Aftershocks
By
James Howard Kunstler
22
April, 2013
If the FBI can track
down two homicidal Chechen nobodies inside of forty-eight hours of
their Boston bombing caper, you kind of wonder how come the Bureau
can’t detect the odor of racketeering, insider trading, and wire
fraud in this month’s orchestrated smackdown of the gold futures
markets, including the parts plaid by the Federal reserve, one or
more too-big-to-fail banks, self-interested big money players such as
George Soros, slumbering regulators at the Commodities Futures
Trading Commission, and tractable editors at The Wall Street Journal
and The New York Times.
Of course, US
Attorney General Eric Holder, who oversees the FBI, has done a fair
imitation of a Brooks Brothers store window mannequin for four years,
but surely somewhere in the trackless labyrinth of American law
enforcement there exists some dogged rogue investigator with a
filament of nagging curiosity who might piece together the clunky
train of events that may amount to the financial crime of the
century. For instance, it can’t be so difficult to determine who
was behind the several hundred ton mass dump of paper gold contracts
a week or so ago. There must be a pretty simple record of the
transaction, retrievable with a warrant or a subpoena. Whatever
entity did it — still ostensibly unknown — knowingly generated
losses in the neighborhood of a billion dollars for itself. Was this
just the cost of doing business? Or a favor owed, say, from a bank to
its godfathers at the Fed, carried out to make the dollar look
relatively a lot less unsound than it really is? Or a ruse to allow
the custodians of bullion in US depositories re-acquire at bargain
prices gold that has been stealthily hypothicated into oblivion? Or
just to divert attention from their inability to make good on
contracted deliveries of actual physical gold.
No official has yet
answered why the Federal Reserve Bank of New York told the German
government a couple of months ago that it would take seven years to
return that country’s gold held in safekeeping (across the ocean
from the Russians) since the Cold War. The NY Fed must have a vessel
under contract that makes the proverbial slow boat to China look like
an ICBM.
Doesn’t anybody
want some answers to these questions, including how come the two
aforementioned major newspapers published front-page stories
calculated to justify, if not provoke, the most extreme negative
sentiment in the precious metals markets, seemingly coordinated with
Goldman Sachs advisories to short those markets? And what about a
glance at the trading records to see who executed massive naked
shorts? Wouldn’t it be interesting if they were the same parties as
the dumpers? And why? — other than a strenuous intervention in the
markets to make those markets look unreliable? Does anyone even
remember that the purpose of financial exchanges is to verify and
authenticate the clearing of trades to provide confidence that
markets are honest so that real business can be conducted?
What the interveners
have accomplished is only to prove that the gold and silver
derivatives markets are unreliable. They may have smashed the trade
in that kind of paper, but only achieved a firmer divergence between
the derivatives markets and the bullion markets where, for example,
the premiums on delivery of silver ounces makes the price exactly
equal to the pre-smackdown price. Anyway, nobody believes that the
London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) or that the New York
Commodity Exchange (COMEX) can deliver. Meanwhile, runs on bullion
contracts were starting to uncover a contagion of swindling in
precious metals obligations that pervaded the western banking system.
It was not a coincidence that the smackdown happened three weeks
after the Dutch bank ABN Amro notified clients that it would only
satisfy demands for redemptions of gold held in its custody with
equivalent cash payments. “No gold for you today!” A fair
inference based on subsequent events would be that all the custodians
of physical gold bullion have misreported their holdings. And now
that actions by the European Union and its agents have ventured into
the dangerous territory of plain confiscation, there is not a whole
lot of faith throughout the western world by people who are paying
attention that an account of any kind in any financial institution is
safe. There is good reason to fear runs on everything.
Because the smackdown
organizers pulled off their operation in a panic, they probably
ignored the potential further negative consequences of their
stratagem, namely a worsening loss of confidence in banks generally
and in the trade of abstract financial instruments in particular,
including currencies. Nervous public officials may be brooding on
imminent “bail-ins” and currency controls, but the public may be
ready to bail out of the prevailing banking model into things that
have been considered more money than “money” for a few thousand
years, namely real gold and silver. The basic fact remains: there
isn’t enough to go around.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.