Poverty survey paints bleak picture of life in UK

Thousands of families in Britain are living on the breadline. Picture: Getty

By EDDIE BARNES
Published on Friday 29 March 2013 00:00

AUSTERITY is hitting families hard across Britain and Scotland according to a survey which suggests thousands of people are finding it hard to pay for basics like heating, clothing and food.

The Poverty and Social Exclusion report, the biggest survey of deprivation across the UK, found that a third of adults now suffer from some form of financial insecurity, with more than a quarter admitting they can neither save £20 a month nor put money away for a pension.
Just under one in ten households say they are unable to heat the living areas of their homes, up from just 3 per cent in the 1990s. People now say they consider around 33 per cent of Britons to be suffering from a lifestyle of “multiple deprivation”.
Households are suffering marginally less badly in Scotland compared to the UK as a whole, however.
More than 14,000 people across the UK, and 2,700 in Scotland, took part in the survey, which was conducted by a number of universities.
Nick Bailey, of Glasgow University, said: “These findings paint a very bleak picture of life for large numbers of people living in low-income households in Scotland today. There is little comfort in the fact that levels of deprivation appear to be even worse in the rest of the UK. The absolute numbers in Scotland are still shocking.”
The findings come with political focus centred on the impact of welfare cuts due to kick in next week when the new financial year begins.
The results show that, compared to previous surveys in 1983, 1990 and 1999, the situation facing poor households today is worse than before.
On housing, 9 per cent of UK families cannot afford enough bedrooms for every child aged ten or over of a different sex to have their own room, up from 3 per cent in 1999. One in six children lives in a home which is either damp or not adequately heated.
On food, one in 20 people in Scotland say they cannot afford an adequate diet. On clothing, 7 per cent of adults said they could not afford basic items of clothing, such as a warm coat or two pairs of shoes.
Professor Glen Bramley, of Heriot-Watt University, said: “The situation is already serious but it is set to get worse. The decline in living standards and the high level of financial insecurity pose an enormous challenge for both the Scottish and Westminster governments.”

Bitcoin Mythology: Red-herrings and Bullshit

In this DTOM article I intend to examine the nature and purpose of bitcoin with reference to monetary metals, government fiat, binary codes, intrinsic value and PONZI schemes.
My conclusions will be drawn from a biased perspective – mine.  All opinions/views are biased and I hope you have learnt to describe yours as I believe the writing here describes mine.  Let’s commence with an examination of the monetary metal. 

Gold, Silver, Copper

If you believe it was through accident, fate, or manipulation that the market places throughout the world and throughout known history have preferred physical monetary metal in the form of gold, silver, and copper then you are quite delusional.
Through much trial-and-error with numerous mediums-of-exchange such as seeds, paper, tally sticks and other forms of currency, it was discovered by practically every culture in existence that a functional market place required something that was long-lasting, easily recognised, and easy to transport around.   Over time, and throughout the world, an enormous amount of gold, silver, and copper has been forged into coins and bars to facilitate trade between individuals, groups, and eventually nation states.  This isn’t an accident that occurred through chance, it happened for the simple reason that gold, silver, and copper in physical form have been the best medium-of-exchange since time immemorial.
Platinum and palladium have rarely been used since they were discovered relatively late, and because, more importantly, they are difficult to distinguish from silver.  I state above that the market place naturally craves a currency that’s ‘easily recognisable’ and as a thought experiment please place a gold coin next to a silver one next to a bronze/copper one.  They are easily distinguishable from each other and have provided many market places with a functional currency for items ranging from luxury items such as grand palaces to basic purchases such bag of potatoes.  If there’s an item for sale, one of the monetary metals can easily provide the medium-of-exchange.
To deny gold, silver, and copper are the ‘Kings of currency’ is to state that all our history books are incorrect – which may have an element of truth to it J – but not in this context.
The mistakes in the past have been to ‘fix’ the value of gold, silver, and copper in relation to each other, and in a nominal format.  Hopefully we won’t do that again and instead utilize the monetary metals on two basic principles: Purity and weight.

