Relating total national money and credit to gold holdings, we've seen that the USA would price gold at around $45,000 an ounce, Germany at maybe $14,000 an ounce.
World Gold Council June 2007 figures say the UK has 310.3 tonnes of official gold, and Mike Hewitt's table shows UK M3 at $3,532.1 billion. Using the same gold value per kilo as with the other two countries, if the UK's M3 were entirely gold-related, this would imply a price of about $35,4046 per ounce.
From this perspective, although Britain's economy is much smaller than America's, its currency weakness is much closer to America's than to Germany's.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Dow and FTSE lows
The Dow had its lowest close yesterday since 19 April 2007; the FTSE is currently below 5,950 - the most recent lower closing figure was on 3 October 2006. Why we're suffering more, I have no idea.
More on gold and the money supply
At last, I've found something to help me see currencies in the context of official gold reserves - a brilliantly useful essay by Mike Hewitt in The Market Oracle (July 31).The above chart (one of several in his exposition) shows that the Euro zone has a better ratio than the USA of gold to currency, and as I tried to demonstrate yesterday, within Europe Germany is particularly strong. And Europe's economy is also of a size to make it a possible reserve-currency contender.
As a footnote, my fellow Brits must be dismayed at the UK's pathetic weakness.
Sprechen Sie Gibberish?
Most days, I read something that reminds me how little I know. And then I read the financial pages.
Let's look at the UK's Daily Mail today, Money Mail section (pages 38-39). The headline is "Storm Warning" - anything from a week to seven years late, depending on your analysis of the underlying trends.
Sub-section: "Will it continue?" Answer: volatility "for the next few months", but "the markets are fundamentally sound in that that they are not over-priced". Yet we've only just heard from Marc Faber, saying that he expects "earnings disappointments" which will show up in the dividends and so alter the p/e ratio for the worse. And on page 66 of the same paper we see disappointments at UBS, Wal-Mart, Home Depot.
The chairman of a large financial advice firm is quoted saying, "You must put this sub-prime mortgage meltdown into perspective. We are talking about £100 billion of losses. [Wait for the punchline.] This sounds like a lot, but it is just one-tenth of the size of the public sector pension liability in this country." Very large, and mostly unfunded, pension liabilities.
Usually, I throw away the money sections of newspapers; I only read them today to see if they'd noticed what was going on. But then I remember that journalists told us for years not to bother with financial advisers, when we could buy our pensions direct from the six-figure wagemen at Equitable Life.
Let's look at the UK's Daily Mail today, Money Mail section (pages 38-39). The headline is "Storm Warning" - anything from a week to seven years late, depending on your analysis of the underlying trends.
Sub-section: "Will it continue?" Answer: volatility "for the next few months", but "the markets are fundamentally sound in that that they are not over-priced". Yet we've only just heard from Marc Faber, saying that he expects "earnings disappointments" which will show up in the dividends and so alter the p/e ratio for the worse. And on page 66 of the same paper we see disappointments at UBS, Wal-Mart, Home Depot.
The chairman of a large financial advice firm is quoted saying, "You must put this sub-prime mortgage meltdown into perspective. We are talking about £100 billion of losses. [Wait for the punchline.] This sounds like a lot, but it is just one-tenth of the size of the public sector pension liability in this country." Very large, and mostly unfunded, pension liabilities.
Usually, I throw away the money sections of newspapers; I only read them today to see if they'd noticed what was going on. But then I remember that journalists told us for years not to bother with financial advisers, when we could buy our pensions direct from the six-figure wagemen at Equitable Life.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Could the German DM be stronger than the US dollar?
Another thought experiment. We've seen that if the US stock of gold (if it hasn't been replaced by IOUs) had to back all of its M3 money supply, then this would imply a gold price of something like $45,000 per ounce.
I've tried to find equivalent figures for Germany. The latest I can find is from May 1998, when M3 was then estimated at 3,243.70 billion DM. The Deutschmark is pegged at 0.51129 to the Euro, and the US dollar currently buys around 0.73581 Euros. So in dollar terms, German M3 is/was in the region of $1,559 billion.
