This week, the market answered. Why yes, yes we can!

Silver closed the week, trading at $14.78. This is down $0.76 from last Friday and almost 20 cents under our fundamental price from that date. The price of gold also dropped, $52. This is quite a discount to what we calculate as its fundamental price.

So what happened? It’s always a challenge to explain a market price move in terms of a concurrent or preceding event, and financial reporters get it wrong all the time. In this case we feel pretty confident that the driver was the nonfarm payroll report, as the price of gold plunged about $15 within a minute of the release of the data on Friday.

Why? What has the payroll data got to do with the price of tea in China or the price of gold in New York? Traders (likely not hoarders, but speculators) are trying to figure out if the Fed will: (A) cut interest rates, (B) hold them steady, or (C) hike them. If they are to hike, then everyone wants to know when. Since the Fed has said it wants to see full employment as one measure of a recovery before risking a rate increase, the market looks to the Bureau of Labor Statistics for hints.

Such is life in a centrally planned world, where the most important price of all—the price of money—is administered.

There’s only one flaw in this approach. The price of gold does not correlate to the money supply or to the interest rate. In the 1970’s, we had a rapidly rising price of gold and skyrocketing interest rates. In January of 1970, one could have bought gold (if one was not an American—in America, it was illegal) gold for $36.56. By December 1979, the price was up to $593.84 which is a 16-fold increase. More than half of this gain occurred from 1977-1979, which saw the price rise from about $132 to $594.

During that same period 1977-1979, the interest rate on the 1-year Treasury went from under 5% to almost 12%, well over a double.

As to more recent years, let’s look at a graph of 2001 through present, overlaying the gold price with the interest rate.