Occupy Wall Street has come under fire from some libertarians, on the grounds that it’s relatively silent about the role of big government, and its proposed remedies lean heavily toward increased government intervention.
But it’s quite understandable that many in the Occupy movement position themselves in opposition to the “free market” and in favor of government intervention. After all, ever since they were born they’ve heard loathsome cretins like Dick Armey, Tom Delay, along with the usual suspects on CNBC and the WSJ editorial staff, defend corporate capitalism as we know it and the unbelievable concentration of wealth and power as the result of “our free market system.”
Every time you look at a debate on economic policy, the liberal is saying the free market can’t be left to itself because the inevitable result is polarization of wealth and corporate tyranny. And the conservative is saying corporate tyranny and polarization of wealth are good things, and that government should stay out of it.
All the things the Occupiers are rightfully against, like the plutocratic oligarchy and abusive corporate power, they’ve seen defended — or attacked — in terms of “our free enterprise system.” If I thought the free market meant what Dick Armey said it was, I’d hate it too.
It’s not their fault they’ve never heard a free market critique of corporate power, never heard anyone pointing out that big business is the biggest beneficiary of big government, and never heard a case for why genuine, freed market competition would be dynamite at the foundations of corporate power.
Even many libertarians who pay lip-service to condemning corporatism, it seems, are inclined to react defensively when they see what Nixon used to call the Dirty Effing Hippies criticizing big business.
There’s a virally popular graphic making the rounds, a wide-angle photo of Occupy Wall Street demonstrators, with objects tagged “Cameras from Canon,” “Phone from Apple,” etc. This is just the umpteenth iteration of a recurring meme, each time presented with a knowing smirk as if it were some sort of original or witty observation — despite the fact it’s already been dragged out by everyone, including a third-rate hack reporter at CNN.
It’s a right-wing mirror image of the popular liberal “argument”: “But how would we get our roooaaads?!!” To look at the technological products which arose within a corporate-state economy, and to argue that anyone who uses those products is a hypocrite for criticizing corporate statism, is about as wooden-headedly stupid as Elizabeth Warren arguing for some sort of “social contract” where everyone’s obligated to pay “their fair share” because they rely on taxpayer-funded roads or police.
One might as well take a photo from Tiananmen Square or from Moscow in the last days of the Soviet Union, and attach tags like “Bauxite from the Ministry of Non-Ferrous Metallurgy,” “Cameras from Ministry of Consumer Electronics,” etc.
As Charles Johnson, of the advisory board at the Center for a Stateless Society, puts it: “… if your aim is to use visual rhetoric to lodge a criticism of the people at Occupy Wall Street, then an image whose upshot is, roughly, ‘the activities of giant corporations inescapably pervade absolutely every aspect of your everyday life’ … may not actually be as effective a criticism as you think it is.”
There’s nothing hypocritical about making the best choice available from the limited range of alternatives, despite paying rents in the process to companies in whose interest that range of alternatives was restricted, and simultaneously criticizing the injustice of hooking those companies into this system of state-enforced monopoly. That’s for the very same reason that there’s no hypocrisy involved in using state roads or post offices as the best alternative given one’s limited choices, while still criticizing the state.
The folks occupying Wall Street are right on the mark when it comes to identifying the central evil in our economic system, regardless of sometimes fuzzy perceptions of the causality at work and wrongheaded proposals for remedying it: The unholy alliance of big business with the state, and the plutocracy that’s enriched itself beyond human comprehension by extracting rents from the rest of us.
There are libertarians who get mad when they see Dirty Effing Hippies attacking big business, and there are libertarians who get mad when they see “libertarians” defending it. Whether or not libertarianism is a relevant movement for our time depends on which side wins the battle for its soul.
Mayor Bloomberg is moving to shut down Occupy Wall Street at Liberty Square tomorrow at 7 AM.
The ruse he is using: the need to clean the “park.” He has promised that Liberty Square will be reopened after the cleaning but nobody will be allowed to set up anything in park, nor will sleeping bags be allowed (click the sheet to the left for larger version).
This is going to get interesting. Will be working up some ideas for how this could play out. Let’s start off with an assumption. This is Bloomberg vs. Occupy. One mind vs. many minds. The goal is to coerce him into changing his mind. Dissuade him. Get inside his OODA loop.
