are set by paper dealings on the COMEX by a few large speculators (banks and managed money traders), to the exclusion of input from real producers and consumers, making the price discovery process and the resultant price artificial. For the past nearly ten years, CFTC data have indicated that JPMorgan has been the dominant paper silver short seller, along with a few other large banks and as a result of that dominance and control none have ever taken a loss when adding short positions. In addition, for the past six and a half years, JPMorgan has accumulated a massive amount of actual silver (650 million oz) at rock-bottom and self-created depressed prices, all while never taking a loss while shorting silver on the COMEX.

Read More @ SilverSeek.com

Former FOMC Member Admits The Fed Manipulates Asset Prices

by Dave Kranzler, Investment Research Dynamics:

The Fed often treats financial markets as a beast to be tamed, a cub to be coddled, or a market to be manipulated. It appears in thrall to financial markets, and financial markets are in thrall to the Fed, but only one will get the last word. – Former FOMC member, Kevin Warsh – The Fed Needs New Thinking

Please note, a large portion of the source links, plus the idea for this commentary, were sourced from GATA’s latest dispatch regarding the possible appointment of Warsh as the next Fed Chairman.

The quote above is from former FOMC board member,  Kevin Warsh, who appears to be Trump’s top candidate to assume the Fed’s mantle of manipulation from Janet Yellen.   By way of relevant reference, Warsh happens to be the son-in-law of Ronald Lauder,  who is a good friend of Trump’s.  He is also a former Steering Committee member of the Bilderberg Group.    GATA has published a summary reprise of direct evidence from previous written admissions by Warsh the the Fed actively manages financial asset prices, “including bolstering the share price of public companies” (from link above).

In addition to stocks, Warsh admitted in the same essay that, “The Fed seeks to fix interest rates and control foreign-exchange rates simultaneously” (same link above). This task is impossible without suppressing the price of gold, something which began in earnest in 1974 when, under the direction of then Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, paper gold futures contracts were introduced to the U.S. capital markets. This memo, written by the Deputy assistant Secretary of State for International Finance and Development, was sent to Kissinger and Paul Volcker in March 1974: Gold and the Monetary System:  Potential U.S.-EC Conflict (note:  the source-link is from GATA – it was discovered in the State Department archives by Goldmoney’s John Butler).

The nature of discussions after that memo, the minutes of which are now publicly available, center around the fact that several European Governments were interested in re-introducing gold into the global monetary system.  This movement was in direct conflict with the interests of U.S. elitists and banking aristocrats, as U.S. had successfully established  the petro-dollar as the reserve currency.

In 2009 GATA sent a Freedom Of Information Act request to the Fed in an attempt to get access to documents involving the Fed’s use of gold swaps (this letter written by Warsh confirms the existence of the use of gold swaps).  Warsh, who was the FOMC’s “liaison” between the Fed and Wall Street, wrote a letter back to GATA denying the request.

The fact that Warsh has openly acknowledged that the Fed manipulates assets, including an implicit admission that the Fed seeks to suppress the price of gold,  might give some in the gold community some hope that Warsh, if appointed to the Chair of the Fed, might reign in the Fed’s over interference in the financial markets.

On the contrary, I believe this makes him a bigger threat to democracy, capitalism and freedom than any of his recent predecessors.  Warsh is better “pedigree’d” and politically connected than either Bernanke or Yellen.  His high level involvement in the Bilderberg Group ties him directly to the individual aristocrats who are considered to be the most financially and politically powerful in the western world.    Without a doubt he has far more profound understanding of the significance of gold as a monetary asset than any modern Federal Reserve FOMC member except, perhaps, Alan Greenspan.

The good news for the gold investing community is that it becomes increasingly evident that China, together with Russia and several other eastern bloc countries, is working to remove the dollar as the reserve currency and reintroduce gold into the global monetary system.  A contact and subscriber to my Mining Stock Journal who happens to live and work in Shanghai has sent further evidence  (and here) that China is working toward launching a gold-backed yuan oil futures contract.

