Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by fivedollargold 6 years ago
    More bellicose tripe from the gold-haters. Their own chart disproves their putrid thesis. If gold lacks inherent value, why does it cost so much per ounce? You can make beautiful objects from gold. What can you make from paper currency? What were GM bondholders left with, when the Obaminestas took over that company? To their specious claim regarding market-timing, the same is true of all investments. Anyone buy tech stocks in 2000 and ride that pony over the cliff in 2001? How long did it take to recover? There is a reason Saint Ayn made gold the monetary currency of the Gulch.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years ago
      5DG, look at the long-term buy-and-hold returns for gold and get back to us.
      Equities have beaten it by multiple percents over the long haul.
      As a currency for exchange, sure, use it all you want, but as an Investment, you've got to be a fool to believe it's better than any other commodity! When the price is high, mines are reopened and supplies rush to market and the price collapses and those mines become unprofitable and close again, cutting supply and restarting the cycle!
      Look at the Demand for Gold in the world market and you'll see that one of the only places where demand is increasing is in the jewelry market, primarily in India, and its growth isn't enough to make gold appreciate enough, in total, as an INVESTMENT!

      Or you can stick with your own beliefs. I have no gold holdings in my IRAs, thanks to my money manager's wisdom, and after paying their fees AND withdrawing principle for living expenses above SocSec, our IRAs have been being Depleted, on average, about 1% per year for nearly 12 years.
      Not a bad trend, eh? And our withdrawals so far have approached about 3.4M$ (that's three-fourths of a Million Dollars) so I think I've got some good history to back me up.

      Best of luck with your investments.
      But don't believer anything Ken Fisher's written...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Flootus5 6 years ago
        Ah, the old repeated schtick that gold is only another commodity. Totally ignoring 5000 years of monetary history where every society that has tried this failed argument - by definition also economically failed - along with their paper currency inflating out of viable existence. Every time. And with huge upheavals of society.

        Fisher Investment's very existence is dependent on keeping people believing their rhetoric that gold is just another commodity. They faltered when I questioned them upon this. They could not answer why any metal coinage, be it gold, silver, copper, nickel, platinum or even aluminum has a melt value. If you so much want to consider it a commodity then explain why it is the commodity that has an expressed value rather than the fiat paper money. And guess what happens when you disconnect the value of the paper money from the substance that actually does have value.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 6 years ago

          Good luck timing that one... You might win over ten or twenty or forty years, but if you get the wrong part of the cycle, you're screwed.

          Ten or twenty or fifty-year 'returns' don't predict anything. It's still a commodity, driven by economics.

          Or you can deny that and follow your own beliefs.

          I wonder what you 'asked Fisher' and what their answer was... or who answered it. Did you ever read Ken's writings on the subject? Did you find errors in his logic?

          Just curious...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Flootus5 6 years ago
            What the Fisher representative could not get a grasp on is that expressing the value of gold in paper money is not setting the value of the gold, only that of the fiat paper money. Pegging your currency to a gold and silver standard not only serves to stabilize the value of the currency but also to keep the reckless printing and spending an out of control government will engage in. This is why the founders expressed the currency in grains of gold and silver. They had just seen the Continental dollar go worthless. Just as we are seeing global currencies in a race to the bottom today.

            Look at it this way, an ounce of gold in 1790 could buy you a nice suit and a pair of shoes. Today an ounce of gold can buy you.......a nice suit and a pair of shoes. The dollar and any dollar denominated investment has lost 97% of its purchasing power.

            Note that Ayn Rand revered the sign of the dollar - when it was set to a gold standard.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 6 years ago
              Fisher sales rep or your contact there or Ken Fisher's writings?

              If an ounce of gold has the same purchasing power today as in 1790, what's your point, other than it's kept the same 'value' for over 200 years?

              I used to track the cost of a Corvette versus my gross pay, and it tracked very nicely. Same for a loaf of bread or quart of milk, relative to average hourly pay.