- Go straight for him. Maximize the eviction’s taint on Bloomberg’s personal brand. Personalize the protest/eviction by attaching the blame to him personally. Pierce his shield of bureaucratic impersonality. Brand the eviction with the name: Bloomberg. This is/will be a global stage, use it.
- Confuse him. Lots and lots of Flash Mobs. Shut down bridges and major streets. Overwhelm with volume/speed. Non-violent disruption. As soon as police arrive in force, disperse and reassemble at new location. Bikes + Kids. Disrupt, disrupt, disrupt. More flashmobs = more disruption. As long as the square is under attack, keep the city tied in knots. NOTE: If they lock down the area, flashmobs are the best way to participate (and get some exercise).
- Connect with more people than him. Best way to do this: Eyes in the sky. Get a camera/cameras above Liberty Square. Stream the feed. The better the quality the more impact it will have. It will play across the world. Think about how important AJs video feed over Tahrir was when things got hot. Better yet, get AJ to cover it and stream it.
If you have additional ideas, add them below. Good training in tactical thinking.
Hoisted from the comments:
The flashmob tactic was tried here in Panama couple of years ago by the SUNTRACS construction workers union, and with very small groups pre-planted all over the city they drove the police absolutely crazy. Police would show up at location A, mob would disperse immediately, two text messages and now TWO flashmobs would block streets at different locations. They never followed up with it (preferring massive marches to display force) but it worked very well and with much less people than #ows has available. [courtesy: Okke]
You don’t have to be coherent to be politically incorrect.
I’ve been down to “Occupy Wall Street” twice now, and I love it. The protests building at Liberty Square and spreading over Lower Manhattan are a great thing, the logical answer to the Tea Party and a long-overdue middle finger to the financial elite. The protesters picked the right target and, through their refusal to disband after just one day, the right tactic, showing the public at large that the movement against Wall Street has stamina, resolve and growing popular appeal.
But… there’s a but. And for me this is a deeply personal thing, because this issue of how to combat Wall Street corruption has consumed my life for years now, and it’s hard for me not to see where Occupy Wall Street could be better and more dangerous. I’m guessing, for instance, that the banks were secretly thrilled in the early going of the protests, sure they’d won round one of the messaging war.
Why? Because after a decade of unparalleled thievery and corruption, with tens of millions entering the ranks of the hungry thanks to artificially inflated commodity prices, and millions more displaced from their homes by corruption in the mortgage markets, the headline from the first week of protests against the financial-services sector was an old cop macing a quartet of college girls.
That, to me, speaks volumes about the primary challenge of opposing the 50-headed hydra of Wall Street corruption, which is that it’s extremely difficult to explain the crimes of the modern financial elite in a simple visual. The essence of this particular sort of oligarchic power is its complexity and day-to-day invisibility: Its worst crimes, from bribery and insider trading and market manipulation, to backroom dominance of government and the usurping of the regulatory structure from within, simply can’t be seen by the public or put on TV. There just isn’t going to be an iconic “Running Girl” photo with Goldman Sachs, Citigroup or Bank of America – just 62 million Americans with zero or negative net worth, scratching their heads and wondering where the hell all their money went and why their votes seem to count less and less each and every year.
As economic data deteriorates and markets decline, governments and multinational agencies are facing an immediate dilemma. They can either do nothing and risk a global depression—or they can intervene with more monetary and fiscal stimulus to postpone dealing with the problem a few months into the future. The choice of which direction we are headed has already been decided.
A tidal wave of inflation of the global money supply is on its way—soon. It will be on a massive scale never before seen.
First, here are some of the announcements pointing out why we are facing a tsunami of quantitative easing.
At a G-7 meeting in Marseille, France on September 10, International Monetary Fund (IMF) head Christine Lagarde urged governments to “act now, and act boldly, to steer their economies through this dangerous new phase of recovery.”
A September 22 announcement from the G-20 Group of Nations included the statements that they are committed “to taking all necessary actions to preserve the stability of banking systems and financial markets” and that they are also “committed to a strong and coordinated international response to address the renewed challenges facing the global economy, notably heightened downside risks from sovereign stresses, financial system fragility, market turbulence, weak economic growth, and unacceptably high unemployment.”
At the annual joint meeting of the IMF and the World Bank on September 24, US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner warned that a failure to manage Greece’s financial problems could lead to “cascading default, bank runs, and catastrophic risk.” On top of that the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, stated, “there is recognition here that the global crisis has entered a dangerous phase.” He further said, “the countries of the Eurozone understand that they need to take decisive action… We’ve got weeks not months” to sort out the financial problems of the nations using the Euro.