Read More @ InvestmentResearchDynamics.com

Catalan Officials Meet to Plan Independence

by Stephen Lendman, StephenLendman:

On Monday, Catalan officials met in Barcelona. Referendum results showed 90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the autonomous region’s residents support independence from fascist Spain.

Catalan President Carles Puigdemont chaired a Monday cabinet meeting. He’s expected to ask regional parliamentarians to vote on an independence declaration within days, calling Sunday’s vote valid, binding, and had to be applied, adding:

“My government in the next few days will send the results of the vote to the Catalan parliament, where the sovereignty of our people lies, so that it can act in accordance with the law of the referendum.”

EU officials can no longer “continue to look the other way.” At the same time, Puigdemont called for international mediation to help resolve a standoff with Madrid, saying “(w)e don’t want a traumatic break…We want a new understanding with the Spanish state.”

Catalan trade unions and associations called a region-wide strike for Tuesday, protesting Madrid’s “grave violation of rights and freedoms.”

In Madrid, PM Mariano Roy is meeting with ruling People’s Party officials, discussing how to confront Catalonian independence if declared as expected.

Spain’s El Pais broadsheet blamed Catalan officials for Sunday’s “shameful” events, Madrid bears full responsibility for. It also blamed Rajoy’s regime for failing to prevent the independence referendum from taking place – calling Sunday “a defeat for our country.”

Read More @ StephenLendman.org

“Systemic” Age Discrimination in Tech, even as Tech Workers Get “Better with Age”

0

by Wolf Richter, Wolf Street:

But “ageism” exists “across all industries,” not just Tech.

Many people have seen this with their own eyes as it happened to others, or have experienced it themselves even as companies have vigorously denied it. So finally, here are some numbers that expose blatant age discrimination in the Tech industry, both in hiring and promotions, and it’s even worse than the age discrimination in Non-Tech industries.

The study boils down to this: if you’re a Baby Boomer, forget it. And if you’re Gen X, it’s tough.

These numbers are not based on VC-funded startups where the two founders may be 27 and 28 and the oldest people of the bunch. No one even bothers to mention age discrimination in these outfits. It’s just a fact of life. No, these numbers are based on an analysis of over 330,000 US-based employees – 63,000 in Tech and 267,000 in other industries – from 43 large companies. This is Corporate America.

Here is what the study by Visier, which provides workforce analytics for HR professionals, found: “Systemic ageism is occurring in Tech hiring practices.”

Here are some nuggets:

  • Millennials (aged 20 to 33) make up 43{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the workforce in Tech, compared to 26{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in Non-Tech.
  • Gen X workers (aged 34 to 51) make up 45{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the Tech workforce, compared to 47{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} for non-Tech.
  • Baby Boomers (aged 52 to 70) make up less than 12{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the Tech workforce, compared to 27{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in Non-Tech.
  • Non-manager workers in Tech are on average 38 years old and thus five years younger than Non-Tech workers (43 years old).
  • Managers in Tech are on average 42 years old, vs. 47 in Non-Tech – not that managers in Non-Tech industries don’t face age discrimination, it’s just not as brazen.

But performance is not the problem.

The study found that the older workers in Tech had more “Top Performer” ratings in their respective jobs. Some nuggets:

  • “From age 40 onward, non-manager workers in Tech enter the ‘Tech Sage Age’ and are increasingly likely to receive a Top Performer rating as they age, mature, and gain experience, compared to Non-Tech.”
  • The proportion of Top Performers in Tech increases with age, but in Non-Tech industries the proportion decreases.
  • “This suggests that maturity and experience are more important drivers of high performance in Tech than in Non-Tech industries.”

Despite the high performance of older workers in Tech, they’re being discriminated against via both, hiring practices and promotions:

  • Tech hires a higher proportion of younger workers and a smaller proportion of older workers than Non-Tech.
  • Notably, the Tech Sage Age does not translate into higher promotion rates for older non-manager workers in Tech. Rather, promotion rates for Tech workers decrease continuously with age as they do in Non-Tech.