              We've been on and off the gold standard, and in the terms we've both just quoted, the "value of the currency" may vary all over the map but its buying power doesn't, so what's the point?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Flootus5 6 years ago
                The point is exactly that. Gold has stayed the same, but not the fiat paper money that has been unhinged from the standard. And almost all of that inflation has been in my lifetime since Nixon (and those behind him) cut the final ties of gold backed currency. So, actually the buying power of the "value of currency" has changed immensely and not for the better. Very predictable.

                I remember reading some Ken Fisher writings a number of years ago. Long forgotten who the rep was. Sounds like you're affiliated with Fisher Investments. Edward Jones runs the same argument by falling for the "just a commodity" scam.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 6 years ago
                  Yes, I'm 'affiliated with Ken Fisher' ... as a client.
                  His company manages my IRA and my wife's IRA and in two days (Thursday), we'll mark our 12th anniversary with them controlling our loot.

                  After paying their fees and withdrawing about $60k a year for living expenses (to augment SocSec), our 'loss' has been approximately 1% per year of initial principal. And that includes the 'Market Crash' of a decade ago, too. We rode that 'coaster down and back again.
                  One of our only mistakes was to put too much of our holdings into bonds and similar instruments.
                  We should have stayed in equities. We'd have 3-5% more total cash now if we had.

                  Whatever... that's water over the bridge... or under the dam... or whatever. We're quite happy with the returns; we put zero effort into our wealth management other than throttling spending so we don't burn through our reserves quicker than our life expectancy.
                  At present, at a 1%/year, drop, our IRAs could be depleted in somewhere around 110 years from now, assuming the 1%/year drop.
                  We're in our 70's now, so we think we made a good choice 'way back then.

                  We tried the kool-aid, liked the flavor and have been happy with it ever since.

                  We made our bed and we've been comfortable in it, and never "lost our nest egg" as so many other "investors" did over that period.

                  Each to their own... choices and beliefs.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Dobrien 6 years ago
        Very long term Buy and hold theory for gold stacks up better than many many stocks as the RCA,s the India co., ITT,Xerox,Polaroid, Kodak, Enron GM Airline stocks, Trump stocks, diversify be vigilant and be not married to a stock is usually better than just buy and hold.
        IRA-investments have tax advantages they are not the best place for non dividend or interest paying investments. Those income producing investments perform best during interest rate declines we are now at historical lows for interest rates. Any discussion of investment opportunities in the here and now should be focused on the windshield not the rear view mirror. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
        Worse yet a myopic view of past performance not considering the massive leveraging up of the G 7 nations and the PIGS socialistic failed economy's of the world including our $19trillion govt debt.
        Medium term historical values of gold have been manipulated by govt. The elimination of the gold standard then outlawing ownership of gold. The death and elimination of Gaddafi and Libyan gold plan for Africa. Today's Fiat currency is 1 big ponzu scheme . Print print print create inflation then lie about the inflation rate. Loot our future loot the retiree, loot our grandchildren.
        World population adds a Chicago sized population every month a formula for increased long term demand for one of the rarest commodities. The future for gold holdings as a portion of assets
        Looks compelling.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 6 years ago
          As you wish, D... but over my 70 years, I've also observed that damned near every item you mentioned is Cyclical, with periodicity in the five-to-twenty-year range, AND subject to 'stochastic shocks' at unpredictable times.
          So go for it and do your best.
          I'm happy with my choices and results; happier than a lot of people who made other choices.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 6 years ago
            ps... as countries become more 'developed' and 'advanced,' their population growth rate drops.
            Some are now below 'replacement levels.'
            Nothing grows to the sky and extrapolation based solely on historical trends is, in the end, foolish.

            Many decades ago I saw a wonderful graph that showed how the price/cost of a jet fighter was growing linearly on a log scale graph.

            Only problem was: GDP wasn't on as steep a slope, so the "logical conclusion" was that Eventually, one jet fighter would be equal in cost to the nation's GDP.

