This guy doesn't like precious metals.

I think it is exactly as you say...they are in the business of PM so they know about buying and selling metals which isn't that difficult anyway. Buy low sell high is pretty much how it goes. Its like the liberty dollar failure. These were men who were just in the business of buying and selling gold coins they had minted up then they wrap the whole business in a coat of anti-currency rhetoric and scare tactics about the economy and how gold will somehow save you from losing money...all the while they are taking your currency + a little profit to provide that great patriotic service. They were just selling metal and had a shtick to make them sound like they are somehow doing you a service by selling you that metal the same as any other PM dealer, above market price...and buying below. Not to say that selling PM is a bad thing...its when they use scare tactics and false information to make people think they NEED to buy gold because of impending economic disaster is when it becomes shady. The real crime when it comes to the liberty dollar is not that they were minting a competing currency to the US (because that was already turning out to be a failure) It was their slimy tactics to make themselves out to be patriots doing you a great service...

I will tell you who the real experts are when it comes to PM, a metallurgist or a chemist...otherwise...buy low, sell high, and if you are buying the actual metal itself...maybe make it long term.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Many precious metal addicts such as yourself believe they have found the perfect investment. It seems whenever someone posts an article discussing the pitfalls of silver and gold some die hard fanatic such as yourself is quick to label them as crazy and a propaganda writer working for the "man" to keep silver away from the common folk. Argue all you want but at the end of the day any common index fund has outperformed precious metals for all of American history outside of the last ten years.

Stack Away....

 

Through Youtube and what seems like a few people on Cointalk (not pointing fingers) a handfull of people just outright dislike investing in gold & silver and want nothing to do with it. I agree that precious metals are volitile, they do all sorts of crazy things that make people bad mouth them, but on a personal level they have always been good to my family. Whether it was my grandparents hoarding back in the 60's or my dad puchasing a lot of it in the late 80's or my grandpa's inheritance from his father, precious metals have been good to us. Yes I know most of it may be luck that we made it out so well, either way I inherited a considerable sum of the shiny stuff and due to this I will only continue to stack as long as my wallet can afford it.

 

Thats the best way to invest in PM anyway...long term...even better...inherit it...then you didn't have to buy it at a loss.

 

Well, considering I am probably one of those not getting a finger pointed to, I will respond.

I love silver, always have, and have bought silver coins since I was 7. I like gold, don't have a problem with it, just don't quite have the same emotional attachment to it as silver. Financially, I like PM as well. I was an "idiot" telling people to invest 10% of their assets in PM during the 90's, while buying up $4 silver as much as I could afford.

I sound like a bear here because I simply feel some people reading some posts, (not pointing fingers either), might get the idea its a good idea to stick ALL of your money in PM. I simply believe its not. As much as I love silver, I only put a portion of my assets in it. That is because I simply believe its a great contra asset, but has too much volatility as a sole asset. I need to be SURE I can get access to money when I need it. Because of the volatility of pricing, I cannot rely on this. So, I spread my investments around, using PM as an important component of my investments, but not the SOLE investment.

I know this is a PM section, but I simply believe some are TOO optimistic about PM performance. Like it or not, especially after a 12 year bull run, there is a DISTINCT chance PM could lose 50% in a couple of years, or it could be flat, or up significantly. I don't know, but neither does anyone else, but reading a lot of posts here it sure sounds like they know for a fact.

Anyway, that is why I sit here, a 35+ year investor in silver through thick and thin, and sound like a raging PM bear. Its a matter of DEGREE.

 

I agree with you on the terms that people are TOO optimistic in PM's but some people like I mentioned are TOO pessimistic towards it. My opinion is biased anyway since the situation with my inheritance and my family history with PM's. I will say that by no means do I put all my money into PM's. Any wise investor knows that would be foolish. I was tought to diversify my assets so I have bought and sold stocks since about a year and a half ago and stick the remainder of the green into my savings.

 

I tend to take any article with too much bias one way or the other and lower its "believability index" a few notches. To me anyone who lists only one side of the equation, either for or against, no matter their supposed credentials or educational background is not telling the whole story for a specific purpose to their advantage. This is not to say that any article by any writer may have valid points that one can extract and build their strategies on, but it's never a good idea to wholesale believe anything, from either side.

I tend to agree with the article's general statement against PM's as an investment in the traditional sense, as I do believe that all things equal, stocks will outperform PM's in general paper gains. However, I do not agree with leaving out other points such as PM's as a general stable hedge against loss of purchasing power, which I personally believe to be the best placement for PM's in a portfolio in the current day. I personally believe that PM's will outperform bonds, CD's and the like with the current yields not keeping pace with inflation over the long term, and provide me with a viable safer alternative to "cash under the mattress" so to speak. However, currently for growth of capital I leave it to the stock market to make sure my current paper makes more paper.

It's a bonus that I find gold and silver coinage to be extremely eye-catching and thus it gives me an incentive to keep adding more...

 

Gold may not have much worth from the standpoint that it doesn't do anything. Warren Buffet often likes to point this out. This is fine, since it simply reinforces that gold is strictly a monetary metal. This makes it one of the easiest things to invest or not invest in based simply on monetary policy. Monetary policy clearly dictates that gold is a good investment right now in spite of it's relative lack of usefulness.

Gold is not only a commodity, it is also an element. To classify gold as only a commodity is short sighted, as it differs from other non-metal commodities in that it cannot be reproduced. Because it is in finite supply it should not be treated with the same logic as other commodities which are reproduceable.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, however the reality of our monetary situation being perceived as a scare tactic is not anyone's fault except for those who are devaluing the currency at a record pace. If it's scary, well it is what it is. Buying gold won't fix any of the problems, but it will ensure you don't get robbed by inflation or counter party risk or default. Gold is not an ideal currency, but it is ideal for money. One of the rules for the definition of money is that it is a store of wealth. Paper currency does not fulfill that requirement, so anyone who doesn't like losing their buying power to inflation will need to hold commodities, stocks, or hard assets.

Gold and silver happen to be in that realm without also having counter party risk, something anyone who is concerned about the fairness and stability of our markets should appreciate, and something that commodities and stocks cannot provide. Sure people can save a few bucks playing the ETFs, but the counter party risk involved defeats the purpose of investing in PMs unless one is only concerned with paper profits. One of the primary benefits of investing in PMs is protection from just that, for the buy and hold crowd. If someone wants to flip metals like houses then ETFs will save them a lot on the spread, but that's how you end up getting burned.

It's odd that you have pointed out that the monetary system is the sum of the value of a nation's worth, yet do not acknowledge that gold is an aspect of that worth. Gold is where the surplus value goes when a nation no longer has any need for any goods or services in particular, for those that produce more than they spend.

It may very well be a disaster going back to a gold standard, since the currency has been so devalued, but the fault would not be on the gold standard which would simply enforce rules in a system that survives by breaking them, and a system which will lead itself into disaster eventually regardless because it requires free market capitalism to cease to function.



So it's unfair to put the blame on a gold standard even if that would hasten the outcome. Once that happens, one way or another, a gold standard will likely emerge out of necessity since nations will still need a way to measure the value of their trades when faith in paper is eventually lost. This could take a few years, which is a good thing for those of us who still want to buy gold at undervalued prices.

 

I have been around in circles on this forum for a while now trying to convince people to stop bothering with the messenger and to just examine the information they are providing. Note this is exactly what I did in my post on the previous page. It means zilch what the credentials are on either side, and any attempt to steer the direction of the conversation to the character of the author is a blatant diversion tactic.

 

Unfortunately there are those who get paid to downplay PM's because they threaten the current paradigm's dominance derived from their ability to rob the people through the hidden tax of inflation. Whether or not you fall into this category I have no actual idea, but it gives me pause that you claim to like silver yet are constantly trying to support arguments for not owning it or going after the character of those who write articles supporting ownership, then backtracking and saying you like it and own it. Considering you rub elbows with the CME I have no choice but to view your posts in such light. It's not something I want to do, but my sense won't let me do otherwise. If you want to convince me you aren't a bear you'll have to try a lot harder than saying it ain't so.

 

Within a certain pricing matrix, I assure you ALL PM is "reproducible". There is what, like 5 ounces per person on earth of gold just dissolved in ocean water? People who say prices have nothing to do with availability should look at ever increasing production of silver. It just keeps going up, and higher prices would drive that further.

So, if technologically we are no where near the limits of recoverable PM, and technology is increasing this boundary all of the time, then "physical exhaustion" is not really a concern for pricing discussions.

That is why I agree with Drusus' analysis.

Btw Drusus, I have a book that goes over pretty well the beginning of the notion of gold as a monetary metal. From that book, they explain gold was pretty and used by the clergy for crowd effect in ancient mesopatamia. Once the clergy started to demand it, the aristocracy found it fashionable to wear it as well. This was the real beginning to the notion that gold was "valuable" at all, basically a early form of religious performance art. After that, because of clergy and aristocratic demand, the mesopotamians "taught" others that gold is valuable, and this continued on until the "whole world", (Europe and near east in ancient parlance), all believed gold was valuable.

 

I'm not sure what your definition of reproduceable is, but only an exploding star can create new elements of gold and silver. Corn on the other hand can be planted in the ground. We may be able to recoup or derive metal from other existing sources, but that is not the same as producing it.

 

In my position professionally, I use the CME to hedge commodities. Therefor, I simply have some hands on knowledge of similar markets, (something almost no one else here has). Don't you think its pretty darn silly to be throwing stones, or listening to those throwing stones at a market they have ZERO information about? Who would you trust about a cut of meat, a geologist or a veterinarian? A geologist can have an OPINION, but maybe you should ask a vet and have him shed a little more educated light on the subject?

Have I EVER said PM is a bad asset to own as part of a portfolio? Have I EVER supported anyone who said all PM should be avoided?

I own about 1000 ounces of bullion silver, and maybe 10 ounces of gold. Maybe there is another 500 ounces of coins I keep as coins I may sell for melt if prices ever got crazy. This is my baseline PM investment. I haven't had to add much to it since its gone up with the rest of my portfolio. I have around 10% in PM, which is about where I wish to be. Would I be mad if PM went higher and it became 20%? Not really. If it went down enough that it was only 5%, I would probably be a strong buyer again and buy enough to get me back to 10% at least.

Now, having said that, do I think people are actively out writing articles to "steal people's money through inflation"? No, I think such thoughts are pretty silly. I see no large government conspiracy to stop anyone from owning PM. If there were, it would be the only large conspiracy in history not involving a war to be kept secret, and btw its a pretty crappy conspiracy looking at the last 12 year's price moves.

PM is a great contra asset, its pretty, and I like owning it. That's about the end of it for me. And yes, I will continue to post against conspiracy theories, government manipulation, and errors in market activities that are written here on CT. I simply think believing in such things clouds a person's judgment to what IS really a good investment alternative, IN MODERATION.

Other than that, I am not too concerned about convincing anyone here of anything. If you don't believe me, think I am some sort of "government plant here to steal from you", well its a free country.

 

You have a pile of dirt, you spend some money, and voila, silver. Want more silver? Spend more money. The silver and gold are there for the taking, just depends on how much money will be spent to gather it.

 

So your a stock fanatic I take it?

Most people can't put together a portfolio that gains over 500% in 10 years while the DJIA essentially treads water.

Good for you, can you post some of your most awesome picks so we can track them over the next 10 years? Or are you just one of them talkers?

 

And where is your fantastical returns for the 20 years before that?

That's the rub, ain't it? MAYBE PM will take off in the 2000's, but if you bought in 84 and need to sell in 99, doesn't do you a lick of good, now does it?

Fred13 was taking a long term average, you are trying to pick and choose the most advantageous timeframe in HISTORY to prove your point. Who's point do you think it strongest?

 

I am not a stock fanatic. I am a person who understands things as they are in an open minded manner.

I think you justify my point exactly.
I state a reason for not owning pm and I get called a stock addict.

 

Don't bother,
These people will never understand common sense and logic. They lack a common understanding of financial markets and as such flock to owning pm for the majority of their wealth. As an investor my motto has always been prior to investing to prove myself wrong. One should look for reasons for not investing in a specific subject and then make a decision based on looking at an issue from all aspects. These people do the opposite
As you stated earlier, I also like silver; love it in fact along with all other precious metals however at the end of the day it is one of the if not the most poorest performing asset class

 

Delete some people are not worth it.

 

Delete some people are not worth it.