This produces a “disconnect” for older workers between their rising performance and their declining promotions with age. In a sidebar, Visier’s report cited a study by researchers from the computer science department at North Carolina State University that found that programming knowledge actually improved with age:

Using Stack Overflow user data, they found a correlation between age and reputation. They found that: “…programmer reputation scores increase relative to age well into the 50s, that programmers in their 30s tend to focus on fewer areas relative to those younger or older in age, and that there is not a strong correlation between age scores in specific knowledge areas.”

As older programmers are “getting better with age,” what are their salaries doing?

Turns out, non-manager workers in Tech and Non-Tech experience similar salary trajectories: The median salary for workers in both sectors increases in the first phases of the career and peaks in their early 40s, at which point it “stabilizes” for both – that is, it begins to decline slightly for both.

However managers in Tech experience some salary increases as they age – if they remain employed in Tech, which, as the above numbers show, is very hard to do.

The study summarizes: “We found that hiring decisions in Tech do indeed favor younger candidates” compared to Non-Tech industries. Millennials are the big winners – at the expense of Gen X candidates and Baby Boomers.

Read More @ WolfStreet.com

Fall of the Great Pumpkin

0

by James Howard Kunstler, Kunstler:

Welcome to the witching month when America’s entropy-fueled death-wish expresses itself with as much Halloween jollity and merriment as the old Christmas spirit of yore. The outdoor displays alone approach a Babylonian scale, thanks to the plastics factories of China. I saw a half-life-size T-Rex skeleton for sale at a garden shop last week surrounded by an entire crew of moldering corpse Pirates of the Caribbean in full costume ho-ho-ho-ing among the jack-o-lanterns. What homeowner in this sore-beset floundering economy of three-job gig-workers can shell out four thousand bucks to decorate his lawn like the set of a zombie movie?

The overnight news sure took on that Halloween tang as the nation woke up to what is probably now confirmed to be a national record for a civilian mad-shooter incident. So far, fifty-eight dead and over 500 hundred injured in Las Vegas at the Route 91 Harvest Festival (Nine up in fatalities from last year’s Florida Pulse nightclub massacre, and way more injured this time).

The incident will live in infamy for maybe a day and a half in the US media. Stand by today as there will be calls far and wide, by persons masquerading as political leaders, for measures to make sure something like this never happens again. That’s rich, isn’t it? Meanwhile, the same six a.m. headlines declared that S &P futures were up in the overnight markets. Nothing can faze this mad bull, apparently. Except maybe the $90 trillion combined derivatives books of CitiBank, JP Morgan, and Goldman Sachs, who have gone back whole hog into manufacturing the same kind of hallucinatory collateralized debt obligations (giant sacks of non-performing loans) that gave Wall Street a heart attack in the fall of 2008.

Europe’s quaint doings must seem dull compared to the suicidal potlatch of life in the USA, but, believe me, it’s a big deal when the Spanish authorities start cracking the heads of Catalonian grandmothers for nothing more than casting a ballot. The video scenes of mayhem at the Barcelona polls looked like something out of the 1968 Prague uprising. And now that the Catalonia secession referendum passed with a 90 percent “yes” vote, it’s hard to imagine that a good deal more violent mischief will not follow. So far, the European Union stands dumbly on the sidelines. (For details, read the excellent Roel Ilargi Meijer column on today’s TheAutomaticEarth.)

Next in the cavalcade of October traumas: the USA versus the nuclear weapons ambitions of North Korea. This has been ramping up all year, of course, but it looks to be headed for a climax now that the Golden Golem of Greatness is at the helm. Truly astounding, though, is America’s new method for conducting the most sensitive matters of foreign policy. The day after Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that his office was in contact with North Korean officials, the Secretary’s boss, You-Know-Who, tweeted out: “I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man.”

Could this possibly be a cleverly orchestrated good cop / bad cop effort to bamboozle Kim Jung-un? Or is the US government just completely dysfunctional? Or maybe something else is afoot. Under normal circumstances, Mr. Tillerson would just resign after such a gross insult, but we must suppose that a patriotic sense of duty compels him to remain in office in case the need suddenly arises in this witching month to run over Mr. Trump with the 25th amendment — the clause in the constitution that allows a consensus of a pretty small number of national political leaders to toss out a sitting president on the grounds of derangement and incompetence. Stay tuned on that one.