            Beware of extrapolations and assumptions.
            But hey, WTF do I know... I'm just an old engineering-trained observer of the species.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years ago
    It's still a more valuable medium of exchange than paper money and that is what all the gold rhetoric is about in reality.
    Of course there are those looking for short gain profits in selling gold as well and using our debt/fiat currency to their advantage.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years ago
      True: short term trading gains can definitely be made, but long-term investment potential is mediocre at best, compared to equity-holding.
      If you want to trade gold on its per-oz value, buy during gluts and sell during shortages.
      Follow the historical cycle.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 6 years ago
    Gold is NOT an "investment." Gold is MONEY. Comparing gold to stocks and bonds is like comparing cash to stocks and bonds. Neither one will give you a return. Compare gold to cash, and you'll be onto something.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Dobrien 6 years ago
      Gold is money with out the devaluation. Gold can increase in value. My dollar that used to buy 3 packs of smokes at $.35 cents per pack now buys 3 cigarettes. During same time period $1 in gold is worth $36 today. GM stock went from 100 to belly up thanks to the looter govt and their crony unions.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years ago
      Tell that to the gold-bugs who disagree...
      I trust my financial money-managers... :)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 6 years ago
        That's more than I can say.
        Most Money Managers I have used know the lingo but not much more than me. When I was young and just starting to make real money, I used a friend who was also recommended by other friends. A real nice guy and a good racquetball partner, but I lost money using his advice. Life is a learning experience.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 6 years ago
          I did some of my early investing on my own, then tried the 401k options offered by my employer. The initial selection was limited and I was ignorant. They broadened the selection after a few wasted years, but I still had no real clue how to invest.
          I then tried a name-brand low-cost firm which did help me understand goals and allocations, but then left me on my own after making some static suggestions.
          I then moved to Smith Barney which lost me a LOT of money until I realized that the broker was driving around in her new Lexus SUV when I was trying to figure out how to buy a used corporate car Ford Taurus.
          Finally heard about Fisher Investments, went 'up the mountain' (literally, in the Santa Cruz Mountains of CA) to interview them and concluded that they were worth a try.
          Signed over our IRAs to them to manage about 12 years ago, drank the kool-aid, read Ken's books (at least a half dozen of them) and never looked back.
          From my last notes, as a fraction of initial investments in my IRA plus my wife's IRA...

          Time from 06/03/2004 to Today 11 years 11 months
          Total w/d's & Fees = ($759,467.29) 69.43%
          Avg. % Change/Year (0.91)
          Total net gain = $640,514.81 58.56%
          "Years to empty" (at current withdrawal rate)= 110

          Keep in mind that those results include the "Crash of '07, too! We never bailed or did any major reallocations during that time, although we did tweak our portfolios to increase bond holdings from about ten to up to 20% or so. In hindsight, we should have been 100% equities All The Time. We'd have about 5% more money there now if we had.

          That's why I'm happy with my kool-aid and I'm a Believer.
          And why I keep asking why anyone publishes a financial newsletter... Why the hell would they invite competition in the markets against their own selections?!
          Unless they're just looking for extra income beyond their own investment returns?
          Which, again, begs the same question of "WHY"?!

          Socrates is my hero. Warren Buffet or Steve Forbes or Donald Trump is not.
          They're in a different league. I don't/can't buy companies outright... just tiny parts of them via the managed IRAs.

          A very good friend of mine used to pass investment suggestions to me and most of them were great. Then he suddenly stopped sending me suggestions. When I asked why, he responded that it was taking too much time and energy to beat the market by a few percentage points and he'd found a company that could do as well or better then he could. His new resource was Fisher Investments, and that's when my wife and I decided to investigate them.
          They have a $500k minimum now, although it was $1M when we joined (and just squeaked in). But they also manage many cities' and companies' retirement investments, too, and have many Billions under their management.
          At one point, they implied they had more compute power under their roof than Fidelity.
          Who knows? Who cares?
          They've done well by us and for us.
          If anyone doesn't like the flavor of the kool-aid, they don't have to invest through them.
          Although they do offer a choice of three or so firms to handle the trades in your account, and I opened my own account with our selected firm and all equity trades are about $8.00 or so. I trade rarely in that tiny account. It's just a small playground for me... although if it gets big enough, I'm buying a classic Corvette with the money. If I live long enough...

          Happy investing and motoring!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 6 years ago

            for some numbers on Demand for gold.
            Technology: about 9%
            Jewellry: about 50%
            Central Banks: about 14% as of 2014 or so.
            Investors: about 33%

            So, you investors and jewellry makers drive most of the price of gold!
            Gee, when investors drive the values of their investments, does that tell you something?
            Nah, not likely. Avoid Friedman on Economics... stick with your old buddies like Keynes... :))))))))))
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 6 years ago
    Gold does not generate wealth, and in times of dire straits and shortages, its perceived value plummets. While it sounds like a joke to all except the WTSHTF folks, lead (in the form of the most common types of ammunition) is a much more valuable medium of exchange.

    Short of an apocalyptic event, real estate still remains a strong investment target. Technology can be an explosive growth investment, if done with an educated eye. Robotics, in all its forms, will be very strong, pushed by blind union favoritism and bloated minimum wages.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 6 years ago
    People often forget that gold is a commodity and as such is subject to the rise and falls experienced by and such thing. The reason people keep gold is the belief that if the world's economies fail and paper monies become worthless, gold and silver will be the medium of exchange until the world economies rebound. But then, if the economies crash to the point where paper money is worth less than newsprint, what will you be able to buy with it? Such a drastic fall of money value would cause production to grind to a halt. Barter might work for a while, but until production gets back, gold will be even more useless than many other commodities. You cannot eat gold, clothe yourself in it, or shelter yourself with it. Let us just hope that sanity prevails and it doesn't come to that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years ago
      True, Herb, and if you follow, you can continually read about their responses to money newsletters that say the world's economy is tanking.
      By their measurements, and they tell you what their measures are... today, the 'world economy' is growing.
      Of course, if you're of another Economic Religion (or making money publishing economic-apocalypse newsletters), that will make no difference to you. :)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 6 years ago
    Those "believers" include the framers of the Constitution. The following excerpt is from Ron Paul's "The Case for Gold". This is public domain. For background:

    The excerpt:

    Legal Tender Laws

    As we have seen, the Constitution forbids the states to make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt, nor does it permit the federal government to make anything a legal tender. One of the most important pieces of
    legislation that could be enacted would be the repeal of all federal legal tender laws. Such laws, which have the effect of forcing creditors to accept something in payment for the debts due them that they do not wish to accept, are
    one of the most tyrannical devices of the present monetary authorities.
    Not only does the Federal Reserve have a coercive monopoly in issuing "money," but every American is forced to accept it. Each Federal Reserve note bears the words, "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." The
    freedom to conduct business in something else—such as gold and silver coin—cannot exist so long as the government forces everyone to accept its paper notes. Monetary freedom ends where legal tender laws begin.
    The United States had no such laws until 1862, when the Congress—in violation of the Constitution—enacted them in order to ensure the acceptance of the Lincoln greenbacks, the paper notes printed by the U.S. Treasury during the wartime emergency. That "emergency" has now lasted for 120 years; it is time that this unconstitutional action by the Congress be repealed. Freedom of contract—and the right to have such contracts enforced, not abrogated, by the government—is one or the fundamental pillars of a free society.

    Defining the Dollar

    A second major reform needed is a legal definition of the term "dollar." The Constitution uses the word "dollar" at least twice, and it is quite clear that by it the framers meant the Spanish-milled dollar of 371% grains of silver. Since 1968, however, there has been no domestic definition of "dollar," for in that year redemption of silver certificates and delivery of silver in exchange for the notes ended, and silver coins were removed from circulation.

    In 1971, the international definition of the "dollar" as %2 of an ounce of gold was also dropped. The Treasury and Federal Reserve still value gold at $42.22 per ounce, but that is a mere accounting device. In addition, IMF rules now prohibit any member country from externally defining its currency in terms of gold. The word "dollar," quite literally, is legally meaningless, and it has been meaningless for the past decade. Federal Reserve notes are not
    "dollars"; they are notes denominated in "dollars." But what a "dollar" is, no one knows.
    This absurdity at the basis of our monetary system must be corrected. It is of secondary importance whether we define a "dollar" as a weight of gold or as a weight of silver. What is important is that it be defined. The current
    situation permits the Federal Reserve—and the Internal Revenue Service for that matter—to use the word any way they please, just like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland.

    No rational economic activity can be conducted when the unit of account is undefined. The use of the meaningless term "dollar" has all but wrecked the capital markets of this country. If the "dollar" changes in meaning from day-to
    day, even hour-to-hour, long-term contracts denominated in "dollars" become traps that all wish to avoid. The breakdown of long-term financing and planning in the past decade is a result of the absurd nature of the "dollar." There is very little long term planning occurring at the present. The only way to restore rationality to the system is to restore a definition for the term "dollar." We suggest defining a "dollar" as a weight of gold of a certain fineness, .999 fine. Such a fixed definition is the only way to restore confidence in the markets and in the "dollar." Capitalism cannot survive the type of irrationality that lies at the basis of our present monetary arrangements.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years ago
      No argument at all, Floot...
      But everything you've mentioned is based on Agreement, not any fixed, intrinsic, measurable or otherwise static parameter.
      Do you see the dilemma in that?
      Anyone can get a bunch of people together (Consensus) and Agree on 'what a dollar is' or 'is worth' and gee, golly-whillikers, Mr. Wizard... all you have is Agreement.
      It's a nice starting point, but as I've asserted here, elsewhere and often, once that 'benchmark' is established, government gymnastics can turn that 'value' into anything they want it to.

      Do you have suggestions on how THAT could be prevented?

      And yes, I agree that the advent of the Fed and the demise of Bank notes probably set the ball in motion downhill.
      I just can't conceive of any government or President or Congress ever reversing that decision!
      But isn't that what would be needed/necessary to 'cure the problem'?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 6 years ago
    The correct interpretation from looking at the plot of gold value is that gold prices are generally flat when relatively fiscal conservatives are in presidential office (Reagan, Bush I?, Clinton), and when spendthrifts like Carter, Bush II, and Obama get into office, hitch your ride on the gold train. I applied that wisdom on the day after Obama got elected, and my Au is worth $1230/oz. now vs. $880 then. That is only a 5% return on investment, but compared to everything else in this era of no reward for risk taken, that's not bad.

    Yes, Au prices did go down over the last several years. This was the result of a very clear, stated interference by the Federal Reserve to attempt to keep Au prices at $1200/oz. One thing that any investor should learn is that fighting the Fed is a losing battle.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 6 years ago
    More from Ron Paul's "The Case for Gold"

    Sorry for the length, but it is important.

    The Moral Argument for Gold
    A monetary standard based on sound moral principles is one in which the monetary unit is precisely defined in something of real value such as a precious metal. Money that obtains its status from government decree alone is
    arbitrary, undefinable, and is destined to fail, for it will eventually be rejected by the people. Since today's paper money achieves its status by government declaration and not by its value in itself, eventually total power over the
    economy must be granted to the monopolists who manage the monetary system. Even with men of good will, this power is immoral, for men make mistakes, and mistakes should never have such awesome consequences as they do
    when made in the management of money. Through the well-intentioned mismanagement of money, inflation and depression are created. Political control of a monetary system is a power bad men should not have and good men
    would not want.
    Inflation, being the increase in the supply of money and credit, can only be brought about in an irredeemable paper system by money managers who create money through fractional reserve banking, computer entries, or the printing
    press. Inflation bestows no benefits on society, makes no new wealth, and creates great harm; and the instigators, whether acting deliberately or not, perform an immoral act. The general welfare of the nation is not promoted by
    inflation, and great suffering results.
    Gold is honest money because it is impossible for governments to create it. New money can only come about by productive effort and not by political and financial chicanery. Inflation is theft and literally steals wealth from one group for the benefit of another.
    Gold is wealth; it is not just exchangeable for wealth. Today's notes are not wealth. They are claims on wealth that the owners of wealth must accept as payment. No wealth is created by paper money creation; only shifts of wealth occur, and these shifts, although significant and
    anticipated by some, cannot always be foreseen. They are tantamount to theft in that the assets gained are unearned. The victims of inflation suffer through no fault of their own.
    Legally increasing the money supply is just as immoral as the counterfeiter who illegally prints money. The new paper money has value only because it steals its "value" from the existing stock of paper money. (This is not true of
    gold, however. New issues of paper money are necessarily parasitic; they depend on their similarity to existing money for their worth. But gold does not. It carries its own credentials.) Inflation of paper money is one way wealth
    can be taken against another's wishes without an obvious confrontation; it is a form of embezzlement. After a while, the theft will be reflected in the depreciation of money and the higher prices that must be paid. The guilty are difficult to identify due to the cleverness of the theft. They are never punished because of the legality of their actions.
    Eventually, though, as the paper money becomes more and more worthless, the "legalized counterfeiting" becomes
    obvious to everyone. Anger and frustration over the theft results and is justified, but it is frequently misdirected and may even lead to a further aggrandizement of governmental power.
    Neither the government nor private issuers of money can be permitted to defraud the people by
    depreciating the currency. The honesty and integrity of the money should be based on a contract; the government's only role should be to see that violators of the contract are punished. Depreciating the currency by increasing the supply and diluting its value is comparable to the farmer who dilutes his milk with water yet sells it for whole milk. We prosecute the farmer, but not the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee. Those who must pay the high prices from the inflation are like those who must drink the diluted milk and suffer from its "debased" content.

