IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

[Mega]

Sorry no link, do they mean it?
Mike

[Jay]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

Sorry no link, do they mean it?
Mike

They never mean it. It's just jawboning.

[zoog]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

They never mean it. It's just jawboning.

Over and over and over again...

Our information is that the IMF will talk about selling gold but not actually do it. This is consistent with central banks which have for years announced gold sales but have not followed through with sales.

[metalman]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

Sorry no link, do they mean it?
Mike

if the threat succeeds in lowering the gold price, announcements of sales by the IMF has previously meant... buy more. because they have followed these announcements with sales.

[blazespinnaker]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

Sorry no link, do they mean it?
Mike

http://www.midasletter.com/news/0902...es-of-gold.php

I guess they had to keep jawboning, so when it came time to actually sell the price wouldn't drop right away because people wouldn't know for sure what was going to happen.

[Starving Steve]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

I like gold, but I like silver better at this price level. I like oil even better at its price level.

The more the IMF threatens gold sales, obviously the better is the opportunity to buy gold. Let the IMF invest in its worldwide paper money to bail-out the Federal Reserve Bank and the other central banks, worldwide.... Trillions in stimulus packages worldwide, and the IMF comes to buy the paper money to rescue the central banks, and that is supposed to inspire confidence in paper money.

And the more the idiots and potheads around me invest in solar solutions, the more I like oil, hydro-electric, and nuclear power. Even coal is a better solution than solar. Even burning wood makes more sense than solar. But let the potheads learn the hard way--- when they have to shower in lukewarm water even in the desert.

The longer I live, the more I see that this world is truly run by morons.

[Guest]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

Resulting in the "devalued currency" of "gold sale threats". Neato.

[LargoWinch]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

...and to this China replies "We'll take it"

[xtronics]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

I hope they do - I will buy more on the down tick..

[bill]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...1983#post71983
page 9
Question 19

[*T*]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

MINE in SIZE

Anyway it's a drop in the ocean

"There has been a step-up in investment demand as evidenced by the GLD," said Bryan, referring to the world's largest gold ETF SPDR Gold Trust , which has since the beginning of the year jumped about 115 tonnes to 895 tonnes as of Feb. 10.

see here

[Thailandnotes]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

always enjoy it when the interviewer asks jim rogers what will happen if the imf sells its gold and rogers rants "i'd love to see the imf sell its gold. it would be the end of the imf."

[Mn_Mark]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

The longer I live, the more I see that this world is truly run by morons.

That's what I observe too.

It makes me genuinely curious to understand how the United States came to be so fortunate as to be founded by the brave, wise men who won our freedom and then wrote a Constitution, which if actually observed would have protected our liberty and property rights to this day. Liberal "interpretation" of the "living document" that the Constitution has become, which is mostly no real Constitution at all, just some empty words that whoever is in power interprets to mean whatever they want, has left us largely at the mercy of people like Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Obama, etc.

But how come there was actually a time when men expected to stand on their own feet, and would vote for politicians who would write laws requiring people to stand on their own feet? What was it about that time and place that seemed to breed courageous men of honor and principle who wanted real freedom and individual responsibility instead of a nanny state and social engineering? How did we end up with Obamas, Hillarys, and McCains instead of Washingtons, Adamses, and Franklins? There was a time when it was generally considered dishonorable to want to be supported by government. Now it seems to be the aspiration of a large percentage of the population, and they feel no shame about it either. And there's an eager crop of politicians ready to give them all the pork and "entitlements" they demand. I recall this quotation:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."-- James Madison, in response to the 1792 congressional appropriation of $15,000 to assist some French refugees.

What was different then? What's it going to take to get a new generation of Washingtons and Franklins? My guess is they will rise out of the ashes of our current civilization. I shudder to think how bad it's going to get before that happens. And Washington didn't have to fight a ruling power that had spy satellites, bugging technology, cluster bombs, nuclear weapons, and so on. My worst fear is that something like North Korea could be in the future for all of us. Or perhaps the future portrayed in the "Terminator" movies, except the enemy will be big government statists instead of machines. Maybe technology and weaponry have advanced too far for a "Spirit of '76"-style revolution to occur again?

[Adeptus]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

Even coal is a better solution than solar. Even burning wood makes more sense than solar.

How do you figure? I'm curious.

[bcassill]

Re: IMF to sell 104 tons of GOLD

That's what I observe too.

It makes me genuinely curious to understand how the United States came to be so fortunate as to be founded by the brave, wise men who won our freedom and then wrote a Constitution, which if actually observed would have protected our liberty and property rights to this day. Liberal "interpretation" of the "living document" that the Constitution has become, which is mostly no real Constitution at all, just some empty words that whoever is in power interprets to mean whatever they want, has left us largely at the mercy of people like Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Obama, etc.

But how come there was actually a time when men expected to stand on their own feet, and would vote for politicians who would write laws requiring people to stand on their own feet? What was it about that time and place that seemed to breed courageous men of honor and principle who wanted real freedom and individual responsibility instead of a nanny state and social engineering? How did we end up with Obamas, Hillarys, and McCains instead of Washingtons, Adamses, and Franklins? There was a time when it was generally considered dishonorable to want to be supported by government. Now it seems to be the aspiration of a large percentage of the population, and they feel no shame about it either. And there's an eager crop of politicians ready to give them all the pork and "entitlements" they demand. I recall this quotation:

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."-- James Madison, in response to the 1792 congressional appropriation of $15,000 to assist some French refugees.

What was different then? What's it going to take to get a new generation of Washingtons and Franklins? My guess is they will rise out of the ashes of our current civilization. I shudder to think how bad it's going to get before that happens. And Washington didn't have to fight a ruling power that had spy satellites, bugging technology, cluster bombs, nuclear weapons, and so on. My worst fear is that something like North Korea could be in the future for all of us. Or perhaps the future portrayed in the "Terminator" movies, except the enemy will be big government statists instead of machines. Maybe technology and weaponry have advanced too far for a "Spirit of '76"-style revolution to occur again?

There has always been scandal. Just remember President Grant's "The Era of Good Stealing" in the 1870's and the Tea Pot Dome Scandal of the 1920's. As long as there exists power and money, there will be those who will attempt to manipulate the system in their favor. Either that or just steal it outright.