Comment: "spike in rates to force China to sell back at lower prices"

(See in situ)


"spike in rates to force China to sell back at lower prices"

I'm not sure that makes sense. China has massive reserves, only a tiny fraction of which are in gold. Most of the reserves are in treasuries. And China has repeatedly expressed an interest in shifting away from treasuries (and has been doing so gradually for years). So, if a rate spike put China in a situation where it needed to raise fast cash, which assets would they most likely sell? I'd say treasuries, not gold.

Not only would the US banks not get their former gold back cheap, China selling treasuries is about the last thing the US government and banks want to happen. And they don't want higher rates in any case, given that every 1% rise means about $100 billion more in annual interest payments on the debt and a decline in value of the huge treasury holdings of the banks (not to mention that rising rates risk collapsing the entire cheap-credit-fueled bubble economy that now exists here).

After all, what's the whole purpose behind gold price suppression? To rid the dollar of a potentially lethal competitor, so that they can keep printing, so that they can keep borrowing to fund leviathan. Raising rates to keep the gold price suppression scheme going makes no sense.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."