    Gold money is always rejected by those who advocate significant government intervention in the economy. Gold holds in check the government's tendency to accumulate power over the economy.
    John Locke argued for the gold standard the same way he argued for the moral right to own property. To him the right to own and exchange gold was a civil liberty equal in importance to the liberty to speak, write, and practice one's own religion.
    It is not surprising, then, given this background, that the Congress of 1792 imposed the death penalty on anyone convicted of debasing the coinage. Debasement, depreciation, devaluation, inflation—all stand condemned by then moral law. The present economic crisis we face is a direct consequence of our violations of that law.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ChuckyBob 6 years ago
    As I see it, there are four gold markets: 1. The short term speculator, 2. The long term hedgers, 3. Industrial users, 4. The SHTF crowd. With 1 and 2 it all depends on how good your crystal ball is. You can make, or lose a lot of money. The industrial users probably don't affect the market as much as the speculators who trade mass amounts of gold on paper. The industrial users are going to use what they will use to fill demand for their products. The SHTF crowd are the ones who really need to change their thinking. They buy it as a future medium of exchange. However, in an SHTF situation gold's utility is not high. If you believe in SHTF, it would be much better to invest in productive land, old fashioned farm implements, long term food storage, lead and powder, etc. In an SHTF situation, if you are hungry and have a pound of gold and I have guns, ammo and a pallet load of poptarts I think I will probably come out better in the negotiation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 6 years ago
      And what many investors don't know is that unless you are actually in physical possession of the gold, you have nothing but paper in the first place, as most real gold is committed 50+ times to separate buyers. Tell me how that is any different than our fiat currency.

      Now I view things completely different when talking about gold as currency, but as an investment, it's purpose is as a hedge and/or portfolio diversification.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by fivedollargold 6 years ago
    $5Au never claimed gold was the "best" investment. However, as part of a DIVERSIFIED portfolio, it has a place. You can purchase it easily through an exchange traded fund such as GLD or IAU. You can also buy shares in gold mining stocks, some of which pay a dividend, if you like. Some people prefer to buy gold coins. Or hunt for it yourself. $5Au has spent pleasant hours panning for it, but quite honestly, more as recreation than as a money maker. $5Au generally keeps 5 to 10 percent of his portfolio in various forms of this beautiful metal.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 6 years, 1 month ago
    Thus speaks those that favor not prosecuting the LIBOR conspirators.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      Not necessarily. From whence did you infer that?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 6 years, 1 month ago
        A recent Fed Appeals Court ruling has reaffirmed a joint suit against the many banks/financial groups involved in the identified LIBOR price fixing of recent years, though no one's yet found (or is likely to) certain evidence of prior years (or decades) of gold price fixing from the same groups/banks.

        The author uses the already identified prices from the LIBOR price fixing as justification for his argument.