Binary code and perception of fiat

We’re starting to hear more-and-more about Bitcoin as time goes on and the contemporary monetary system shows increasingly obvious signs of weakness and vulnerability to collapse.
Those that encourage you to utilize the new cyber-currency called bitcoin may be well-intentioned, and indeed many bitcoin advocates are also monetary metal enthusiasts.  Although there is a strong suspicion for some regarding bitcoin, I’m philosophical towards it, although I must stress that I have no interest in it myself.
However, as many have stated prior to my rantings here, bitcoin is merely binary code and has no intrinsic value whatsoever.  Furthermore, it would appear to have pseudo-PONZI scheme qualities in which the early adopters are rewarded and the later-joining participants gaining less as time unfolds.  Bitcoin has apparently increased in price by 2000% in two years; does anyone reading this believe this trend will continue?
In the early days of my awakening to the current monetary systems in play I frequently asked people around me the simple question, “How much of £sterling is in physical notes and coins?”  I received a variety of responses with some believing that 50% is in physical form with the remaining being stored on a computer database – i.e. in binary code.  I used to examine their eyes as the individual elaborated upon the simple fact that a mere three-per-cent of £sterling is physical with the vast majority simply being a virtual currency…….”A bit like a computer game” one person responded.  “Yes, indeed” I replied.
Myth One:  The public accepts digital currency is a good thing
I would imagine if a large percentage of the population realised their wealth was in the format of intangible fiat currency, there would be a global bank-run in a matter of days.  Although our contemporary currency system has functioned like this for some time, it has worked without the general population being aware of the facts.  I would also assume most folk believe their currency is stored 100% in paper at the bank, an assumption about to be proved fatal for many throughout the euro zone area.
The criminal elite have a wet dream regarding a ‘cashless’ society and are continuously attempting to implement one without success to date.  This is because the vast majority of people have a psyche in the concrete and not in the abstract.  Bitcoin, being an intrinsically-worthless and abstract currency will not be adopted by the general population, and I personally believe that the majority of folk currently paying attention to its progress are doing so for one purpose alone – greed and the chance of making a profit.
Myth Two:  Bitcoin is a store-of-Value
People often use the shipwreck example to explain the notion that gold and silver are a store-of-value.  In essence, it’s simple:  A ship sinks in the year 1713 with one-hundred gold sovereigns and two-hundred silver florins on board.  In 2013 the ship is discovered by a team of deep-sea divers who bring the stash up to the surface.  Has the gold and silver ‘stored’ value?  The answer is of course, yes, and not only that they will probably have a ‘premium’ over their intrinsic melt value due to numismatic qualities.  What would happen to your ‘bitcoin wallet’ three-hundred years from now, or even 6000 years from now?  Yes, there are coins from 6000 years ago made of electrum in museums that have a basic melt value.  Bitcoin also requires a computer and electricity to function, which sounds, to me ate least, like a massive assumption of conditions.  Without a computer and electricity bitcoins revert to their intrinsic value of worthlessness.
Myth three:  Silver has no intrinsic value
This myth of nonsense has been thrown-around by those that really should know better, and I’m extremely suspicious as this myth is used in correlation with the promotion of bitcoin.  Let us review the exact words again to put this myth to bed once-and-for-all.
Intrinsic:  belonging to a thing by its very nature: the intrinsic value of a gold ring.
Value:  relative worth, merit, or importance
Those that are perpetrating the myth that silver has no intrinsic value are attempting to get you to reason that all value is perceived…..a flip on the saying, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” into, “value is in the mind the beholder”.  This is partly true, and, after all, most bullshit has an element of truth to it otherwise it wouldn’t work.
Most DTOM readers will be aware of the wealth cycle principle and ratio investing, and will not be surprised nor enlightened with the concept that there is an element of the human psyche involved when examining value.  However, I refer you to the definition above which specifically states ‘relative worth, merit, or importance’.  Relativity is independent of the human psyche.  For example, there is relativity in the gravitational pull of planetary bodies; a phenomenom that existed before humans, and I dare suggest such relativity will exist long after our species meets the same fate as the many species before us.
Silver has intrinsic value/importance regardless of whether the human mind knows of its existence, just like oxygen has intrinsic importance prior to human kind discovering the properties of the air around us.  To suggest otherwise is either intellectually thick-as-pig-shit, or, as I chiefly suspect, the mind or minds of those with an agenda to promote ‘value’ in an intrinsically worthless entity such as bitcoin.  Those that fall into the latter category should be fully ashamed of themselves, shunned by the other awakened folk, and have their nonsense challenged for all to see.
Myth Four:  Bitcoin is anonymous
Trace Mayer recently appeared on a BBC Newsnight interview to pump the credentials of bitcoin to the British public.  Accompanied by Mr Knowles,  a shill from the Rothschild-controlled Economist, Trace and the shill debated for a few moments.  You can review the interview for yourself by clicking here.
Trace was reasonably honest and stated he uses bitcoin as a medium-of-exchange to circumvent the banking sector, and conceded that it is indeed a speculation/investment to make a move into bitcoin.
After the interview Trace addressed some of the topics discussed, and one of the arguments the Economist’s shill made was that bitcoin could be used for money-laundering, i.e. he was stating the myth that bitcoin is anonymous.  In response, Trace wrote:
“Additionally, all transactions are permanently stored in the blockchain which anyone can review. This leaves a tremendous amount of digital footprints that a competent forensic accountant can follow.”
“Consequently, I think Mr. Knowles is attributing to Bitcoin’s censorship-resistant nature a property which it does not have. Just because a payment cannot be stopped does not mean it cannot be traced.”
So there you have it from one of the most knowledgeable people on the bitcoin operations system.  Clearly, although there are no capital controls obvious to TPTB stopping a transaction in bitcoin occurring, they could if they so wished find out what coins are being used for what, where, and by which computer ISPN.
Myth Five:  Bitcoin is immune to the powers of the Banking Cartel
I’m not going to comment too much on this particular myth but would like to stress:  Are you fucking kiddin’ me?
Are you seriously trying to tell me that TPTB in the western world, the same self-professed elite that had the ability to pay programmers to design STUXNET can not, if they so wished, pay the best computer experts to completely sabotage the existence of bitcoin?
Like I stated:  Are you fucking kiddin’ me?
Summary/Conclusion:
Physical monetary metals have served the market place for millennia in various regions around the globe.  This is due to a process of trial-and-error with a variety of currencies with the outcome being the metals gold, silver, and copper becoming the ‘Kings of monetary history’.
Unlike bitcoin, gold silver and copper have intrinsic value outside of the human consciousness and although the human psyche does have a ‘value in the mind of the beholder’ effect on the monetary metals their value is not solely derived from such contemplation.  Bitcoin, on the other hand, is digital binary code with zero intrinsic value similar to digital government fiat currency.
The majority of humankind operate in the concrete rather than the abstract, and that is an explanation as to why TPTB have so far failed to implement their wet dream of a cashless society and computer-only currency transactions.  Bitcoin will meet the same reception from the general population……especially as the anger stage moves up a gear due to events in the euro area.
People will want to hold tangible wealth.
There are a few myths surrounding bitcoin and it is wise for anyone considering its usage to consider why they are interested in acquiring some:
Is it for profit?  How much longer will it rise?
Is it for an international medium-of-exchange?  The world is returning to localism, is it not?
Is it for confidentiality?  Trace Mayer states quite clearly there is a paper trail – or in this case a ‘binary code trail’.
But hey, it’s up to you if you want to speculate on whatever and whenever.  As I stated at the start of this article we are all biased and my bias motivated me to write this piece.  The thing that pissed me off was the utter bullshit being peddled about that “silver has no intrinsic value.”  If you genuinely believe that then you’re an intellectually pygmy not worthy of debating my 7-month-old son J
As always, keep safe and good luck.  Keep stacking that physical monetary metal – especially silver – and keep your wits about you as more-and-more shills and red-herrings will be released/unleashed as we go deeper into the collapse.
Peace

