OASIS FORUM Post by the Golden Rule. GoldTent Oasis is not responsible for content or accuracy of posts. DYODD.

“Unfortunately, most of our drinking water today is dead, having passed through 90° right angles in a pipe…”

going around a ninety degree turn in the plumbing kills water?  this is an awesome new level of moonbattery!   i’m impressed.

http://humansarefree.com/2015/09/everything-is-fake-top-40-pieces-of.html

The last time Silver ran up near $50, it lagged gold for a long time. Gold started up in ’01, and was climbing very nicely all by itself, at 17% per year until 2011.

Silver did nothing from ’01 until 2010 and suddenly flew straight up from $18 to $48 in a matter of MONTHS, peaked early 2011 and crashed taking gold down with it. I blamed Silver for throwing Gold off stride.

Maybe it will repeat itself again. Silver is like those penny stocks, or bulletin board over the counter stocks. They can FLY, than look out.

http://www.therebel.media/caught_on_camera_campus_employee_assaults_white_male_with_deadlocks_because_of_cultural_appropriation

OOPS. I understand what you are saying. Sorry. You weren’t asking, you believe it will be much higher. Hope you’re right.

Best.

The problem with Silver? Several. Silver is the poor mans Gold of the 1960s thru the ’70s. They all got poorer. The self employed with undeclared income, I think have been using real estate for money laundering. Silver still controllable.

The big money goes into gold. I gave up on Silver long ago. Back in ’01 and again in the 2009 low, I focused on gold instead.

Not seeing the usual last hour massive offers today.

Does that mean we get follow thru tomorrow?

Listening to a couple of lawyers battle about Apple not helping the gov’t – what a couple of losers.

Worried about terrorism, blah blah, blah. They sound like Ted Cruz. Keep the sheep in fear 24/7

The whole Apple thing was a farce. Apple could care less about their customers’ security.

Why is silver lagging so much?

Thank God for Aussie humour.

http://youtu.be/Xfzxesxk_Yo

This is where they’ve turned them back twice already but it sure looks like they’re ready to explode.

Hopefully they’re leading the metals now – especially silver which has some serious catching up to do…

Only thing to worry about this week is the employment report on Friday

The correction that started March 8th, to today, March 29, 14 trading days, is probably over. I think it was an over reaction to the down side. I thought $1250 was the support area. Not $1220.

“Pundits say Trump has destroyed the Republican party. I say that’s one party down, one to go. The job is only half done.”

Good one! 🙂

Janet Yellen Crushes Recent Hawkishness, Unleashes Fresh Bout Of Soothing Dovishness: Live Feed

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-29/credibility-watch-janet-yellen-explains-how-dovishly-hawkish-fed-live-feed

I love this guy.  These insights are why I love his strip ‘DILBERT’.  From Scott Adams blog at:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/141810560316/the-elbonian-zombie-virus

========================================================

The Elbonian Zombie Virus
Posted March 27th, 2016 at 8:13pm in #Trump

This is a thought experiment.

Imagine that the tiny nation of Elbonia suffers a Zombie Virus outbreak. Luckily, the virus does not spread easily, but prolonged personal contact with an infected zombie increases the odds of transmission. Once infected, the Elbonian becomes a zombie killer. As it turns out, most people are immune to the virus. Over 99% of the public have no risk of catching it. But 1% is far too many zombie killers.

Imagine we have no way to detect this Elbonian Zombie Virus infection before symptoms occur. And let’s say that the problem started in Elbonia and so far has not gone beyond its borders. There is no cure for the Elbonian Zombie Virus. So what would world health organizations do?

For starters, they would quarantine the entire nation of Elbonia to limit the damage. This is obviously unfair to all uninfected Elbonians but it is also the only practical way to protect the rest of the world. Once the quarantine is in place, the professionals can get to work on a cure.

Now here’s the interesting part. What is the functional difference between the Elbonian Zombie Virus and radical islamic terrorism? In both cases they are spread by prolonged personal contact. In both cases you have no way to identify infected people until there are symptoms. In both cases the “virus” is deadly to both the person infected and those around them.

