Koos Jansen has shared a 4 paragraph article that shreds the belief that the silver price is suppressed…
First, the public tip:
A silver price-suppression theory gets debunked https://t.co/hRICKw5DLO
— Koos Jansen (@KoosJansen) October 6, 2017
Embracing the belief that a bank or a cartel of banks has suppressed the prices of gold and silver for decades via the short-selling of futures contracts is like adopting a child. It’s a lifetime commitment through thick and thin, meaning that once this belief takes hold there is no amount of evidence or logic that can dislodge it.
Entering a debate with someone who is incapable of being swayed by evidence that invalidates their position is a waste of time and energy, so these days I devote no TSI commentary space and minimal blog space to debunking the manipulation-centric gold and silver articles that regularly appear. However, Keith Weiner has taken on the challenge in a recent post.
Keith’s article is brilliant. In essence, it proves that the silver market has NOT been dominated by the “naked” short-selling of futures. His arguments might not be as interesting as many of the manipulation stories, but they have the advantage of being based on facts and logic.
Don’t get me wrong; for as long as I can remember it has been apparent to me that gold, silver and all the other important financial markets are manipulated. However, it is also apparent to me that the price manipulation happens in both directions and never overrides the fundamentals for long. Of course, to see that this is the case you first have to know what the true fundamentals are.
Thank goodness it’s settled.
All this time, we thought there was an incentive for the governments and central banks around the world to keep the silver price artificially low.
We sure are glad that silver is worth $16.62 an ounce and not one single penny more.
Perhaps we should start stacking some other market-efficient similarly priced commodity that’s been around for thousands of years too: