Jump to content

$5000 GOLD?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Gold is cyclical like every other investment. It might go sky high, but it will also inevitably drop. Never hurts to spread your assets around though.

 

Right :hysterical:

 

Gold will skyrocket because of the crooks in charge of your money have been systematically steeling your wealth to fatten their own pockets. The world market is headed for a major correction and all those paper assets will become nothing more than scribbling paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right :hysterical:

 

Gold will skyrocket because of the crooks in charge of your money have been systematically steeling your wealth to fatten their own pockets. The world market is headed for a major correction and all those paper assets will become nothing more than scribbling paper.

 

Well you go right ahead and cash in everything you own for gold. I'm not stopping you.

 

On a side note, you have to be one of the most cynical people I've ever known.

Edited by NickF1011
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Money = what you can exchange it for = material things, and services = wealth.

 

Most wealth in the modern world is held in the form of goods, primarily real estate.

 

The value of real estate is dropping like a rock. Not just here, but now over much of the globe.

 

If you sold you house, put the proceeds into gold, and then gold explodes in dollar value while houses drop in dollar value, you could potentially have a big win.

 

Bottom line: you need a house, you don't need gold. Eventually the gold has to be turned back into goods and services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Money = what you can exchange it for = material things, and services = wealth.

 

Most wealth in the modern world is held in the form of goods, primarily real estate.

 

The value of real estate is dropping like a rock. Not just here, but now over much of the globe.

 

If you sold you house, put the proceeds into gold, and then gold explodes in dollar value while houses drop in dollar value, you could potentially have a big win.

 

Bottom line: you need a house, you don't need gold. Eventually the gold has to be turned back into goods and services.

But it is worth more goods and services than it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were to sit down and calculate the actual value of the dollar, taking into account all debt and future liabilities, it would be virtually worthless.

 

Gold doesn't change it's value. It is worth the same now as it was worth 500 years ago. Gold has doubled in price in US dollars over the last three years. That means that the dollar has lost half it's value. The reason why we don't see hyperinflation, yet, is because we are borrowing to hide it. That is like curling up in a closet to escape the fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it is worth more goods and services than it was.

 

Correct, just as a barrel of oil was worth more goods and services a few months ago ($147), than it is today ($70).

 

Gold will do exactly the same thing: it will increase and decrease in value relative to every thing else.

 

It is like the theory of relativity. The value of anything depends upon what you compare it to, or measure it with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the S&P and Dow are going to be where :titanic:

 

http://www.infowars.com/peter-schiff-says-...-5000-an-ounce/

 

Peter Schiff is a smart guy, but there are a whole bunch of smart people out there who strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with his opinion. For every bull, there's a bear, and for every buyer, there's a seller, with each party thinking that he or she has better knowledge than the person on other side of the trade. Such is the nature of markets.

 

As for economic forecasting -- especially forecasting a whopping 500 percent increase in something so volatile as the price of gold -- I must return to the esteemed British publication The Economist's definition (derision, actually) of economic forecasting:

 

FORECASTING: Best guesses about the future. Despite complex economic theories and cutting-edge econometrics, the forecasts economists make are often badly wrong. Indeed, following economic forecasts has been likened to driving a car blindfolded, following directions given by a person who is looking out of the back window. Some of the inaccuracies in forecasts reflect badly designed models; often, the problem is that the future actually is unpredictable. Maybe it would be better to take the advice of Sam Goldwyn, a movie mogul, "Never prophesy, especially about the future."

 

Everywhere in the media these days, we read and hear about the importance of investing in gold. There are a growing number of purveyors and a growing number of different ways to invest in gold. This seems very much like the investment climate that led to the Dot-Com Bubble of the late 1990s. Once people began to realize that the stocks they were holding had no intrinsic value (i.e. the companies they owned couldn't generate profits) they began to sell, and thus began a cascade of rapidly declining share prices throughout the tech sector, and like a virus, it spread to all other sectors of the market. This gold mania may be just that: a bubble. History is replete with bubbles. See the 17th century Tulip Mania as a hilarious but instructive example. (The Dutch have since learned from their mistakes. See real value in the form of Nestle, Royal Dutch Shell, and ING Financial.)

