Historically the gold/silver ratio has been averaging 1/16 (this goes back to ancient history).
Currently gold is over this ration, so I would expect silver to do better than gold in the near term.
As to what both will do against bitcoin, that would be pure speculation but all are alternatives to inflating currencies.
No one knows when inflation is coming, but when it does, it typically comes quicker than folks expect.

Please expect our offering into this market of fine silver and gold bitcoin pieces shortly as well.

They are on sale.

If work without pay is volunteer, and with pay is slavery, then we are in a place I've never been.  Or heard of for that matter.

There are very many ways to determine the flow of funds.  Those may not be the most difficult part of the criminal allegation. The electronic record is only one of many pieces of evidence that can be brought to a court.  Testimony, affidavits, confessions of others who did buisiness with them.  All of those can be problems for the accused.

I don't know all the specifics of what they are being charged with, but I suspect it may include:

26 USC §7203 - Willful Failure to Keep Records
Willfulness will also be inferred if a concealment motive is part of the failure to keep records. However, an important factor in the probability of conviction in these investigations may be a substantial deficiency attributable to the failure to keep records.

The "willfulness" may require evidence of statements they made, or other communication records.  That may prove a more difficult thing than "knowing where the money came from".  It is very likely that the prosecutors won't have detail on all the transactions, (reportedly there were about 55 million transactions) but they likely have details on more than just a few.

Agreed.  It is a cost more than a benefit.

I don't have any evidence of anything, and am not involved in the case in any way.  The evidence was presented to the judge who processed the warrants.  If this is anything like most criminal cases, the evidence has been piling up for a long while and they don't pull the trigger on prosecuting until they are pretty sure they have what they need, or they aren't likely to get anything better by waiting. 

And yes, modern law is based on some pretty archaic and ancient principles, though the frequency that they blame god for things since the inquisition has decreased.

To be clear, you are arguing against someone who is a strong advocate of 4th amendment protections, and is more or less on your side.  All I have been doing is explaining the process.  It is not so unusual.

As to what evidence the prosecution might have there are all sorts of possibilities irrespective of where any particular transfer originated.  According to the public reports, this was the combined effort of 17 countries.  For AML, usually it is some criminal that gets caught on something more serious that cooperates with their local authorities and explain to them their process.  Sometimes they get a lower penalty when the give the state evidence against others.  The electronic transfer record is not the only evidence that can exist, so even if you are acting anonymously digitally, you may not be anonymous in other ways.
=-=-
...from a recent theft of some $45 million from two Middle Eastern banks. “The complaint against one of the Dominican Republic gang members allegedly involved in the theft states that thousands of dollars' worth of stolen cash was deposited into two Liberty Reserve accounts via currency centers based in Siberia and Singapore,” the AP reported.

Or to put it more accurately, once prosecution shows evidence of all the prongs of the crime, the burden is on the defense to create doubt and one ignores this at their own risk.

Further, when probable cause is established, and the prosecution convinces a judge that the crimes are continuing and the only way to stop them is to hurt innocents, sometimes a judge agrees! 
They think of it as blocking traffic on a block where there is a violent crime occurring.  Lots of folks suffer but they think that maybe they stop something worse from happening and make an injunction judgement on that risk.

I can't say who is right and who is wrong in this LR stuff, but the legal system is working as it was designed.  Disagree with the design if you like, but it is not good to ignore it.

I buy my bitcoin with silver and gold because I value my bitcoin community too much to pay in fiat.

Math eventually is obsoleted as well, but the leaps between old and new tend to take a LOT longer, and to be more disruptive.
Bitcoin is resilient to software and hardware advancement.  Worry/hope instead about math advancement.

By the same measure, so also are words, ideas, and the characterisation of all experiences are artifice.
At the risk of skipping to your punchline, why make this distinction as to whether it is or isn't artificial if all are?

DwvANN2Kye4WwwzhY8prhLLu88UypbSJX2

Am I #100?

...if there is probable cause for indictment and some evidence against them.

Please accept my apologies for putting an important part of the sentence near the end where it can be neatly chopped off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

This is a beautiful and generous sentiment.
To do that which is meaningful for many is aspirational and laudable.
One who can make a contribution to every living person is rare and precious.

One of the risks of the philosophical is that we can lose touch with the broad popular usage of words to which we may ascribe a narrow meaning and purpose.
In the broad sense, capitalism is dying, it is killing, it is wickedness, greed, corruption, selfishness, jealousy and all manner of other wrongs.
In the narrow sense the philosopher might say those were not capitalism, but greed and the corruption inherent in creating and empowering the engine of a government useful for turning against our fellows and coercing what is theirs for our benefit.
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
That capitalism instead is the pure and noble voluntary exchange for mutual benefit which depends on having some decision authority (capitalism's ownership) over what we each might exchange.  To seek a higher mutual affluence through trade.
But this philosopher can only speak with other philosophers who use the same definitions, and those are likely already in agreement about much.
And so broad labels often do not serve us well, and when we use them to attack an argument we unwittingly often engage in making straw men.

We also forget why we argue at all, which is to benefit our common understandings, rather than to defeat a foe.  I suspect the only foes I can ever address are the wrong ideas I myself hold.  For all I've written, I may never have convinced anyone else of anything.  I may like to think I am helping someone else in understanding something, but in honesty admit that is more likely vanity.

True, but also don't ignore the validity of Kittn's point that:
The difference between the philosophic capitalism and what is in practice are not the same.  Using the same word for both is confusing.
"Communism" likewise.
"Anarchy" as well.
The terms are appropriated by popular culture and media.

It may not work, but folks are working toward it anyhow.
Marx/Engels may have had a more profound effect on US politics than many of his contemporary presidents.  Seems like we are following his playbook more than not:
http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html