The Silver-to-Gold Ratio: 1:20 — Fact or Fantasy? Historically, the silver-to-gold price ratio has floated, but the long-standing historical average (before modern fiat systems) hovered between 1:12 to 1:16.

🪙 The Silver-to-Gold Ratio: 1:20 — Fact or Fantasy?

Historically, the silver-to-gold price ratio has floated, but the long-standing historical average (before modern fiat systems) hovered between 1:12 to 1:16.

Why?

  • Silver and gold were both monetary metals

  • Governments pegged their currencies in bimetallic standards

  • For centuries, the natural extraction ratio (how much silver vs gold came from the ground) was roughly 15:1–17:1

  • So people assumed: value = scarcity

🔁 This reinforced a belief system that gold should be ~15x the value of silver.

👨‍🌾 Enter: The Hunt Brothers (1970s–1980)

Who:

  • Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt, oil billionaires

  • From a Texas dynasty with deep pockets and anti-Fed sentiment

They believed:

  • Fiat money was collapsing (they weren’t wrong)

  • Gold had already been made illegal in the U.S. (until 1974), so...

  • Silver was the next best hard asset

  • Silver was undervalued compared to gold, and the “real” ratio should be much closer to 1:16 or 1:20

So they:

  • Bought over 200 million ounces of physical silver

  • Accumulated huge amounts via futures contracts

  • Formed what amounted to a quasi-cartel, cornering the silver market

🚨 The Aftermath: Silver Hits $50/oz in 1980

  • Price exploded from ~$6 to $50 an ounce

  • Ratio dropped to near 1:15, briefly vindicating their theory

  • But the COMEX changed the rules (known as "Silver Rule 7"):

    • Raised margin requirements

    • Banned further long contracts

The silver bubble collapsed — HARD.

  • Silver plunged from $50 to $11 almost overnight

  • The Hunts lost billions

  • Charged with market manipulation

  • Forced into bankruptcy

  • Became legends and cautionary tales

🤔 Were the Hunts Right?

In terms of macro vision — yes, in many ways.

They understood:

  • Fiat was flawed

  • Precious metals were under pressure from central banks

  • Real assets would eventually outlast paper ones

But their method was flawed:

  • Tried to force the market instead of riding it

  • Didn’t hedge political and institutional retaliation

  • Underestimated the Fed’s and COMEX’s power

🧮 Today’s Ratio (As of September 7, 2025):

  • Gold: ~$3,580/oz

  • Silver: ~$40/oz

  • Ratio: ~87:1

That’s more than 4x the “historic” 1:20 ratio.

To return to 1:20:

  • Silver would need to be ~$115/oz if gold stays the same

  • Or gold would need to crash, which is unlikely in the current global debt climate

🧠 What This Suggests Today:

BeliefStatus
Silver is undervalued vs gold✅ Historically yes, especially if fiat weakens
1:20 ratio is "natural"❌ More symbolic than realistic today
The ratio will close🟡 Possible in a systemic reset, but not guaranteed
Physical silver is suppressed✅ By banks like JPMorgan (see 2010s market manipulation cases)
Hunts were ahead of their time✅ But the system crushed their strategy

🧩 Final Thought:

The Hunt brothers weren't just greedy — they were true believers in hard money, and saw silver as a weapon against fiat tyranny.
Their 1:20 ratio thesis still haunts precious metal circles, especially among:

  • Sound money advocates

  • Anti-Fed thinkers

  • Libertarians

  • “Reset” watchers

The Hunts weren’t wrong about why, but they got burned by how!

sharing is caring

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DNA: The Fable Brought to the Table – How the Double Helix Became Kayfabe . The double helix was not observed but modeled. DNA’s discovery rests on single samples, assumptions, and damaged evidence — kayfabe science at work.

The discovery of DNA’s structure has been told and retold as a triumph of science, a neat tale of genius deduction capped with a double helix. The textbooks make it sound like truth was laid bare, clear as day, in a single crystallographic photograph. Yet what was brought to the public table was less a feast of evidence than a carefully plated fable. Single Source Problem All of the early conclusions about DNA’s structure were drawn from a single preparation of sodium DNA (NaDNA) in dry form. Rosalind Franklin’s diffraction studies were confined to this one source. She did not compare across multiple DNA samples from different organisms. The entire story of heredity — the claim that the same structure encoded all living things — was extrapolated from a narrow slice of evidence. The possibility remains that other DNA might not have looked the same at all. Helix by Assumption The iconic two-chain helix of B-DNA was not directly observed. It was suggested based on missing spots in ...
Read more

The Dream of DNA: Crick’s Vision, Franklin’s Erasure, and the Scientific Kayfabe. DNA’s discovery was not pure science but kayfabe: Crick’s dream, Franklin’s erasure, and a myth built to protect authority. The helix is real, the story is not.

In 1953, Francis Crick and James Watson announced the structure of DNA — the double helix — in a short paper in Nature . Their discovery has been enshrined as one of the great triumphs of modern science: the key that unlocked genetics, inheritance, and the very code of life. Textbooks repeat the story like gospel: brilliant deduction, confirmed by crystal-clear evidence, delivering a eureka moment of certainty. But beneath this polished myth lies a far messier truth. Crick himself admitted that the idea of DNA’s twisting strands came not solely from data, but from a dream — sometimes described as his, sometimes his wife’s. At the same time, Rosalind Franklin’s meticulous X-ray diffraction work provided a key empirical clue, yet her contribution was marginalized, her photograph shared without consent, and her name sidelined from the Nobel glory. This is not simply academic bickering about credit. It reveals a deeper pattern: science, like politics and medicine, is subject to what Dave C...
Read more

Hunter Biden and Anthony Weiner’s Laptops: Political Kayfabe and the Suppression of Truth. Hunter Biden and Anthony Weiner’s laptops expose corruption, cover-ups, and kayfabe. Why were nine NYPD officers who saw Weiner’s laptop found dead?

In his wide-ranging interview with Tucker Carlson, Cornell professor Dave Collum described American politics as kayfabe — scripted theater that keeps the public fixated on drama while the real crises unfold offstage. Nothing illustrates this more vividly than two digital Pandora’s boxes: the laptops of Hunter Biden and Anthony Weiner . Both devices allegedly contain explosive evidence. Both were seized by law enforcement. Both were quickly wrapped in layers of suppression, distortion, and rumor. And both, like medical data in the so-called “virus isolation” debate, remain quarantined from public view. As Collum pointed out, the suppression has been so extreme that nine New York police officers who viewed Weiner’s laptop are now anomalously dead. These laptops are more than hard drives. They are symbols of how evidence is managed, memory-holed, or weaponized — depending on what the kayfabe script demands. Hunter Biden’s Laptop: From “Disinformation” to Damning Emails In 2019...
Read more