Read More @ Kunstler.com

IMF Head Foresees the End of Banking and the Triumph of Cryptocurrency

by Jeffrey Tucker, The Foundation for Economic Freedom:

In a remarkably frank talk at a Bank of England conference, the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund has speculated that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency have as much of a future as the Internet itself. It could displace central banks, conventional banking, and challenge the monopoly of national monies.  

Christine Lagarde–a Paris native who has held her position at the IMF since 2011–says the only substantial problems with existing cryptocurrency are fixable over time.

In the long run, the technology itself can replace national monies, conventional financial intermediation, and even “puts a question mark on the fractional banking model we know today.”

In a lecture that chastised her colleagues for failing to embrace the future, she warned that “Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies.”

Here are the relevant parts of her paper:

Let us start with virtual currencies. To be clear, this is not about digital payments in existing currencies—through Paypal and other “e-money” providers such as Alipay in China, or M-Pesa in Kenya.

Virtual currencies are in a different category, because they provide their own unit of account and payment systems. These systems allow for peer-to-peer transactions without central clearinghouses, without central banks.

For now, virtual currencies such as Bitcoin pose little or no challenge to the existing order of fiat currencies and central banks. Why? Because they are too volatile, too risky, too energy intensive, and because the underlying technologies are not yet scalable. Many are too opaque for regulators; and some have been hacked.

But many of these are technological challenges that could be addressed over time. Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies.

Better value for money?

For instance, think of countries with weak institutions and unstable national currencies. Instead of adopting the currency of another country—such as the U.S. dollar—some of these economies might see a growing use of virtual currencies. Call it dollarization 2.0.

IMF experience shows that there is a tipping point beyond which coordination around a new currency is exponential. In the Seychelles, for example, dollarization jumped from 20 percent in 2006 to 60 percent in 2008.

And yet, why might citizens hold virtual currencies rather than physical dollars, euros, or sterling? Because it may one day be easier and safer than obtaining paper bills, especially in remote regions. And because virtual currencies could actually become more stable.

For instance, they could be issued one-for-one for dollars, or a stable basket of currencies. Issuance could be fully transparent, governed by a credible, pre-defined rule, an algorithm that can be monitored…or even a “smart rule” that might reflect changing macroeconomic circumstances.

So in many ways, virtual currencies might just give existing currencies and monetary policy a run for their money. The best response by central bankers is to continue running effective monetary policy, while being open to fresh ideas and new demands, as economies evolve.

Better payment services?

For example, consider the growing demand for new payment services in countries where the shared, decentralized service economy is taking off.

This is an economy rooted in peer-to-peer transactions, in frequent, small-value payments, often across borders.

Four dollars for gardening tips from a lady in New Zealand, three euros for an expert translation of a Japanese poem, and 80 pence for a virtual rendering of historic Fleet Street: these payments can be made with credit cards and other forms of e-money. But the charges are relatively high for small-value transactions, especially across borders.

Instead, citizens may one day prefer virtual currencies, since they potentially offer the same cost and convenience as cash—no settlement risks, no clearing delays, no central registration, no intermediary to check accounts and identities. If privately issued virtual currencies remain risky and unstable, citizens may even call on central banks to provide digital forms of legal tender.

So, when the new service economy comes knocking on the Bank of England’s door, will you welcome it inside? Offer it tea—and financial liquidity?

New models of financial intermediation

This brings us to the second leg of our pod journey—new models of financial intermediation.

One possibility is the break-up, or unbundling, of banking services. In the future, we might keep minimal balances for payment services on electronic wallets.

The remaining balances may be kept in mutual funds, or invested in peer-to-peer lending platforms with an edge in big data and artificial intelligence for automatic credit scoring.

Read More @ Fee.org

This is how China moves the world to a gold standard! – Bill Holter

by Bill Holter, Miles Franklin:

We have watched for years as China grew in strength economically, financially and militarily. They have pre positioned themselves by making trade deals, setting up credit facilities and even an alternative clearing system to the West’s “SWIFT”. We also know China has been gobbling up global mine supply of gold for going on 10 years now. As I’ve written in the past, just using the back of a napkin, it can be surmised they now have hoarded 20,000 tons or more compared to the “supposed” 8,133 tons held by the U.S..