As Keith Preston quips, some might wonder how a libertarian anarchist like himself ever got involved with people who identify themselves as nationalists. Are not liberty and nationalism polar opposites, never to be reconciled or aligned? Preston does not think so. Indeed, if one can say that both nationalists and anarchists stand against world government and “globalization,” then the two actually have a lot in common. Moreover, if freedom of association is to have any meaning at all, then it must necessarily entail rights of discrimination as well as kinship and tribe.
And today, anarchists and nationalists share a common enemy—what Preston calls “Totalitarian Humanism,” and which stands as the reigning ideology of the state as well most cultural, educational, and religious institutions. In a nutshell, Totalitarian Humanism means a universalist political order, mass-ification of peoples, and the destruction of cultural and individual differences—all in the name of “equality.” Totalitarian Humanism is a doctrine of both the contemporary Left and Right, and which is often masked by the Establishment’s favorite bogeymen: “racism,” “fascism,” “right-wing extremism” etc. Liberty and nationalism are not enemies after all.
Article by John Gray. Hat tip to Chris George.
Storming of the Bastille by Francois Leonard. Many of the French revolutionaries favoured violence as an “engine of social transformation”
“Today we take it for granted that war happens in smaller, poorer and more backward countries,” Steven Pinker writes in his new book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: the Decline of Violence in History and Its Causes. The celebrated Harvard professor of psychology is discussing what he calls “the Long Peace”: the period since the end of the second world war in which “the great powers, and developed states in general, have stopped waging war on one another.” As a result of “this blessed state of affairs,” he notes, “two entire categories of war—the imperial war to acquire colonies, and the colonial war to keep them—no longer exist.” Now and then there have been minor conflicts. “To be sure, [the super-powers] occasionally fought each other’s smaller allies and stoked proxy wars among their client states.” But these episodes do not diminish Pinker’s enthusiasm about the Long Peace. Chronic warfare is only to be expected in backward parts of the world. “Tribal, civil, private, slave-raiding, imperial, and colonial wars have inflamed the territories of the developing world for millennia.” In more civilised zones, war has all but disappeared. There is nothing inevitable in the process; major wars could break out again, even among the great powers. But the change in human affairs that has occurred is fundamental. “An underlying shift that supports predictions about the future,” the Long Peace points to a world in which violence is in steady decline.
A sceptical reader might wonder whether the outbreak of peace in developed countries and endemic conflict in less fortunate lands might not be somehow connected. Was the immense violence that ravaged southeast Asia after 1945 a result of immemorial backwardness in the region? Or was a subtle and refined civilisation wrecked by world war and the aftermath of decades of neo-colonial conflict—as Norman Lewis intimated would happen in his prophetic account of his travels in the region, A Dragon Apparent (1951)? It is true that the second world war was followed by over 40 years of peace in North America and Europe—even if for the eastern half of the continent it was a peace that rested on Soviet conquest. But there was no peace between the powers that had emerged as rivals from the global conflict.
In much the same way that rich societies exported their pollution to developing countries, the societies of the highly-developed world exported their conflicts. They were at war with one another the entire time—not only in Indo-China but in other parts of Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. The Korean war, the Chinese invasion of Tibet, British counter-insurgency warfare in Malaya and Kenya, the abortive Franco-British invasion of Suez, the Angolan civil war, decades of civil war in the Congo and Guatemala, the Six Day War, the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 and of Czechoslovakia in 1968, the Iran-Iraq war and the Soviet-Afghan war—these are only some of the armed conflicts through which the great powers pursued their rivalries while avoiding direct war with each other. When the end of the Cold War removed the Soviet Union from the scene, war did not end. It continued in the first Gulf war, the Balkan wars, Chechnya, the Iraq war and in Afghanistan and Kashmir, among other conflicts. Taken together these conflicts add up to a formidable sum of violence. For Pinker they are minor, peripheral and hardly worth mentioning. The real story, for him, is the outbreak of peace in advanced societies, a shift that augurs an unprecedented transformation in human affairs.
A third party? No. Too easily co-optable.
A federation of local parties committed to the pan-secession, liberty and populism, ten core demographic and left-right-center tri-partite strategies? Yes.
The statement says a vote for either party is a vote for the status quo and the two party system is entirely insufficient to carry the country through its problems and into the future.
This new party would work in the interests of th 99%.
The full proposal is below.
A Sincere Proposal
In my observation of this movement of the American people, I have begun recently to hear/read suggestions that a revolt might be brewing. I understand why people are saying these things, but I think we can all agree that it would be best to avoid such an outcome. So, I have a proposition, a vision for what we as a nation could achieve.
Currently, the media mocks us, the police beat and arrest us, the business people laugh at us, and every politician in the United States of America is wondering how to sway the full support of the movement in their favor. Each of these groups understands the true power of the 99%. They see us as votes, wasted potential, criminals and a story to keep the viewers at home watching through commercial breaks.
We need to be honest with ourselves: given the current viable options (Republican/Democrat), we cannot vote our way out of this mess that our government and the financial institutions created. It’s as simple as that. Furthermore, any actions taken by the governing body will be meant to placate the masses.
If you cast a vote for a Democrat, you cast a vote for the status quo. If you cast a vote for a Republican, you cast a vote for the status quo. I don’t care if you are a libertarian, anarchist, communist, leftist, right-winger or a completely disillusioned non-voter; you must recognize that this nation’s current political structure is not equipped to fix the problems this nation is facing. If our politicians refuse to work together in the interests of the people, the two party system cannot carry us safely or securely into the future.
And so, we face possibly the most challenging moment in this nation’s history, since the Civil War. We need ideas to avoid a revolution and ways to reign in the policy makers of this country. Our elected officials need to work for us, not against us. So, I offer this path to a better, more accountable nation.
I propose a new political party, one that will always work in the interests of the 99%.
I’m sure we all understand the concept of a republic, but if some need to be reminded, I believe this quote from wikipedia should be sufficient:
“A republic is a country with a specific type of form of government, in which the people, or some significant portion of them, have supreme control over the government, at least in theory, and where offices of state are not granted primarily based upon family, military, or business connections.”
Unfortunately, republics are extremely difficult to maintain. It’s impossible to educate oneself on every issue which requires a vote. It’s difficult for people to find the time to vote.
It would obviously be difficult to establish a pure republic in the United States of America. However, we could have a party that is bound to the will of the people.
Let’s assume we can communicate the votes of the individual to an elected representative of this theoretical party. Given its feasibility, it would look something like this:
1. Each person of voting age in a district that is represented by a member of this theoretical party is entitled to one ‘vote.’ Remember, this is not a legitimate federal vote. It is merely a ‘speaking up’ of the entirety of a representative’s constituency. The people’s votes are then tallied, and the representative, being bound to the will of the people, will vote as directed.
2. Each person of voting age in these districts may choose to actively vote, passively vote or not vote.
- An active vote is a Yes or No vote chosen by the individual.
- A passive vote is a vote as the Democratic majority votes or vote as the Republican majority votes.
- A choice not to vote on a particular issue is a forfeiture of the right to to vote on that particular issue.
3. Each person of voting age has the right to open a petition for a vote.
A system similar to the one outlined above could drastically alter the course of this nation without a revolution. Given enough popular support, people across the nation could petition their representatives for a vote on a certain issue.
We are the 99%. This proposed party can become a reality. Change is possible. So, when our nation’s politicians look at you and say, “We can’t…” respond, “…But we can!”
Keep it peaceful.
Robert Stark and returning guest RamZPaul discuss:
- Occupation of Wall Street;
- The protesters’ ideology and theHollywood elitists who are sticking it to the man;
- Controlled opposition among the Tea Party and anti-capitalist Left;
- Class warfare, economic issues, and how nationalism is the solution to these problems;
- Censorship at Youtube and ways to get around it;
- Political Correctness and cultural Marxism in the media and academia;
- Britian putting babies on political list.
Poland’s former President Lech Walesa says he supports the Occupy Wall Street movement in New York that protests corporate greed.
The Nobel Peace laureate told The Associated Press that he is planning either a visit or a letter to the protesters.
“I am weighing now how and when to best support them, without doing any harm,” Walesa said Thursday.
Since mid-September, the protesters have besieged a park near Wall Street to rally against corporate greed, saying that is the main cause for the U.S.’s failing economy. Similar protests are planned across Europe this weekend, including in Poland’s capital, Warsaw.