As we often hear from political pundits, you can’t bomb an idea. And we can see for ourselves that war doesn’t eliminate the “virus” of radical Islamic terrorism. I suggest we start treating terrorism as a medical condition – specifically, like a virus that creates a mental health problem.

In earlier times, people believed mental problems were not health problems in the same way cancer is. Today we recognize that the brain is just another body part that responds to treatment. Sometimes the treatment involves counseling, sometimes drugs, sometimes lifestyle changes. We have lots of buttons we can push to see what works.

I’m fairly certain that the idea virus of radical islamic terror can also respond to mental health treatments, once we figure out the best approach. Here I am talking about using the science of persuasion, along with the tools of the mental health profession, to cure terrorism.

Is that possible, you ask? Absolutely. Generally speaking, a professional persuader with enough time can convince almost anyone of almost anything. But we haven’t tried this approach because our government has decided that terrorism is a criminal and military problem. It isn’t. It is a mental health issue. If we reframe terrorism as a mental health emergency, that frees us to approach it with medical tools and methods more appropriate to the problem.

As the saying goes, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The United States has tools for war and tools for diplomacy. It has no tools for treating a massive mental health issue in a distant land. But we could build those tools.

All we need to do is change our “frame” for terrorism and start treating it as a medical problem. Trump already started that process by suggesting we quarantine the United States from all Muslim immigration – which seems terribly unfair – just to avoid contact with the 1% who might be infected with the radical islamic terror virus. Trump is approaching the problem as if it were a medical emergency. First you quarantine, then you solve.

Trump also says we need to figure out why the terrorists hate us. That tells you he sees it as a mental health problem, although he hasn’t used those words. In our country, thoughts of suicide and mass murder, along with delusions of virgins in the afterlife, would be considered a mental problem and treated as such.

I have no idea whether Trump’s impressive skills at persuasion can stop radical islamic terrorism. But I do know he has the right tools for the job. We can see that already during the campaign.

Clinton’s tool box for fighting terrorism only has weapons and diplomats in it. As president, Trump would have all of that plus persuasion.

Here I pause to tell new readers that I don’t endorse Trump. And my personal views do not line up with any of the candidates on any of the issues except by coincidence in a few places.

—

If you think this blog post is ridiculous, you should see my book.

—

My best tweet of the year was this one:

Pundits say Trump has destroyed the Republican party. I say that’s one party down, one to go. The job is only half done.

========================================================================

LOL There’s nothing negative in that quote. What part don’t you understand!

Bill Holter is a hard money advocate. Maybe that’s where you disagree with him?

Scott Adams is the cartoonist of ‘DILBERT’… one of my favorites due to it’s insightful analysis of the human condition.  The following writeup is from Scott Adams blog, found here:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/141605245101/whos-afraid-of-donald-trump

====================================================================

Who’s Afraid of Donald Trump?

Posted March 24th, 2016 at 9:54am in  #trump

For new readers:

I have already disavowed Donald Trump for being scary. And by that I mean he scares my fellow citizens, which I find unacceptable.

My policy views don’t line up with any of the candidates’ positions, including Trump’s. I don’t vote and I am not a member of a political party. I try to avoid identifying with any political label because doing so would make me biased and less credible.

My interest in Trump is his persuasion skills. I have never seen better.

— start —

A Donald Trump presidency might offer a once-in-a-lifetime chance to fire the government of the United States.

Whatever that means.

If you support Trump, you probably think it means he will remove the influence of big money and make common-sense decisions based on good advice. That sounds like a good thing.

If you are anti-Trump, you probably fear he will acquire too much control and become a crazy racist dictator who declares war on China. For the record, I think that would be a bad thing.

So how would you assess the risk/reward of a Trump presidency? I’ll help you put the question in context, then you decide.

Sizing the Risk

As President of the United States, Trump would be both powerful and unpredictable. Trump often says he is intentionally unpredictable because it gives him an advantage in negotiating. The combination of power and unpredictability should scare you. And apparently it does scare a lot of people. As risks go, it doesn’t get much bigger.

