What are "market forces"?

[Phatscotty]

My gut feeling would go with you on the gold being overvalued. I see it as a bubble, like the housing market.

right. its the same bubble that the real estate market was and the tech bubble before it, just another level of blowing it up, devaluing the currency all the while. Commodities is the last stand. I hope to be done with caring about any and all of this around the time the commodity bubble pops, come what may.

I might flirt in nano/bio tech tho



We can still dream, can't we?

[BigBallinStalin]

I conclude that no one really knows on this fora (except maybe a few who have actually studied economics).

Therefore, whenever someone mentions "market forces" on the CC fora, keep in mind that they most likely have no idea what they're talking about.

likewise, if you are not an astro-physicist, you are unable to gaze at the stars or notice which direction they appear to move, nor are you able to feel the warmth or see the light of our sun.

sucks to be you!

I shit on your analogy, sir, because you've wrongly equated Astrophysics with merely looking at stars, feeling the warmth of the sun, or seeing the light of our sun.

It seems that you were upset from my previous comment. Perhaps, you should read some book on economics, instead of lashing at me with silly analogies.

If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. I'm doing just fine in my own economic universe. I would rather you judge how correct or incorrect I am by comparing what I have said in the past to what has happened since, rather than what books I have read and what I got out of them. You don't have to focus on how I got there or why, because I am not the hippest to telling people my strategies and depending on my respect level for any given person at any given time might reflect my answers anyhow.

My point was you do not need to have an econ degree, or read any books, to feel the impact of a market force, or understand that a force is mostly good or mostly bad.

To feel the impact? Of course not.

To understand whether something strongly related to economics is "good or bad"? Yes, one needs to have developed a basic understanding of economics to make a credible and educated argument on that particular issue.


Everyone needs some kind of knowledge in order to better understand something beyond one's current realm of knowledge.

Looking at something and saying, "Well, that's how it works" without understanding how something actually works is called ignorance.

[BigBallinStalin]

For the sake of not-having-read-the-thread-and-wanting-to-post-a-witticism:

[insert rage over the comic's strawman argument]






Here's "3rd world" market forces at play:



Timminz wins (+1)
(I've yet to read Fruitcake's contribution, but will do so soon)

[Mr_Adams]

ack. look at those ugly fabric patterns.

[Fruitcake]

Waiting patiently, which is why I hold that, until I see the first red flag that could possibly lead to interest rates rising, people are close to safe in gold and silver. I equate red flags with US gov't spending cuts, the end of QE, de-petrodollarification on a large scale, technical support in the USD, increased foreign bond purchases etc. There are rumors concerning some of these, and others are coming to fruition on small scales, but overall I don't think the dollar is going to hold at .72. I would put precious metals at close to safe rather than safe, although I admit the explosion in the prices does make me nervous based on price and gains alone. However, I expect one more "major event" to come through pretty soon, and that is the top of the US bond market, which you might agree is interchangible with your statement of increasing interest rates. (not to confuse, but now we have to consider if the gov't will interfere and rob us of the free market expectations and make it an artificial market IE cdo's). At that point, I think precious metals will have a last spectacular, once in a life time shot to the moon, and then it will crash for a generation but probably stabilze around 1800-2200, bar of course the USD crash or a strong SDR.

My guys have been over 85% heavy in precious metals since 2001. about 1 in 100 passed on gold at 260 and silver at 3.50, but now 30 of those hundred must have precious metals and they dont care how much it costs, another sign for me. But I have always expected the sheep to come in in the end and blow the top out of the bubble in remarkible fashion. I will tell people to exit hopefully before that

of course, this whole post is priced in USD

I do like your logic and you are spot on regarding the final price surge and how it is often created. I am fascinated that you feel Gold may surge spectacularly before settling, and at that value level? I would have loved to be around on this, but I exited at around $1000, I had my %s all sorted, I had achieved them and there has been other opportunities to be involved in. However, if Gold does reach those dizzy heights I will certainly feel regret at exiting previously. I work to the standard equation that I buy in to precious metals when cheap and exit when the price equates to the 1980 price less my own % discount. At this point I exit and bank the liquidity. If you are correct I shall have to adjust that process in the future should I ever wish to get back into that market with any real weight. Kudos to you over the whole thing.

The real alchemy would be to exit just BEFORE those final signs appeared

I bought into a spread of nano companies in 1999. Most of which have since gone to the wall. However, from those I still have 7 looking good and the combined value is now pretty much what I injected in the first place. I have since bought into others (yes I am a committed nano investor) and have yet to see any real growth. I am of the opinion 1 or 2 will do a Google+ in value terms and I managed to get right in at ground and mezzanine level on all those still in existence so will be looking for a big payday...or leave the shares all wrapped up in a decent investment trust for my descendants, there's a couple who would be able to keep a wary eye and make sure the family cashed it's chips at the right moment.

[Phatscotty]

I conclude that no one really knows on this fora (except maybe a few who have actually studied economics).

Therefore, whenever someone mentions "market forces" on the CC fora, keep in mind that they most likely have no idea what they're talking about.

likewise, if you are not an astro-physicist, you are unable to gaze at the stars or notice which direction they appear to move, nor are you able to feel the warmth or see the light of our sun.

sucks to be you!

I shit on your analogy, sir, because you've wrongly equated Astrophysics with merely looking at stars, feeling the warmth of the sun, or seeing the light of our sun.

It seems that you were upset from my previous comment. Perhaps, you should read some book on economics, instead of lashing at me with silly analogies.

If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. I'm doing just fine in my own economic universe. I would rather you judge how correct or incorrect I am by comparing what I have said in the past to what has happened since, rather than what books I have read and what I got out of them. You don't have to focus on how I got there or why, because I am not the hippest to telling people my strategies and depending on my respect level for any given person at any given time might reflect my answers anyhow.

My point was you do not need to have an econ degree, or read any books, to feel the impact of a market force, or understand that a force is mostly good or mostly bad.

To feel the impact? Of course not.

To understand whether something strongly related to economics is "good or bad"? Yes, one needs to have developed a basic understanding of economics to make a credible and educated argument on that particular issue.


Everyone needs some kind of knowledge in order to better understand something beyond one's current realm of knowledge.

Looking at something and saying, "Well, that's how it works" without understanding how something actually works is called ignorance.

Well I guess I had better not mention "market forces" then.

[HapSmo19]

Market Forces: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wGR4-SeuJ0

[Phatscotty]

[spurgistan]

I really, really wish the ECB and the Fed were doing what that cartoon seems to think they are.

[Phatscotty]

I really, really wish the ECB and the Fed were doing what that cartoon seems to think they are.

You don't think they are creating a lot of money?

[spurgistan]

They are both far too preoccupied with inflation for economies with 10% unemployment. The ECB is like, Hoover's wet dream.

[PLAYER57832]

Market forces is just a general term economists use to describe all sorts of things that impact sales, the economy, etc. The exact definition varies a bit depending upon who is using it.

But I like this definition better:

Market Forces is a science fiction novel by Richard Morgan, first published in 2004.

Set in 2049 in the wake of a global economic downturn called the Domino Recessions, it follows up-and-coming executive Chris as he plunges into the profitable field of Conflict Investment. Major corporations invest in rebel armies, totalitarian dictatorships, freedom fighters, and terrorists by selling weapons and services in exchange for a percentage of a state's GNP.

[BigBallinStalin]

Market forces is just a general term economists use to describe all sorts of things that impact sales, the economy, etc. The exact definition varies a bit depending upon who is using it.

But I like this definition better:

Market Forces is a science fiction novel by Richard Morgan, first published in 2004.

Set in 2049 in the wake of a global economic downturn called the Domino Recessions, it follows up-and-coming executive Chris as he plunges into the profitable field of Conflict Investment. Major corporations invest in rebel armies, totalitarian dictatorships, freedom fighters, and terrorists by selling weapons and services in exchange for a percentage of a state's GNP.

you seem upset

[Phatscotty]

Therefore, whenever someone mentions "market forces" on the CC fora, keep in mind that they most likely have no idea what they're talking about.

likewise, if you are not an astro-physicist, you are unable to gaze at the stars or notice which direction they appear to move, nor are you able to feel the warmth or see the light of our sun.

sucks to be you!

I shit on your analogy, sir, because you've wrongly equated Astrophysics with merely looking at stars, feeling the warmth of the sun, or seeing the light of our sun.

It seems that you were upset from my previous comment. Perhaps, you should read some book on economics, instead of lashing at me with silly analogies.

If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. I'm doing just fine in my own economic universe. I would rather you judge how correct or incorrect I am by comparing what I have said in the past to what has happened since, rather than what books I have read and what I got out of them. You don't have to focus on how I got there or why, because I am not the hippest to telling people my strategies and depending on my respect level for any given person at any given time might reflect my answers anyhow.

My point was you do not need to have an econ degree, or read any books, to feel the impact of a market force, or understand that a force is mostly good or mostly bad.

To feel the impact? Of course not.

To understand whether something strongly related to economics is "good or bad"? Yes, one needs to have developed a basic understanding of economics to make a credible and educated argument on that particular issue.


Everyone needs some kind of knowledge in order to better understand something beyond one's current realm of knowledge.

Looking at something and saying, "Well, that's how it works" without understanding how something actually works is called ignorance.

Well I guess I had better not mention "market forces" then.[/quote]

My original analogy was supposed to be "astrologist" and not "astro-physicist". You can put the poop back in your but.