The Goat Pen

looks like silver has a spike going on right now.

back in 2008 I bought somewhere around 200oz for $18 per. Its fluctuated over the years but spot price is now $29. I wouldn't sell at that price but if it gets on a run I'd be more than happy to sell it.

At one time silver was about 16:1 to gold. Now its somewhere in the neighborhood of 80:1 and people like me felt like it was undervalued. Of course I've felt like that for 12 years now and it hasn't done jack shit.

One major seller has shut down sales of precious metals in an effort to contain the run.

https://www.kitco.com/news/2021-01-31/U ... opens.html
-------------------
From a silver trading site in 2019

The 8 big shorts have been “lucky” so far, that their predicament isn’t widely recognized. I’m sure that a small number of sophisticated investors are aware of the plight of the 8 big shorts. But the simple truth is that there has been no mention of the concentrated short position in COMEX gold and silver futures by any mainstream media source. Even on the Internet, the concentrated short position is hardly mentioned. There seems to be a growing groundswell of opinion that silver is the cheapest asset around (it is) and I’m even starting to hear some ask why silver is so cheap to begin with? Let me make it easy for you – the only reason silver is so cheap is because of the concentrated short position of the 4 biggest traders, who hold more than 312 million ounces short, as of the latest COT report. When combined with the next 4 largest traders, the concentrated short position grows to nearly 404 million ounces. The connection couldn’t be more direct. Silver is the cheapest because its short position is the largest.

Over the past year and a half, the biggest damage to the 8 big shorts has come from gold, but more recently silver has begun to add to the loss mix. At current prices, silver accounts for as much as $3 billion of their total losses. Every $8 move higher in silver will cause that loss to increase by a further $3 billion. A move to $50 silver, commonly bandied about, would bring the 8 big shorts an additional $10 billion in losses from silver alone. What happens if the 8 big shorts move to cover and buy back their silver short positions in order to avoid catastrophic losses? Any such attempted short covering would cause the most drastic price move in history. This is the explanation for why the big shorts haven’t rushed to cover. I believe they finally grasp the extent of the bind they are in.

The only alternative for the big silver shorts is to try and buy time and postpone the inevitable by arranging sharp selloffs in hopes of buying back as many short positions as possible, something they have not been able to do. Complicating the plight of the big shorts is that they have buying competition. As more and more investors and financial entities move into silver, their losses mount. If they are overrun and must buy back their shorts at any price, it will be like Tesla shares on steroids. This is the big shorts’ last stand. The only difference between the big silver shorts of today and General Custer of yesteryear, is that historical records suggest Custer didn’t realize he was trapped until the last moment. My guess is that the big silver shorts now know they are doomed and are just delaying the inevitable.

14,623. compared to 27?

eCat = Silver Baron

I wouldn't be against a trading tax like she mentions. I disagree that it would curb frequent trading and we should spend the tax money on college loan forgiveness.

computers do that trading in volume on fractional changes in stock

that would generate some income

sardis wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 12:05 pm 14,623. compared to 27?

I don't follow

oh the 80:1

yea, sorry, wasn't doing the math

eCat wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:04 pm computers do that trading in volume on fractional changes in stock

that would generate some income

Market makers will claim that a transactional tax would kill "liquidity in the market" (which has some truth to it), will toss some dollars at the right legislators and this will all come crashing down.

Also, wrt the AOC and the woman with the close-set eyes, flat face and racist views...they are wildly different political actors in ability. AOC is a real threat to conservatism (well, so is the Geico Cavewoman lady, if I think about it). GOPers won't debate her because she's an incredibly effective communicator. McConnell figured out really early in the game that it's best to talk about her, but not to her. She is best handled labeling her without her being around. The thing about progressives, the really good ones, is that they rarely lose debates. They only lose elections.

look that GOP woman is crazy, no one is arguing that..well no one that is balanced in their ability to view information.

AOC stumbled out of the gate and there is no shortage of hypocrisy on her part.

Giving praise to AOC for being a great communicator just means she is adapting quite well to being a Washington Politician

If you only look at Progressive points of view, I can see where you'd think AOC is a leader and is challenging the status quo

If you look at the conservative side, she's a punch line with her new green deal, her newly minted millionaire status only months after arriving in D.C. and lately her overly dramatic tweet about Cruz trying to get her killed - oh and throwing in sexual assault in a teary eyed speech as to why she feared for her life in hiding and struggles to achieve credibility in her chosen profession. She just hits all the bases doesn't she?

Its not completely unnoticed, she gets her licks in but worse, her penchant for drama has an almost militant dark side while she plays to a very receptive audience . Her comments about "when we get in charge" and the implied tracking of Trump supporters for some level of revenge or accountability in her eyes (and her new cohorts) is alarming at best. If that is what we can expect from the new progressives then the level of discourse will only get worse.

Progressives should demand better than someone on the level of instagram media influencer

You mean like Trump "progressives" demanded better than someone on the level of a Twitter rabble influencer?

Hey, we let Traficant hang around.

sardis wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:10 pm Hey, we let Traficant hang around.

and the world is a lesser place without Youngstown's greatest son...

Re AOC

I am more left of center / centrist, and I don't agree with a lot of what she says. However, people should never underestimate her.

What Dook said.

I dont ever want to come out too much like I'm an AOC Stan. I'm also recognizing her political skill...even if some (like e) aren't here for it. She resonates with a lot of people.

I will say, women that have gone through sexual assault, who haven't repressed it or blamed themselves, get triggered genuinely with similar stimuli. I will not be cynical about her sharing her feelings in that respect.

The main thing that matters to me is that her IQ is about 40 points higher than that whacko cunt from Georgia. It's just embarrassing that we have people so goddamn stupid and backwards that somebody like her could be elected to Congress. She needs to be on a street corner somewhere selling pencils from a cup...

hedge wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:04 pm You mean like Trump "progressives" demanded better than someone on the level of a Twitter rabble influencer?

you lose the moral high ground with that argument

Bklyn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:52 pm What Dook said.

I dont ever want to come out too much like I'm an AOC Stan. I'm also recognizing her political skill...even if some (like e) aren't here for it. She resonates with a lot of people.

I will say, women that have gone through sexual assault, who haven't repressed it or blamed themselves, get triggered genuinely with similar stimuli. I will not be cynical about her sharing her feelings in that respect.

especially if she can use it as a tool to attack Ted Cruz

AOC has yet to prove to me she is more substance than being the Progressive Sara Palin

I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to the death penalty for AOC... and all other politicians.

"AOC has yet to prove to me she is more substance than being the Progressive Sara Palin"

If you really believe that you're impervious to proof...

what proof?

what has AOC accomplished that is of substance ?

eCat wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 6:33 pm what proof?

what has AOC accomplished that is of substance ?

Well, most of the bills she cosponsored in her 2+ years in office have been about wages, affordable housing, immigration and health care access. McConnell sat on every bill that came from the House after Nancy took over. So, it's hard to point to anything...even failures...because they were never given an opportunity to be voted on in the Senate. Because of McConnell's effective "Grim Reaper" tactics, her biggest claim so far, much like Katie Porter, is that she has effectively dismantled witnesses in Congressional testimony.

She is going to be a problem...for conservatives and centrists alike. There is a reason her name is called out as the boogeyman every 3rd block on Fox News, but she is not given microphone time that's not a managed soundbite. Don't sleep on her. She raises a shit ton of money and the camera finds her. Sooner or later, this US Representative beginning her second term in office, will get legislation that is actually voted on through it's natural course and those in opposition will need to go on record with their position.