But as I learned in school, you can’t compare something to nothing. You need to compare the risk of a Trump presidency to the alternatives. And that alternative is probably a Clinton presidency that is not too different from the current presidency.

So how risky would “more of the same” be?

Budget-wise, we are probably on the road to ruin. The more-of-the-same president is unlikely to stop the special interests and big money players from bloating the budget to the point of crushing debt.

Nor would we have any reason to expect the economy to have any extra zip under a more-of-the-same scenario. So no matter how bad you think Trump might be for the economy, the more-of-the-same alternative is probably a pathway to crushing debts and financial doom.

And once the economy dies, we all die. So as risks go, “more of the same” might be the highest risk of all. The only way we would escape economic doom under the more-of-the-same scenario is for some unpredictable future event to change our direction in a positive way. Is that likely?

Trump, on the other hand, is an unpredictable future event that can change just about anything, as we have already learned. So in terms of economic risk, Clinton is a path to probable budget doom whereas Trump can go either way.

As far as I can tell, homeland security seems effective under President Obama, at least in terms of preventing Belgium-sized attacks. But we have a growing risk from terrorists disguised as immigrants from the middle east. There’s no way to assess that risk because we don’t know how well the vetting process in this country works. But if we assume the people doing the vetting are no more competent than your coworkers, reach your own conclusions about that risk.

Trump adds risk to the world by suggesting a temporary end to Muslim immigration. That rubs a billion people the wrong way. It might spark violence and it might worsen the country’s reputation. The tradeoff for that risk is (Trump hopes) a lower risk of terrorists reaching our soil.

How do you balance those risks?

If you think Trump is a racist, his proposal of a Muslim immigration ban looks like the beginning of something terrible. But if you believe Trump is totally transparent about sacrificing “political correctness” for national security, it just looks like aggressive risk management.

Your Psychic Abilities

If you are sure you know how a Trump presidency would play out, ask yourself how often you have been right about this sort of thing in the past. Humans are notoriously terrible at predicting the future. Consider the fact that almost no human can pick stocks that will outperform the index no matter how much information is available. That should give you some humility.

Some of you are not aware that financial advice is mostly a scam. Experts can’t pick winning stocks any better than a monkey with a dart board. I learned that fact when I got my B.A. in economics. I learned it a second time when I got my MBA at the Haas School of Business at Berkeley. And I learned it a third time when I ignored everything I learned in school and tried to pick stocks.

But now I’m fairly sure I can’t pick stocks.

If you can pick winning stocks year after year, then you might have some unusual ability to see the future. If I ever meet you, I will take seriously your predictions about a Trump presidency. And I also want some stock tips.

Okay, okay. I realize stocks and humans are different. But ask yourself how often you thought a relationship would go one way and it went the other. And look around at your fellow citizens who are divorced or unhappy in their relationships. How good are we at predicting the future of other people?

Have you ever been involved in hiring? I have. I’ve hired lots of people for lots of things over the years. I have also partnered with lots of folks for lots of things. And I can assure you I was surprised most of those times. No matter how much information I think I have, people still surprise me.

Now look around at your idiot coworkers and ask yourself how well your boss makes hiring decisions.

If you get a chance, ask the smartest venture capitalist or angel investor how they spot a winning startup. The answer is that they are all guessing. No one knows what the future holds.

Humans are terrible at predicting the future. We are also terrible at knowing we can’t do it. Ask yourself if you are the rare exception.

Rising Racial Tensions

A Trump presidency might raise racial tensions and increase the odds of violence. I think most observers would agree that Trump is gaming the primary process by doing the dog-whistle racism strategy. He is transparent about being flexible in how he wins, so long as he wins. Here Trump appears to be making a conscious decision to increase the risks of racial tensions in order to protect the homeland, both economically and physically.

Is that moral? Definitely not. Is it a good tradeoff in terms of risk? We don’t know. Ask Belgium.

Bad Role Model

Some say Trump is a bad role model for our children, with his rude language, his insults, his political incorrectness, and his inability to admit wrong.

Other people say that if your kid is using Trump as a role model, you have failed as a parent.

Trump isn’t running as a role model for your kids. He hasn’t even tried to make that case. Apparently that is a low priority for him. He’s more about national security and the economy. So while it is fair to ding Trump for the role model problem, you have to ask yourself where “role model for my kid” lands on your list of national priorities.

Trump Talks Crazy so He Must be Crazy

Trump talks crazy. He says water is dry and up is down except when it is up. His budget is nonsense and his policies seem to shift on a daily basis.

That sounds unstable.

But Trump also has nearly seventy years of track record that says he isn’t crazy or unstable in any way. The man has never had a drug or a drink. He has been appropriately hesitant to go to war and he has never stabbed anyone in the belt buckle.

How many people change their character when they get to seventy? None, unless they have mental problems. The smart money says Trump is whatever he has always been.

And what he has always been is a guy who wrote a book on how to be unpredictable to win negotiations. He’s doing just that, and completely transparent about it. He says he is stirring up controversy to get free television time. And we observe that to be true.

Trump might have suddenly turned crazy at the same time that acting crazy was exactly the right strategy to win the Republican primary. But you have to ask yourself how big of a coincidence that would be.

And Trump has already shown he can pretend to be presidential on command. That tells you he presents whatever vision of himself gets the best result.

Trump is a Con Artist and a Narcissist

What you call a con artist, Trump calls negotiating. I call it persuasion. And we all call it politics. It’s all the same thing. Trump just does it better than his opponents.

And that’s exactly the skill he is offering to the country. The president’s job is to persuade people. He needs to persuade Congress, voters, and the rest of the world about all sorts of things. He needs to negotiate, cajole, and lead.

You can call persuasion manipulation. You can call negotiating conning. But don’t lose sight of the fact we ask our president to do exactly those things.

But what about Trump’s narcissism? Is that a risk?

Maybe. But I have trouble seeing how he could feed his ego without doing a good job as president. Trump is proposing we staple his reputation to the reputation of the country. I can’t see a scenario in which he screws the country and thinks it will work out well for him personally. That would be more crazy than narcissistic.

Those Business Failures

Trump had a number of bankruptcies and failed businesses. By way of context, I have over thirty business failures on my record. Far more if you count Dilbert licensees. A typical startup has about a 10% chance of making it. Trump is entrepreneurial by nature, so you should expect a high number of failures. The number of failures don’t tell you anything.

To judge Trump’s business skill, look for how he managed his personal risk. And apparently he did that well. The bankruptcies protected his personal assets, and his license deals probably pay him a guaranteed advance no matter how well the licensee does. In other words, he made good deals that gave him a big upside but not much downside.

You might have seen estimates from experts saying Trump would be richer if he had simply put his inheritance millions into a stock index fund. But I believe those calculations ignore what he spends, gives to ex-wives, etc. I wouldn’t trust them.

When to Accept Higher Risk

Generally speaking, you want to avoid risks (such as Trump) when things are going well, and you want to invite the right kind of risk when things are not. For example, if you think the budget of the United States will reverse course and balance itself before we are broke, you probably don’t want the extra risk of a Trump presidency. Likewise, if you think there is no real risk from having porous borders, you don’t want the risks of a Trump presidency.

But if you think the government is broken, and you want to send a wrecking ball to Washington D.C., Trump offers that possibility. We just don’t know what else he offers because we can’t see the future.

===================================================================================

Now you’re talking my language

Let’s see if it sticks.

“Prior, he wrote for Miles Franklin from 2012-15. Bill worked as a retail stockbroker for 23 years, including 12 as a branch manager at A.G. Edwards. He left Wall Street in late 2006 to avoid potential liabilities related to management of paper assets. In retirement he and his family moved to CostaRica”

What to we get?

The Rally You NEVER SELL!

http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1459187821.php

He has no clue about anything. Go read about his family. He’s a crook. Anyone smart has not listen to this man for at least 10 years. He’s full of bull. The only reason he’s rich is because of subscribers and his family $$$