 

As for people who provide brazen forecasts of investment opportunities in the media, I assign a probability that they will be correct with the same accuracy as a broken clock, which is 0.13888 percent of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gold is just another bubble waiting to pop.

 

You don't think that the US dollar has been over-extended? You believe that the trillions of debt and unfunded liability are going to just go away? Nations are dumping the US dollar. It is sinking like a rock. Hello Zimbabwe. The only way for the gold "bubble" to pop is if the US dollar suddenly pulled a phoenix. That ain't about to happen without WWIII happening first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Went through this gold tripling in value stuff back in the early 80s.

 

Then along came Ronald Reagan. Who do we have now? We have his exact opposite. Many believe that Obama and his radical gang of socialists and communists are out to destroy the U.S. so they can assume dictatorial power. The same thing happened during the last Great Depression. People got so scared that they looked to dictators to save them. What they ended up with was a devastating war, and the dictatorships got the worst of it.

 

Printing money makes gold go up. Printing money makes other countries dump your currency, so gold goes up more, based on your currency, that is. The value of gold doesn't change. If it takes more of your currency to buy it, there is something wrong with your currency. There is nothing wrong with gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Printing money makes gold go up. Printing money makes other countries dump your currency, so gold goes up more, based on your currency, that is. The value of gold doesn't change. If it takes more of your currency to buy it, there is something wrong with your currency. There is nothing wrong with gold.

 

 

Absolutely correct. Damn trim, I didn't know you had it in ya!!

 

 

And why do government continue to own gold?

http://financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/109-47.pdf

 

Before the House Financial Affairs Committee, July 20, 2005

RON PAUL: If, indeed, this is your last appearance before our committee, Mr. Greenspan, I would have to say that, in the future, I’m sure I’ll find these hearings a lot less interesting.

But I do have a couple of parting questions for you. Keynes, when he wrote his general theory, made the point that he has tremendous faith in central bank credit creation because it would stimulate productivity.

But along with this, he also recognized that it would push prices and labor costs up. But he saw this as a convenience, not a disadvantage, because he realized that, in the corrective phase of the economic business cycle, that wages had to go down – which people wouldn’t accept, a nominal decrease in wages, but if they were decreased in real terms, it would serve the economic benefit.

Likewise, I think this same principle can be applied to our debt. To me, this system that we have today is a convenient way to default on our debt – to liquidate our debt after the inflationary scheme.

Even you, in the 1960s, described the paper system as a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.

And, in many ways, I think this is exactly what has happened. We have learned to adapt to deficit financing. But in many ways, the total debt is not that bad because it goes down in real terms.

As bad as it is, in real terms, it’s not nearly as high.

But, since we went on a total paper standard in 1971, we have increased our money supply essentially 12-fold. Debt in this country, federal debt, has gone up 19-fold – but that is in nominal dollars, not in real dollars.

So my question is this: Is it not true that the paper system that we work with today is actually a scheme to default on our debt? And is it not true that, for this reason, that’s a good argument for people not – eventually, at some day – wanting to buy Treasury bills because they will be paid back with cheaper dollars?

And, indeed, in our lifetime, we certainly experienced this in the late 1970s – that interest rates had to go up pretty high and that this paper system serves the interests of big government and deficit financing because it’s a sneaky way of paying for it.

At the same time, it hurts the people who are retired and put their money in savings.

And aligned with this question, I would like to ask something to dealing exactly with gold, is that: If paper money – today it seems to be working rather well – but if the paper system doesn’t work, when will the time come? What will the signs be that we should reconsider gold?

Even in 1981, when you came before the Gold Commission, people were frightened about what was happening – and that’s not too many years ago. And you testified that it might not be a bad idea to back our government bonds with gold in order to bring down interest rates.

So what are the conditions that might exist for the central bankers of the world to reconsider gold?

We do know that they haven’t given up on gold. They haven’t gotten rid of their gold. They’re holding it there for some reason.

So what’s the purpose of the gold if it isn’t with the idea that some day they might need it? They don’t hold lead or pork bellies. They hold gold.

So what are the conditions that you might anticipate when the world may reconsider gold?

MR. GREENSPAN: Well, you say central banks own gold – or monetary authorities own gold. The United States is a large gold holder. And you have to ask yourself: Why do we hold gold?

And the answer is essentially, implicitly, the one that you’ve raised – namely that, over the generations, when fiat monies arose and, indeed, created the type of problems – which I think you correctly identify – of the 1970s, although the implication that it was some scheme or conspiracy gives it a much more conscious focus than actually, as I recall, it was occurring. It was more inadvertence that created the basic problems.

But as I’ve testified here before to a similar question, central bankers began to realize in the late 1970s how deleterious a factor the inflation was.

And, indeed, since the late ’70s, central bankers generally have behaved as though we were on the gold standard.

And, indeed, the extent of liquidity contraction that has occurred as a consequence of the various different efforts on the part of monetary authorities is a clear indication that we recognize that excessive creation of liquidity creates inflation which, in turn, undermines economic growth.

So that the question is: Would there be any advantage, at this particular stage, in going back to the gold standard?

And the answer is: I don’t think so, because we’re acting as though we were there.

Would it have been a question at least open in 1981, as you put it? And the answer is yes.

Remember, the gold price was $800 an ounce. We were dealing with extraordinary imbalances, interest rates were up sharply, the system looked to be highly unstable – and we needed to do something.

Now, we did something. The United States – Paul Volcker, as you may recall, in 1979 came into office and put a very severe clamp on the expansion of credit, and that led to a long sequence of events here, which we are benefiting from up to this date.

So I think central banking, I believe, has learned the dangers of fiat money, and I think, as a consequence of that, we’ve behaved as though there are, indeed, real reserves underneath the system.

 

His answer is full of double talk, but the answer to owning gold is because of fiat money. Now if the federal reserve and government were still behaving and using their 'pretend' gold standard today, we wouldn't be having this issue and gold wouldn't skyrocket.

 

Greenspan on FOX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then along came Ronald Reagan. Who do we have now? We have his exact opposite. Many believe that Obama and his radical gang of socialists and communists are out to destroy the U.S. so they can assume dictatorial power. The same thing happened during the last Great Depression. People got so scared that they looked to dictators to save them. What they ended up with was a devastating war, and the dictatorships got the worst of it.

Who, the crackheads at Infowars?

 

As far as gold goes, meh. One can make far greater returns in a shorter span of time by investing in pharmaceutical and emerging market stocks. The gold bubble will burst in time, just like every other speculative asset. When you have senior citizens withdrawing their entire savings to buy gold bullions because they heard on the radio that the dollar would be worthless is about the time the gold market will crash.

Edited by mustang84isu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who, the crackheads at Infowars?

 

As far as gold goes, meh. One can make far greater returns in a shorter span of time by investing in pharmaceutical and emerging market stocks. The gold bubble will burst in time, just like every other speculative asset. When you have senior citizens withdrawing their entire savings to buy gold bullions because they heard on the radio that the dollar would be worthless is about the time the gold market will crash.

 

But this guy told me to do it! How can you not listen to a guy like that?

 

0000034395_20061020195256.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who, the crackheads at Infowars?

 

As far as gold goes, meh. One can make far greater returns in a shorter span of time by investing in pharmaceutical and emerging market stocks. The gold bubble will burst in time, just like every other speculative asset. When you have senior citizens withdrawing their entire savings to buy gold bullions because they heard on the radio that the dollar would be worthless is about the time the gold market will crash.

 

 

Maybe this time the dollar will burst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then again, maybe it won't.

Dollar loses reserve status to yen & euro

Ben Bernanke's dollar crisis went into a wider mode yesterday as the greenback was shockingly upstaged by the euro and yen, both of which can lay claim to the world title as the currency favored by central banks as their reserve currency.

Over the last three months, banks put 63 percent of their new cash into euros and yen -- not the greenbacks -- a nearly complete reversal of the dollar's onetime dominance for reserves, according to Barclays Capital. The dollar's share of new cash in the central banks was down to 37 percent -- compared with two-thirds a decade ago.

 

 

 

Fed boss Ben Bernanke may be forced to raise rates in order to restore faith in the dollar — and help bring the euro and the yen back to earth.

Currently, dollars account for about 62 percent of the currency reserve at central banks -- the lowest on record, said the International Monetary Fund.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...