It is clear China has meticulously readied themselves to take the role of world leadership from the U.S. but do they really want the responsibility AND burden of issuing the reserve currency? This has always been the question and the answer from logical thinkers is “no”. No, because we (and of course China) have seen the result of the “burdens” that comes along with the privilege of issuing the reserve currency. I must confess, I too did not believe China would desire or even accept the responsibility of reserve currency status. I now believe this thought is mistaken! I will explain shortly.

The announcement of “yuan for oil, convertible into gold” is a game changer http://www.zerohedge.com . China imports about 8 million barrels of oil per day, this works out to 3 billion barrels per year. At $50 per barrel, the oil trade by China is about $150 billion per year. If we compare that to total global production of gold, we find the 80 million ounces produced and priced at $1,300 currently amounts to just over $100 billion. In other words, China consumes more oil (in dollar terms) than ALL the gold produced in the world. Think about this for a moment, at current pricing, just one country uses more oil than the entire world produces money? Does the word “reset” at all come to mind?

Taking just one step back, China has over the last few years imported roughly 2,000 tons of gold per year. If we add India’s imports of roughly 1,000 tons per year, we see combined they are importing more than the 2,500 that are produced. These numbers by themselves illustrate that the gold supply had to come from somewhere …and that “somewhere” can only be from Western vaults. In order to extend and pretend their financial systems and currencies were sound, the West (led by the U.S.) has been bleeding their gold reserves.

Now, getting back to China, here is why I believe they are leading the world BACK to a gold standard! If China imports oil and pays with yuan and offers their yuan “convertible” into gold, how many oil producers will take them up on the conversion? Certainly not 100{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} and maybe not 50{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. Maybe the number is only 25{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} or even less but that’s not important as “time” will take over. You must ask yourself, how long can China and India import 3,000 tons while the world only produces 2,500 tons? Where will another 1,000 tons (or maybe much more?) of demand be satisfied if oil producer’s newly acquired yuan are converted to gold? The easy answer is “they cannot” …AT CURRENT PRICES!

Here is the interesting part and where I believe I was mistaken in previous thought. China watched as the U.S. was bled of gold leading up to 1971. They also know we have been bleeding gold ever since as a way to camouflage the credit bubble and gross over issuance of dollars. They understand the game and do not want to be placed in the same quandary if the yuan becomes the reserve currency. Instead, I believe China is leading the world toward a de facto gold standard by diverting what was previously “oil for dollars” into “oil for gold”. I believed China might mark gold higher by making a bid and ask price at much higher numbers, instead, facilitating and using natural demand makes so much more sense.

By making yuan convertible into gold, China in essences is creating a demand they know cannot be met by supply … (again) AT CURRENT PRICES! Why would they do this? It is actually so simple I feel dumb for not seeing this previously. China actually kills an entire flock of birds at one time!

First, they are THE largest owner of gold on the planet so they are in fact marking the value of their treasury up by multiples. The higher future price of gold will also make it very difficult if not impossible for other nations to catch up in gold accumulation. By freeing the gold price, China is assuring their place as a world financial leader for many years if not many centuries as that is their mindset. They know quite well, gold is lasting wealth and also the phrase “he who has the gold makes the rules”!

Second, they will in essence be devaluing the yuan versus gold. This will have many benefits and too broad of a subject to breach here but think back to 1934 when the U.S. devalued the dollar versus gold, it creates “inflation” and makes debt easier to pay and service as well as giving a bump to the real economy.

Next and of great importance, moving the world “naturally” to a gold standard means moving away from the dollar standard and all the unfairness that goes with it. A world moving toward gold (China) is a world moving away from the dollar. Surely the dollar will devalue versus the yuan via lower demand from the oil trade and also the lessening of “power” afforded as issuer of the reserve currency. The U.S has enforced the dollar standard by military use for years. Is this action by China “neutral” enough and free market enough to avoid military conflict? We can only hope and pray the U.S. does not kick the table over in reaction.

Read More @ MilesFranklin.com