The World Gold Council's June 2007 figures show Germany holding 3,442.5 tonnes of gold, and there are 31.1034768 grams to the troy ounce, so that's 110,678,945 ounces. If this gold covered all of Germany's M3 at the latter's 1998 estimate, it would imply a gold price of $14,085 per ounce.
Granted that German M3 must now be greater than in 1998, it still suggests that in terms of the ratio of gold to money supply, Germany's currency is around 3 times stronger than the USA's, or one-third as vulnerable in case of hyperinflation.
I've tried to find equivalent figures for Germany. The latest I can find is from May 1998, when M3 was then estimated at 3,243.70 billion DM. The Deutschmark is pegged at 0.51129 to the Euro, and the US dollar currently buys around 0.73581 Euros. So in dollar terms, German M3 is/was in the region of $1,559 billion.
The World Gold Council's June 2007 figures show Germany holding 3,442.5 tonnes of gold, and there are 31.1034768 grams to the troy ounce, so that's 110,678,945 ounces. If this gold covered all of Germany's M3 at the latter's 1998 estimate, it would imply a gold price of $14,085 per ounce.
Granted that German M3 must now be greater than in 1998, it still suggests that in terms of the ratio of gold to money supply, Germany's currency is around 3 times stronger than the USA's, or one-third as vulnerable in case of hyperinflation.
Silver to ride high?
Jason Hommel, in this 2 August report on SilverSeek.com, points out that, because of its industrial uses, silver is actually more scarce than gold.
He confirms my recent mathematical estimate that gold "ought" to equate to "$45,000/oz. to fully back all the M-3 created money supply", and repeats the market-manipulation theory:
...we have strong evidence of government manipulation in the gold market that has been going on since the 1990s. It is strongly suspected that the world's central banks have sold about one-half of their combined "reported" 33,000 tonnes (1 billion ozs.) of gold into the market to depress prices. Were it not for this selling, the gold price could well be $2,000 to $3,000 now!
He's predicting silver at $8,000 an ounce within 15 years - mostly because of hyperinflation, rather than real appreciation. In the nearer future, he thinks:
I see silver easily at $30 by early next year. Gold should be over $1,000 maybe $1,200.
That's something we'll be able to test more easily.
Gold going cold?
The gold price seems to have pretty much frozen, despite currency worries and stockmarket volatility. Peter Schiff is mystified, too though he expects "an explosive move for gold any day now". Yesterday's IHT article notes that "central banks in Europe have increased sales of reserves this year by 7.3 percent", continuing our theme of market manipulation, and a futures trader called Ron Goodis points out, "In times of a liquidity crunch, people want cash, and that's Treasuries, not speculative stuff like gold."
This is the problem for doomsters: the 'true' value of gold is most likely to be seen, not in moderately inflationary times, but when faith in paper currency has collapsed and hyperinflation is roaring through the system. It's not something one should wish for, even if it is needed to prove one's theory.
However, there's still the question of how much longer the market can be bought off with these gold stock sales. Eventually there will be nothing left to throw off the back of the troika at the pursuing wolves. And how much has been 'loaned' from stock already?
The article says, "Central banks are the biggest holders of gold, controlling about a fifth of all known supplies." So four-fifths is now in private hands, presumably. You may not feel the time is right to buy gold as a speculation or hedge, but if you had some already, would you sell it now?
This is the problem for doomsters: the 'true' value of gold is most likely to be seen, not in moderately inflationary times, but when faith in paper currency has collapsed and hyperinflation is roaring through the system. It's not something one should wish for, even if it is needed to prove one's theory.
However, there's still the question of how much longer the market can be bought off with these gold stock sales. Eventually there will be nothing left to throw off the back of the troika at the pursuing wolves. And how much has been 'loaned' from stock already?
The article says, "Central banks are the biggest holders of gold, controlling about a fifth of all known supplies." So four-fifths is now in private hands, presumably. You may not feel the time is right to buy gold as a speculation or hedge, but if you had some already, would you sell it now?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)