        I think it would have been of interest to try and find out what the price of gold and the gold/silver ratio would have done without the price fixing that's been identified and from that interpolate probable/possible pricing back through the 80's

        A proper money based on Gold and Silver would indeed have physical Gold as a sound inflation protector. As such, Gold wouldn't be a short term investment, other than Gold production in the form of investment with the producer.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
          If you research or read Ken Fisher or MarketMinder, you'll see that their opinion is that gold is a commodity and like virtually all other commodities, the idea that it is a Store Of Value or something that's Unique is a fallacy.
          Its value is a function of supply and demand; demand isn't growing as fast as inflation and most of the demand is for jewelry and some electronics' metal coatings.
          When the supply decreases, the price goes up, mines reopen, supplies increase and prices drop, then mines close, supplies decrease, the market price goes up again and the cycle repeats.
          I really suggest you consider their counterpoint against the MSM and Financial Newsletter Publishers' views.
          Consider, too, the long-term return on gold!

          Cheers, and good luck investing.
          We've been with Fisher with them managing our IRAs for nearly twelve years, and after paying fees and withdrawing about 3/4M$ over that period, our total holdings there have dropped, on average, about 1% Per Year.
          And virtually none of the investments are in any precious metals.
          Just sayin'...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 1 month ago
            " the idea that it is a Store Of Value or something that's Unique is a fallacy."
            I agree completely. Comparable goods and service are worth about the same throughout time, within an order of magnitude. (The nature of goods and services change over time, though, so it's hard to compare.) So if you had to bury value without management for hundreds of years, precious metals would be the way to go. It's not a practical store of value within a human lifetime. It's fine to hold some of it as a hedge against bad times, but as the article correctly says there's nothing magic about it.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 6 years ago
              ..and I wonder what post-apocalyptic life would be like if everyone, or even 'the smart ones' had lots of gold in their hoards.
              It's only got 'value' if the seller of the goods you want or need would like to trade it with you. Since it's scarce (you can't print your own very easily,) it's harder to debase as a 'currency,' so that might be a way to 'value' it under those conditions.
              But couldn't the same be said of other hard-to-mine metals or scarce items?
              Just wondering. I've often pictured the guy with the gold either being held up by robbers and thus rendered 'penniless' or the seller demanding excessive amounts of gold in trade.

              Whatever... I'd probably be one of the first to starve, die or be killed in that kind of world, anyway... and that might be preferable to trying to rebuild it.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ allosaur 6 years ago
                It long ago occurred to Old Dino that in a post-apocalyptic environment precious metals, gems, money in any form and such things as big name art and very rare antiques may have no value at all.
                Produce garden seeds should come to be valued as precious.
                Barter would be the only civilized trade. What is bartered should be essentially medieval save for such things as motorized vehicles, modern fuel and firearms plus ammo.
                Crossbows big and small are in Mad Max movies. Someone could do very well making crossbows and bartering them to fill essential needs and to occasionally get something fun like a boomerang for junior to practice with. .
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years ago
            ".and I wonder what post-apocalyptic life would be like if everyone, or even 'the smart ones' had lots of gold in their hoards."
            The value of a medium of exchange is in the stuff you exchange, that you can get it without mutual coincidence of wants. I can turn circuit boards into groceries without finding a grocery store in need of circuit boards. If the grocery store and my lab get ransacked because there's a disaster an no policing, the problem is a lack of stuff to trade, not the the lack of a medium of exchange.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 6 years ago
              And if grocery stuff availability plummets, the 'value' of gold (or circuit boards) required to trade for 'em skyrockets, too.
              So, how much is 'enough' in any scenario?
              I wouldn't want to guess.
              Perhaps skills will be most valuable, like vehicle repair, carpentry, plumbing...?
              :) How's THAT for an alternative?
              AR used gold coins in the Gulch, but they were used, as normal, where skills needed to be monetarized for trade so you wouldn't have to trade an hour of carpentry for a carton of apples at the grocery.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years ago
                "Perhaps skills will be most valuable, like vehicle repair, carpentry, plumbing...?"
                I'm saying that's true now or in a crisis. Value is in skills/abilities to use the available means of production to meet people's wants/needs..

                I recall how they used only gold as a medium of exchange in the Gulch. There's nothing wrong with using gold and silver coins. But they go up and down based on their own supply and demand. There's no perfect medium of exchange.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo