Baires: I do not think there was nearly as much money printing from 2001-2007 - when gold was rising rapidly - as there has been since that period, during which time gold has been dropping like a rock. There was QE1, and QE2 which were limited in value, and now QE3 during which noone knows how much money has been printed - or continues to be printed. All this argues against Gary.

The other factor is that gold declined precipititously during 2007-2014, while money was being printed at an even greater rate than between 2001-2007. Both these features do not support Gary, if he argues that money printing alone causes a rise in the pog.

And all this money printing has not created inflation either, which hints that manipulation in the price of gold may have been a factor in controlling inflation (if inflation is defined as a decline in the value of cash/currency).

Without a strong gold price cash is in greater demand and is its own foundation. But this cannot last because of corruption and rising market distortions. Armstrong argues that reliance on fiat cash itself, without a backup, is the source both of temporary apparent stability and of underlying uncertainty about the economy and government. Money printing, even without inflation, is all smoke and mirrors. In the short term more goods and services are produced and consumed but there is no secure foundation.

At the same time government is dominated by its own immediate and short term interests; it is small-minded and not able to make rational decisions in such a complicated environment; and it does not represent the interests of the people or the economy. I tend to agree with Armstrong, after all among much else he was an advisor to Maggy Thatcher who is one of my heroes! How can Gary possibly explain why gold declined precipititously during 2007-2014, while money was being printed at an even greater rate than between 2001-2007? Ike