I think some gold totally makes sense as an inflation hedge and if you’re into the commodities trade you can obviously make money off of playing any commodity market.
I just think it’s silly people expect gold to be able to help you much in a post apocalypse. That’s the only part of this I really think is ludicrous.
In case you haven’t noticed, people will kill over nothing at all, just for the thrill.
No, I live in Antioch, in NorCal.
The point is that when the economy collapses, living in a community of civic minded people is worth far more than a sackful of gold coins because you can’t trade your gold for anything if the person with the goods you want is willing to kill you instead of trade.
Civilization is people cooperating together to produce things that they cannot produce alone?
And so the miserable anti-social assholes with guns won’t last long unless they join a group. It’s the social assholes with guns who will do OK. The notion that civilization will collapse and it will be every person for themselves is completely, utterly, and in all other ways wrongheaded. Everyone and their brother can see that when times get tough teamwork and community is what will enable people to survive, not the willingness to shoot your former friends and neighbors in the face.
I agree. A violent every-person-for-themselves shoot em up jungle with no order, no government, is pure science fiction.
Of course, gold will still rule, and those who have the gold, will make the rules.
What form of payment are you using?
Gold represents power, and is not a vehicle to power itself. Since gold requires power to acquire a meaningful amount, you can’t have lots of gold without already having some level of power.
On the large scale, when you’re talking about the amount of gold a Roman Emperor or Egyptian Pharaoh had, it requires vast power to acquire such gold.
Since throughout history there have only been a few times ever when people could acquire a meaningful amount of gold while not having much power, there isn’t much we can generalize about such situations.
When the small middle class of merchants and traders started to become powerful it was not because they had gold. It was instead because they were useful, if all they brought to the table was gold, the nobility would have just taken it from them (and early on you do see nobles and kings abusing the middle class, taking loans from them and then refusing to pay them back in a society in which the merchants had no recourse.) No, the merchants facilitated trade of goods and services, which allowed nobles to move the produce of their lands far and wide and enriched the nobles more than they otherwise would have been. They also allowed the nobles to experience expensive luxuries from the near and far east that they otherwise would not have had. Merchants acquired gold of course, but their ability to do so and their ability to grow wealthy was based on the fact that they were doing something useful and thus the nobles were willing to allow them rights and from rights grow power and influence.
Your hypothesis that it is gold that has determined who is powerful throughout history is essentially as wrong as anything has ever been. It’s exactly the opposite, gold ownership is a reflection of how powerful someone is.
And incidentally, said nobles were powerful not because they had a lot of gold, but because they had a lot of land.
Originally Posted by Susanann
I agree. A violent every-person-for-themselves shoot em up jungle with no order, no government, is pure science fiction.
Of course, gold will still rule, and those who have the gold, will make the rules.
I wont argue that in the olden days long long ago that the nobility and kings ruled and had gold. You are really getting off topic, nobody cares if hundreds or thousands of years ago why the Pharaoh or the kings or the Romans had power. It is not relevant. Not relevant at all to today, not relevant to our future, not relevant to this topic. We don’t have nobles anymore, and we don’t want nobles anymore.
This is the 21st century. Things have changed. What matters today, and what matters in our future, is how can everyday people protect their wealth before all the western currencies become worthless.
In today’s world nobody cares if you are, or were, “nobility” or whatever, nobody cares what color you are. In today’s world, in the future world after the Euro and the US dollar collapses, what matters most is post currency collapse, how rich you are, how much real money you have, how much gold and silver and land you have, and the richest people, the people with the gold, the land, the people with real money, will get and do anything they want.
.
You stated it in your own question: the reason to be bearish is because gold and silver are at their all-time highs.
Buy low, sell high. You’re buying high. DCA won’t save you when you buy at the top of the market.
Oh, and I wouldn’t buy Apple either, not at a P/E nearing 20. But that’s just me - I much prefer to buy something a little more reasonably valued.
nm…
Originally Posted by MrFloppy
Well, sure it was but as susanann states, I will be dollar cost averaging over the next few years. I understand Gold and Silver are currently at all time highs but what are your reasons to be bearish?
“Several times every year a weighty and serious investor looks long and with profound respect at Coca-Cola’s (KO) record, but comes regretfully to the conclusion that he is looking too late. The specters of saturation and competition rise before him.”
Fortune Magazine, 1938
Yes, but an actual company like Coca-Cola can expand its business and grow, so that its inherent value can grow over time. Unlike something like gold. (And BTW, didn’t you previously tell us that investing in stocks was a bad idea because all companies inevitably fail? So now you think that stocks are a good idea?)
And actually, in retrospect, 1938 was a great time to buy Coca-Cola because the company followed American troops into Europe and Asia during WWII and so established itself overseas, to a much greater extent than Pepsi.
Are you serious? Or is this a whoosh? I have never had a show an I.D. to buy gold or silver coins and I buy a lot (cultural thing, not a paranoid conservative thing).
Gold doesn’t equal power. Land doesn’t equal power. Being able to enforce your will on others is what equals power. Typically that meant having armed men who carried out your directives either out of loyalty or self-interest or both. Agreements or wars with the other “strong men” in the area resulted in the formation of the ruling class. These men are now in a position to decide who owns what land and to start worrying about things like accumulating gold.
Simply sitting on a mountain of gold and guns doesn’t make you anything but a target for the local strong man.
Your response makes no sense in the context of the discussion.
No.
I did not say that.
You are the only one who said that.
.
Hold on to your hat, because I got some BIG news for you:
Donald Trump, George Soros, and** Bill Gates** have more power than any classroom strong arm bully. In today’s world, it is wealth that makes power.
Sorry. I exaggerated. See below. In particular, “I would “guess”, that 99% of all common stock issued in the past 200 years is totally worthless, but that is just a guess. Most people who bought stock since 1929, in all common stock ever issued since then , saw “most” of their investments go to zero.”