New York minimum wage hike to $9 could be paid by taxpayers

New York's legislature approved a budget that hikes the state’s minimum wage to $9 per hour. But taxpayers, not businesses, could actually be the responsible party for paying those extra wage costs, if a closed-door tax credit agreement among politicos made the final budget cut.
The new wage minimum will be phased in over three years, United Press International reports. The current level of $7.25 will hike to $8 by the end of 2013; to $8.75 by the end of 2014; and to $9 by the end of 2015, UPI says.
The minimum wage increase reflects a win for Democrats, who have fought hard against Republicans and business interests who see the mandate as a wall to economic growth. But the big loser may actually be the taxpayer, The Associated Press reports. Original budget language for the “minimum wage reimbursement credit” actually says employers will receive compensation for their higher wage costs — by way of taxpayers, AP says.
Once the minimum wage rises by $1.75- to its full $9-per-hour mandate, employers will only be paying 40 cents of that difference, AP reports. The remaining $1.35 will be paid by taxpayers, in the form of a reimbursement credit that goes back to employers.
“It’s a big subsidy for the corporate low-wage economy,” said Mark Dunlea of the Hunger Action Network advocacy group, in the AP report.
AP reports the tax credit deal was forged during closed-door meetings with Gov. Andrew Cuomo and legislative leaders, and was subsequently buried within the budget bill.
UPI did not clarify whether that tax credit was contained within the budget that passed the legislature earlier this week.

