The U.S. Government is sitting on 445 billion in unrealized gains

[OohPooPahDoo]

Yes, there are real world examples. Look at what happened to the price of oil the last time the President said he was going to release some of our oil reserves onto the market. Just saying he was going to do it caused the price of oil to plummet. And that was almost literally just a drop in the bucket of world oil supply.

.

The price of oil fell by a factor of 40 fold? Really? I don't seem to remember that. Maybe you're mistaken.

The amount of oil that was to be released onto the market did not add up to anywhere near five percent of total world supply. So it would not have a factor of 40 effect.

If you did release five percent of the world's supply onto the market, I bet oil would drop by a factor of 40. Hell yes.

Let's say the fed did decide to sell it all right away (and let's stick with your straw man and ignore they don't need to do that to realize the profit, as I have pointed out numerous times in this thread) - you wouldn't pay $100 an oz for gold? Or even $42.50?

First, I don't think you know what a strawman is.

Second, if the amount of gold that was available to buy suddenly skyrocketed by 8000 metric tons, then no, I would not pay $100 for an ounce of gold, and neither would anyone else.

.

It doesn't need to be made available to buy you insufferable retard. See big letters above.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

And apparently you couldn't read post #34. Shit for brains.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And apparently you couldn't read post #34. Shit for brains.

Mark Calabria is wrong. When the Fed has a surplus on its balance it must remit to the treasury. If the surplus is a result of marking the gold up to, say $100 this year, the fed would be free to pay the surplus to Congress by paying the Treasury with its own debt instruments , thus cancelling that much debt.


Is there any particular reason the gold should be pegged at 42.22 for all eternity? Should it least go up with inflation, unless that would mean exceeding market price (highly unlikely ever at this point).

 

[SniperFire]

$445 billion is like several years worth of Obama phones!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, no, no. That could easily be spent by this administration to provide 10 phones.

 

[paulitician]

That's nice, but we're $16 Trillion and rising in Debt. Not sure this really matters much.

 

[Againsheila]

Do you think a private business or a private individual would sit on a massive pile of gold when they are racking up huge debts?

The Federal Reserve IS a private business, and the gold that they hold does NOT belong to the US taxpayer or the US Treasury.

The federal reserve by law must remit 100% of its net profits to the U.S. Treasury every year and its board of governors are appointed by the President. I'm not really sure how you can call it a "private business" considering those two facts.

When is the last time the fed was audited?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The Federal Reserve IS a private business, and the gold that they hold does NOT belong to the US taxpayer or the US Treasury.

The federal reserve by law must remit 100% of its net profits to the U.S. Treasury every year and its board of governors are appointed by the President. I'm not really sure how you can call it a "private business" considering those two facts.

When is the last time the fed was audited?

The GAO audited the fed a few months ago.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That's nice, but we're $16 Trillion and rising in Debt. Not sure this really matters much.

The fed getting to park over 400 surplus billion dollars on its asset sheets doesn't matter?

That's our money. Surplus fed funds belong to the People. Why you are opposed to us receiving them is beyond me, especially considering how much conspiracy types like you despise the fed.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

$445 billion is like several years worth of Obama phones!

What they hell is an Obama phone?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

That's nice, but we're $16 Trillion and rising in Debt. Not sure this really matters much.

The fed getting to park over 400 surplus billion dollars on its asset sheets doesn't matter?

That's our money. Surplus fed funds belong to the People. Why you are opposed to us receiving them is beyond me, especially considering how much conspiracy types like you despise the fed.

How can there be a 400 billion dollar surplus if the country is 16 trillion in debt and running over a trillion in deficits? Do you even know what a surplus is? Are you really saying that this is unrealized potential asset revenue? And if so, how much is it going to cover of our fiscal matters and for how long?

Then reread post #36.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That's nice, but we're $16 Trillion and rising in Debt. Not sure this really matters much.

The fed getting to park over 400 surplus billion dollars on its asset sheets doesn't matter?

That's our money. Surplus fed funds belong to the People. Why you are opposed to us receiving them is beyond me, especially considering how much conspiracy types like you despise the fed.

How can there be a 400 billion dollar surplus if the country is 16 trillion in debt and running over a trillion in deficits? Do you even know what a surplus is? Are you really saying that this is unrealized potential asset revenue? And if so, how much is it going to cover of our fiscal matters and for how long?

Then reread post #36.

I'm talking about the Fed's balance sheet not the U.S. Government's. Fuck you're slow.

I ask again - IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON THE FED'S GOLD SHOULD BE PEGGED AT $42.22?

Hey why not let the Fed keep ALL of its profits?

 

[Inthemiddle]

To $42.22 for selling off less than 5% of the total world supply? I fucking doubt it.

I don't know if it would drop that low. But if you offloaded that much at once, it would certainly create a sudden drop in prices. And since gold is used as an investment tool, it's not unreasonable to expect such an initial drop to spark deeper repercussions.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

To $42.22 for selling off less than 5% of the total world supply? I fucking doubt it.

I don't know if it would drop that low. But if you offloaded that much at once, it would certainly create a sudden drop in prices. And since gold is used as an investment tool, it's not unreasonable to expect such an initial drop to spark deeper repercussions.

For like the 7th or 8th time, I never suggested it all be offloaded at once. Doesn't even have to be offloaded at all. The Fed can issue notes backed by it.