The 68-year-old Walesa said the global economic crisis has made people aware that “we need to change, reform the capitalist system” because we need “more justice, more people’s interests, and less money for money’s sake.”
“We cannot accept a situation when capitalism is making huge money and then does not know what to do with it,” Walesa told the AP. “It should invest in new jobs.”
“People are most important,” he said.
The legendary freedom leader said employees, employers and representatives of state and local governments should get together to work out solutions that would best serve the people and the societies.
“For now, capitalism is working to produce more money but does not see the people,” Walesa said. “This problem is getting worse across the world.”
Walesa led Poland’s anti-communist Solidarity movement that eventually brought democracy and a market economy to the country in 1989. Between 1990-95, he served as the country’s first popularly elected president and he now campaigns across the world for global democracy and human rights.
Since communism’s fall, Poland has developed into a market economy with a European social safety net. Its economy has grown steadily since joining the European Union in 2004 and it even avoided a recession during the global downturn of 2008-2009 – the only EU country to do so.
However, Poland remains plagued by legacies of communism – like high unemployment of almost 12 percent and low wages – and problems brought by capitalism, like a growing gap between the country’s rich and poor.
Editor’s note: LZ Granderson, who writes a weekly column for CNN.com, was named Journalist of the Year by the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and is a 2011 Online Journalism Award finalist for commentary. He is a senior writer and columnist for ESPN the Magazine and ESPN.com and the 2009 winner of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation award for online journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @locs_n_laughs. Watch him on “CNN Newsroom” during the 9 a.m. ET hour Tuesdays.
(CNN) — The sign at the airport was so ridiculous, I thought it was a joke.
“Please be advised, snow globes are not allowed through the security checkpoint,” it read.
That was followed by an image of a snow globe with a Christmas tree on the inside and one of those big red “not allowed” lines going through the middle. Underneath the picture read: “Your safety is our priority.”
Apparently, this ban has been around for a while, but I guess I was too busy taking my shoes and belt off to notice.
Over the years, Transportation Security Administration officials have taken away my deodorant, my toothpaste, even my nose hair trimmer in the name of safety. Now it seems as if they are going after Christmas — one snow globe at a time.
To be fair, I can see some reason for their caution.
After all, the liquid in a normal snow globe could be replaced with something dangerous. And at a time in which an al Qaeda operative is on trial for trying to blow up a plane by igniting explosives sewn inside his underwear, there doesn’t appear to be a limit as to how far our enemies will go to harm us.
But on the other, we’re so wildly inconsistent with airport safety protocol, how could someone look at a “No Snow Globe” sign and not laugh?
TSA apologizes to cancer survivor
Afro searched for explosives
TSA to change pat-down rules for kids
A couple of weeks ago, I had an agent ask to frisk my dreadlocks because the scanner read it as an “anomaly.” I argued, and the eventual compromise was having me whip my hair around like a Vegas showgirl until the guy with the rubber gloves was convinced I wasn’t carrying a bomb in my hair.
Then he groped me … just in case I had any dignity left.
On September 30, the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) assets under the Agency’s control, assassinated the alleged “external operations” chief of the Afghan-Arab database of disposable Western intelligence assets, also known as Al-Qaeda, Anwar al-Awlaki, and a second American citizen, Samir Khan, the 25-year-old editor of Inspire magazine, in a drone strike in Yemen.
As The Washington Post reported last month, the “commingling” of CIA officers, JSOC paramilitary troops and contractors “occupy an expanding netherworld between intelligence and military operations” where “congressional intelligence and armed services committees rarely get a comprehensive view.”
Or any “view” at all, which is precisely what the CIA and Pentagon have long desired; an oversight-free zone where American policymakers operate, as Dick Cheney infamously put it, on the “dark side,” a position fully-embraced by the “hope and change” administration of Barack Obama.
Awlaki’s state-sponsored killing, like the May 2 murder of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, resurface many unanswered questions concerning the 9/11 attacks, the so-called trigger for America’s global “War on Terror.”
But before turning to those issues, it is necessary to take a detour and examine administration actions; specifically the deliberations undertaken by Obama’s national security team which culminated in Awlaki’s death.
Most of the city’s street lights have been repossessed because officials failed to pay a multimillion-dollar utility bill, giving rise to concerns about safety and crime in darkened neighborhoods.
