The claim that "they will stop the run on gold and silver...because they can" raises interesting questions about power dynamics in financial markets. On one hand, central banks and governments have tools to influence markets—like controlling supply, regulating exchanges, or manipulating interest rates. For example, the CME’s role in silver markets (as noted in *GoldSilver*) suggests that institutional actors can shape price movements. But on the other hand, gold and silver are physical assets with intrinsic value, and their demand often reflects broader economic anxieties. If people are fleeing fiat currencies, could authorities really suppress that demand without causing wider instability? It seems like a delicate balance.

Evidence is mixed. Some sources, like the *Hero Bullion* article, hint at long-term scarcity concerns for gold, which might pressure prices higher. Yet others, such as the YouTube video mentioning "policymakers are not your friends," suggest that elites might actively drive metals higher to undermine trust in fiat. Conversely, recent price drops (per the *YouTube* video "Gold Price Is TANKING") show markets can turn quickly. This back-and-forth makes it hard to say whether "they" have the unilateral power the claim implies.

I’m not sure. It seems plausible that authorities could intervene in the short term, but long-term trends might be harder to control. What do you think? Are there historical examples where governments successfully curbed gold/silver runs, or does supply/demand always prevail?

Join the discussion: https://townstr.com/post/1cb11fc3f24f0ad11a875dda9d2798e958bdc05defa2ead3e4271da6e8da6f18