 

[Againsheila]

The federal reserve by law must remit 100% of its net profits to the U.S. Treasury every year and its board of governors are appointed by the President. I'm not really sure how you can call it a "private business" considering those two facts.

When is the last time the fed was audited?

The GAO audited the fed a few months ago.

I had to check it out, terrifying.

First Audit Results In The Federal Reserve's Nearly 100 Year History Were Posted Today, They Are Startling! | Economy

The first ever GAO (Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out.

$16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious – the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The fed getting to park over 400 surplus billion dollars on its asset sheets doesn't matter?

That's our money. Surplus fed funds belong to the People. Why you are opposed to us receiving them is beyond me, especially considering how much conspiracy types like you despise the fed.

How can there be a 400 billion dollar surplus if the country is 16 trillion in debt and running over a trillion in deficits? Do you even know what a surplus is? Are you really saying that this is unrealized potential asset revenue? And if so, how much is it going to cover of our fiscal matters and for how long?

Then reread post #36.

I'm talking about the Fed's balance sheet not the U.S. Government's. Fuck you're slow.

I ask again - IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON THE FED'S GOLD SHOULD BE PEGGED AT $42.22?

Hey why not let the Fed keep ALL of its profits?

Sorry, that is post #34. I'm slow, yet you keep dancing around the same thing after it being explained in several ways on several points.

Good luck out there, fella.

 

[Conservative]

8,000 tonnes, right OohPooPahDoo?

Okay.

Now check this out:

In 2011, gold sales to China shot up 20% on the previous year to 769.8 tonnes, the WGC said in its Gold Demand Trends report. The fastest growth was in sales of gold bars and coins for investment: total investment purchases rose 69% in 2011 to 258.9 tonnes, worth 84.5bn RMB.

China to overtake India as world's biggest gold market | World news | The Guardian

Get it now?

8,000 tonnes is ten times the amount of gold bought by the biggest buyer on the planet last year, and that buyer was on a spending binge.

It would take nearly ten years to sell that amount of gold. So how is that helpful to bringing down our debt today?

Is any of this starting to sink in?



.

For the LAST FUCKING TIME YOU RETARDS - the GOLD DOES NOT NEED TO BE SOLD FOR IT TO BE MARKED HIGHER ON THE FED'S fucking BALANCE SHEET.

For revaluation to have any economic impact, we'd have to sell​

dumb ass.​

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

8,000 tonnes, right OohPooPahDoo?

Okay.

Now check this out:



China to overtake India as world's biggest gold market | World news | The Guardian

Get it now?

8,000 tonnes is ten times the amount of gold bought by the biggest buyer on the planet last year, and that buyer was on a spending binge.

It would take nearly ten years to sell that amount of gold. So how is that helpful to bringing down our debt today?

Is any of this starting to sink in?



.

For the LAST FUCKING TIME YOU RETARDS - the GOLD DOES NOT NEED TO BE SOLD FOR IT TO BE MARKED HIGHER ON THE FED'S fucking BALANCE SHEET.

For revaluation to have any economic impact, we'd have to sell​

dumb ass.​

Central banks do not have to sell their gold to issue notes balanced by it, fool. Is there a particular reason the fed should value its gold at $42.22 an oz when balancing it against their liabilities?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

How can there be a 400 billion dollar surplus if the country is 16 trillion in debt and running over a trillion in deficits? Do you even know what a surplus is? Are you really saying that this is unrealized potential asset revenue? And if so, how much is it going to cover of our fiscal matters and for how long?

Then reread post #36.

I'm talking about the Fed's balance sheet not the U.S. Government's. Fuck you're slow.

I ask again - IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON THE FED'S GOLD SHOULD BE PEGGED AT $42.22?

Hey why not let the Fed keep ALL of its profits?

Sorry, that is post #34. I'm slow, yet you keep dancing around the same thing after it being explained in several ways on several points.

Good luck out there, fella.

The link explains why the fed should not mark its gold to market, it doesn't explain why in particular it should mark it at 42 an oz, as opposed to 35, or 64, or 123 an oz. Neither have you. Clearly there are infinity - 2 options available other than mark-to-market or $42.22. Why $42 for ever? 100 years from now when $42 is worth 42 cents today and the Fed's gold is valued at 4000 times less than its market value - it should still mark it at 42? That's a bit retarded don't you think?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I'm talking about the Fed's balance sheet not the U.S. Government's. Fuck you're slow.

I ask again - IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON THE FED'S GOLD SHOULD BE PEGGED AT $42.22?

Hey why not let the Fed keep ALL of its profits?

Sorry, that is post #34. I'm slow, yet you keep dancing around the same thing after it being explained in several ways on several points.

Good luck out there, fella.

The link explains why the fed should not mark its gold to market, it doesn't explain why in particular it should mark it at 42 an oz, as opposed to 35, or 64, or 123 an oz. Neither have you. Clearly there are infinity - 2 options available other than mark-to-market or $42.22. Why $42 for ever? 100 years from now when $42 is worth 42 cents today and the Fed's gold is valued at 4000 times less than its market value - it should still mark it at 42? That's a bit retarded don't you think?

Lets mark it worth $10,000,000,000 a bar and really get ahead of the curve!!