>>4467313, >>4467420 Re the price of gold and the gold standard
An anon estimated a Gold paper to physical correction would revalue Gold @ 120K/oz if Gold is to be the standard
I spelled out Anon's abbreviations below. I am curious what Anons think about whether these calculations are realistic or not.
"Anon says s/he thinks silver (Ag) and gold (Au) will trend much higher then we expect. If a gold standard is The PLAN, it will have to cover at minimum GDP plus “broad $”. Broad $ is 1.26 x GDP, so that value now for the US is right around 25 trillion. Au will be the baseline and cover with a revaluation to match the need. This can happen organically because one run on the COMEX or the LME will challenge their paper to physical ratios (currently 233x Au paper vs. physical gold and 513x Ag paper vs. physical Ag). Historically, Ag has been valued in a range between 15:1 and 5:1 ratio to Au. However, due to tech and industrial consumption Ag’s actual phys above ground ratio is more like 2.1:1. Thus, I would imagine in order for US and other countries already tipped off (i.e. China, Russia, Japan, India, Brazil, UK, etc.) to get to a ratio that is comparable, Au would need to be revalued at near 120k per oz!
Here are the calculations:
GOLD: Take the LME and COMEX ratios and look what you have 213x 1.25k/oz Au = 266k/oz. Be conservative and pull 50% off of the top due to defaults and you are near 120k/oz Au.
Silver: With LME and COMEX ratios currently at 513x paper Ag to phys Ag, a correction would require Ag to be revalued at near 7.6k per oz.
With Au @ 120kAu/oz and applying the historical 15:1 Ag/Au ratio would place Ag right around 8k/oz. The reset and the market crash are necessary to drive public opinion to demand the bimetallic standard. We knew this was coming years ago."
>>4468131, >>4468148, >>4468175, >>4468182 Gold information and Treasury Gold Report
Another anon is estimating a run on Gold to 15K/oz in a correction.