2013 Canadian Federal Budget contains a bail-in feature for collapsed Canadian Banks

Jeff Fitchett
Activist Post

The bail-out/bail-in that Cyprus has been subjected to has disturbed me quite a bit. Up until this point, collapsing countries have spared individual citizens' bank accounts (personal savings).  As you likely know, bank account holders with over 100k euros will lose between 30-40% of their cash in Cypriot bank accounts.

I have mentioned consistently for the last 4-5 years that the most vulnerable countries will be hit first and slowly the rot will make its way to "more stable" developed countries such as Canada.  I did a little digging and noticed on page 155 of the 2013 Canadian Federal budget that the Government of Canada has put in a section on this very topic.  

Specifically, "The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemical important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that in the unlikely event that a systemical important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into the regulatory capital. This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants." Here's the link and click on page 155: http://www.budget.gc.ca/2013/doc/plan/budget2013-eng.pdf

A bail-in means that investors in a bank's stock, a bank's bonds or deposit holders pay for the collapsed institution. Just so you understand what I'm saying; the government mentioned: "the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into the regulatory capital". If you go to Scotiabank's 2012 annual report and pull up page 21: http://www.scotiabank.com/ca/common/pdf/ir_and_shareholders/Scotiabank_2012AnnualReport_ENG.pdf 

Under the liabilities section of Scotiabank's balance sheet you will notice that Personal deposits fall under the banks liabilities. Scotiabank has $135.4 billion in personal deposits.

Pay attention to the amount of cash you have sitting in your bank account.  Banks in Cyprus were closed for almost two weeks. Do you have enough cash at home to last you two weeks to cover things like gas, food, etc? If not, you might want to rethink your personal situation.  Pass this on to people you care about.

China and Brazil won’t speak ‘American’ anymore

The days when the dollar was important seem to be long gone.
Every couple of months, bilateral relations between new global powerhouses seem to confirm what has been long announced: The U.S. dollar is no longer seen as the world’s reserve currency.
This week it was the time for China and Brazil to ditch the once mighty U.S. dollar as the base for their commercial relations. The rising Asian country and the former Portuguese enclave in Latin America will now use their own currencies to trade.
Both countries have signed an agreement to use their own currencies when buying and selling from and to each other. The deal will be valid for the next three years and will amount to what is now worth some 60 billion Brazilian reals. This agreement is the first between the two nations, but not new when it comes to getting rid of a debilitated, less valuable dollar. In the past few months, China and Russia, China and India and other so-called emerging powers closed similar deals.
The kind of agreement to trade in local currencies is supposed to set a new standard in the international dynamics that for many years supported the prevalence of the U.S. dollar as everything all other currencies wanted to be. “Our interest is not to establish new relations with China, but to expand relations to be used in the case of turbulence in financial markets,” said Brazilian Central Bank Governor Alexandre Tombini said.
Mr. Tombini has got it just right. Carefully crafted turbulence in the Western economic landscape mandates new ways to assess risk and more importantly, to prepare for and mitigate unknowns. While the Euro zone and the American economy slowly but surely walk towards financial Armageddon, countries that were once completely dependent on the American and European way of doing business are now looking elsewhere to guarantee their survival. The recent Chinese-Brazilian expansion in their commercial relations is another example of how developing countries are assuring their lifeline in the post-dollar future.
What China and Brazil have in mind with the latest agreement is to buffer their commercial ties should another financial bomb explode somewhere in the world. Many academics and experts agree that solid ties between China and Brazil are very important for the political alliance know as the BRICS. What these two countries along with Russia, South Africa and Indian intend to do, is to limit the impact of economic instability by allying themselves with nations that have equal goals and conditions.
Commercial ties and exchange between China and Brazil grew exponentially in the last few years. It went from about 14 billion to more than 150 billion Brazilian Real between 2003 and 2012. The effects of this commercial partnership has gone so far as to turn China into Brazil’s main trading partner. This fact has further isolated Brazil from the negative effects of a dollar collapse, or an American economic downfall which many experts agree, has been looming for a long time.
The question many people are asking is whether Brazil is closing a deal with the devil or simply changing one devil for another. The only way to know is to observe near future events. Perhaps, the coming of the new Development Bank that the BRICS have agreed to create will further commercial ties among partners and help solidify agreements such as the one signed by the two countries.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