DTE Energy crews have removed about 1,400 light poles from Highland Park as part of a settlement that allowed the city to avoid paying $4 million in unpaid bills going back several years. DTE, which says the work will be completed by Oct. 31, has replaced 200 lights with newer models on street corners, but most neighborhoods remain in the dark.
Highland Park, plagued by financial trouble, was able to reduce its monthly utility bill from $62,000 to $15,000, an amount officials say fits the city’s budget.
FBI and DEA agents have disrupted a plot to commit a “significant terrorist act in the United States” tied to Iran, federal officials told ABC News today.
The officials said the plot included the assassination of the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir, with a bomb and subsequent bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, D.C. Bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, were also discussed, according to the U.S. officials.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in an announcement today that the plan was “conceived, sponsored and was directed from Iran” and called it a “flagrant” violation of U.S. and international law.
“The U.S. is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions,” Holder said. He said the White House will be meeting with federal agencies before announcing “further action” in regards to Iran.
FBI Director Robert Mueller said the arrest of a suspect in the plot shows the U.S. will “bring the full weight of [the] law to bear on those responsible” and that “any attempts on American soil will not be tolerated.”
The stunning allegations come against a backdrop of longstanding tensions between Iran and the United States and Saudi Arabia. In the last year, Saudi Arabia has attempted to build an anti-Iran alliance to push back against perceived aggression by Iran in the region.
Our first real sign of political violence was during the disturbance at the Smithsonian when Patrick Howley of the nocon rag, American Spectator, led an attack of agent provacateurs on the Smithsonian.
Our thanks to Charlie Grapski for catching Howley, one of many preparing to push peaceful protest into political violence on behalf of corporate greed.
Here at Veterans Today, we are running a pool, waiting how long it will be before SITE Intelligence, the Mossad mouthpiece or Canada’s National Post begin publishing articles of support from Al Qaeda that they conveniently “find on the internet.”
Our other pool is when the Molotov cocktails and rock throwing starts, funded by the Wall Street thugs, Bloomberg and his cohorts in Boston and now nearly a hundred other cities. They have billions to spend, our money looted from the banks, money from illegal credit card fees, money from mortgage fraud and, especially, the flood of cash we gave them because we were told “they are too big to fail.”
(CNN) — Five law enforcement officers were among 70 people in Arkansas charged in a federal drug-trafficking crackdown that also involved public corruption charges, authorities said Tuesday.
The five officers took bribes to look the other way while crimes were being committed, authorities said.
Investigators are continuing to look at other law agencies for criminal misconduct, authorities said.
On Tuesday, 800 federal and local authorities arrested 51 of the 70 people, officials said. Five others were already in custody, and the remaining 14 defendants are considered fugitives, authorities said. The Arkansas National Guard was also involved in making the arrests, authorities said.
One agent was shot while serving warrants, and he is hospitalized with injuries that are not life-threatening, authorities said.
“Gold is not a financial asset to be compared with dot-com stocks or Miami condos and it is not a commodity like pork bellies or crude oil. It is the ultimate currency for the truly sophisticated wealth holder in a time of substantial unreserved credit promotion.”
–Paul Brodsky (Fund Manager)
The recent correction in gold has once again led, to financial commentators warning of a bubble—just as they have incessantly since it first passed $400 an ounce. A bubble usually ends with day after day of speculative higher highs, not corrections like we have just seen or as we saw in August where a $200 fall was followed by the resumption of its decade long rise. That gold continues to climb a wall of worry, and that so many are even calling it a bubble, is actually an extremely bullish indicator since financial bubbles burst only after sustained periods of exuberance. We are far from the days when people lined up for blocks each day to buy gold, as they did in Toronto in 1980.
A simple rebuttal, however, is never enough when discussing gold. It will continue to be subjected to the most aggressive “perception management” assault of any asset class, because it is a direct challenge to all the world’s fiat currencies. Since no paper currency is convertible to gold at this time, this is some challenge. The warnings of bubbles and the many other reasons for not owning gold will continue unabated as gold persists to $10,000 an ounce, or higher. Independent study of the underlying causes of gold’s rising price, in my opinion, is the best way to gain sufficient confidence to buy and hold gold long enough to protect one’s wealth through the turbulent years ahead.
This is the premise of my upcoming book, $10,000 Gold—Why it will get there sooner than you may expect. In this article, we will look at three of the most significant reasons why gold is not in a bubble and will continue rising in value for years to come.