Preparing for Inflationary Times

Jeff Clark
Casey Research

"All this money printing, massive debt, and reckless deficit spending – and we have 2% inflation? I'm beginning to believe that either the deflationists are right, or the Fed's interventions are working." – Anonymous Casey Research reader

The CPI, in our view, does not accurately measure inflation, which accounts for some of the discrepancy our reader is pointing out. However, the proper definition of inflation is "an increase in the quantity of money," which we've had in spades. We've not experienced the concomitant increase in prices, which is what we're addressing in this article.

It's logical to assume that when you create more of something, you dilute the value of what's already in existence. That's exactly what has happened to the US dollar since the 2008 financial crisis hit. Economics 101 says this should lead to higher inflation – yet official Consumer Price Index (CPI) levels remain benign.

It's this unexpected development that led a reader to pen the above quote. Is the inflation argument dead? If so, does that mean gold's big run is over? It's a timely question since the current sell-off in gold is largely attributed to low inflation expectations.

This is the first installment in our in-depth series of examining the next big catalysts for the gold price. This month we're looking at inflation. While a low CPI may be puzzling in the midst of massive, global currency abuse, there are three realities about inflation that convince us it's not only coming, but will catch an unsuspecting citizenry off guard.


Let's take a look at why we're convinced inflation will be one of the next big catalysts for the gold price…

Reality #1: History shows that high levels of debt and deficit spending eventually lead to inflation.

This statement makes sense on the face of it, but seminal research has been done that confirms it. A country simply cannot escape high inflation when carrying oversized debt levels and/or running massive deficits. Sooner or later, these sins catch up to you, regardless of what the current thinking may be.

Debt. The first of these historical studies is detailed in the book, This Time Is Different by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, who've extensively researched the impact of high debt on inflation and gross domestic product (GDP).

Based on a comprehensive study of global incidences, Reinhart and Rogoff gave the following conclusion:

• Debt levels over 90% of GDP are linked to significantly elevated levels of inflation.

When specifically studying US history, they again observed that:

• Debt levels over 90% of GDP are linked to significantly elevated inflation.

When US debt levels met or exceeded 90% of GDP, inflation rose to around 6% – roughly triple current levels – vs. the 0.5% to 2.5% range when the ratio was below 90%.
However, with regard to timing, they state:

• There is no apparent pattern of simultaneous rising inflation and debt.

In other words, inflation is a clear and definite result of high debt levels, but it's not a day-to-day link. This likely explains the current lag between high debt and a low CPI reading.

So are we nearing that 90% mark? Bud Conrad, chief economist of Casey Research, estimates we're currently at approximately 110%. Further, he projected from his research in December that…

• Using my assumptions, gross debt to GDP crosses 120% in 2014. That is well past the danger point of 90% that Reinhart and Rogoff cite. What's scary is that my assumptions are not even close to a worst-case scenario, so the situation could be much worse.

Bud does not expect to see much more deflation. One reason is because…

• In essence, much of the deflationary pressures have been cleared out. Going forward, there should be fewer outright losses from bad loans, and thus less deflationary pressure. For that reason (and many others), I expect higher inflation sooner rather than later.

Deficit Spending. Peter Bernholz is widely considered the leading expert on the link between deficit spending and hyperinflation. He conclusively states from his research that…

• Hyperinflation is caused by government budget deficits.

The US budget deficit totaled $5.1 trillion during Obama's first term in office. The longer deficits last and the bigger they are, the closer a country moves toward very high inflation levels.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently reported, however, that the 2013 deficit will drop to $845 billion. Good news, right? Not exactly, because the reduction is largely a result of higher taxes. The CBO was therefore forced to admit…

• The fiscal tightening from higher taxes and lower spending will slow economic growth to an anemic 1.4 percent by the end of 2013, causing the unemployment rate to edge back higher.

It turns into a vicious cycle, because if unemployment grows, money printing will continue and even increase. The CBO further admitted…

• Deficits are projected to increase later in the coming decade, however, because of the pressures of an aging population, rising health care costs, an expansion of federal subsidies for health insurance, and growing interest payments on federal debt.

If deficits grow – or even just remain elevated – we inch closer and closer to the hyperinflation Bernholz warns about. Breaking this cycle will be very difficult, if not impossible... at least not without serious consequences.

These studies present clear and direct evidence that spending more than is brought in and continually adding to the national credit card leads to higher inflation. Sooner or later, this type of reckless behavior catches up to an economy. The sobering reality is that avoiding moderate to high levels of inflation in our current fiscal state would be an historical first.

Unfortunately, that's not the only inflationary fear we have to contend with.

Reality #2: History shows that inflation can occur suddenly and grow rapidly.

Not only is higher inflation a near certainty, history tells us that once it grabs hold, it can quickly spiral out of control. Given our crumbling fiscal state, we must consider the possibility that price inflation could kick in abruptly and rise rapidly.

Amity Shlaes, a senior fellow of economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations and a best-selling author, provides some examples from the past century of US inflation that was at first subdued but then abruptly rocketed to alarming levels. Look how quickly inflation rose in just two years from "benign" levels.

According to Shlaes, US inflation was 1% in 1915 (based on an earlier version of the CPI-U). Within just two years, it soared to 17%. As she states, it happened because the Treasury "spent like crazy on the war, creating money to pay for it…"

In 1945, the official inflation rate was 2%; it accelerated to 14% in 24 months. Inflation registered 3.2% in 1972 and hit 11% by 1974.

It's clear that the arrival of inflation can be sudden, and that prices can quickly spiral out of control. Given the profligate amount of money being printed by many countries around the globe, we could easily become victim to rapidly rising inflation. If we matched the increases in the chart, our CPI would register 11%, 15%, and 19% respectively, by February 2014.

Regardless of the timing, though, this is a clear warning from history: expecting the CPI to remain low indefinitely is a dangerous assumption.

Reality #3: Most developed-world governments need inflation.

It is a fact that high inflation reduces the real cost of servicing debt. Our debt levels have grown so high that the only politically acceptable way to deal with them is to inflate the currency. Politicians and central bankers have no incentive to stop, and thus will continue until disastrous price inflation emerges. Just because it hasn't occurred yet doesn't mean it won't.

Other political solutions simply aren't realistic. There is no amount of politically acceptable increase in tax revenue or austerity measures that can meet existing and future obligations. Printing money is the only viable solution. Once you internalize this, an understanding of the most likely consequences becomes clear.

Even if deflation in select asset classes persists or we get another deflationary event like 2008, we can rely on central bankers to concoct more rescue schemes financed with freshly created money. Perhaps just as likely is that the economy does improve and all the money that's been held back enters the system and sparks inflation.

Conclusions

Based on these realities, we can draw some well-grounded conclusions about the coming rise in inflation.

1. The onset of higher inflation isn't certain, but the outcome is. These realities make clear that higher inflation is virtually ensured at some point. It's thus imperative we prepare for it.

2. What we use for money will experience a significant – perhaps catastrophic – loss of purchasing power. As shown, this is not speculation, but a process of cause and effect observed repeatedly throughout history. As a result, you will likely use some of your gold and silver to protect your standard of living – that is, after all, one of its purposes. The point here is to make sure you own enough ounces to offset a significant decline in purchasing power.

3. When inflation begins rising, precious metals will respond and move to higher levels. We don't know if this is the next catalyst for gold, but we're confident it will be a major driver of future prices.

4. Keep in mind that gold tends to moves in anticipation of inflation – think of it as inflation insurance. By the time inflation is "high," the big moves in gold and silver will have most likely already occurred.

Stay vigilant, my friends, because higher inflation is coming – and as a result, so are higher gold and silver prices.

The Total Iraq and Afghanistan Pricetag: Over $4 Trillion

iraq (Photo credit: The U.S. Army)

Why the US is broken
The Total Iraq and Afghanistan Pricetag: Over $4 Trillion –The wars are over, but the spending is just beginning, says a new study 28 Mar 2013 The U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been declared officially over, but America has barely begun to pay the bill, says a new study. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars will together cost $4 to $6 trillion, according a new study from Harvard University’s Kennedy School. A large share of those bills has yet to be paid: the study finds that the U.S. has spent around $2 trillion thus far on the two controversial wars, and that growing commitments to spending on military personnel and veterans will drive much of the spending in the decades to come.