| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 3,192 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3294 Posts |
Gold is not a zero risk asset, there is no such thing as a zero risk asset since someone could rob you, or a natural disaster could bury your gold under a mudslide or something along those lines. The good news is that with gold, you can control a larger portion of the risk because you can choose where to store it, whether to insure it etc, whereas with paper money, you have no say over how much the government devalues it by printing more $$$.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5855 Posts |
Quote:
Wonder how much they would lose if they sold all that gold today, at 1575 spot price? If my memory serves me right, I think gold was around $1400 back in April of 2011, so I don't think they would lose anything. Of course, now they're probably kicking themselves for not selling when it it got close to $2000. Unless, of course, they actually did sell when it got close to $2000... |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1126 Posts |
Quote:
Gold is not a zero risk asset, there is no such thing as a zero risk asset Nod, You know that, I know that, Heck I would bet everyone on this forum knows that. The "Zero Risk Asset" Classification is only applicable in the make believe world of the Federal Reserve and The Treasury and other such "Honorable Institutions"  But since they are the ones dreaming up these schemes where the current circulating currency is concerned. I believe it is prudent to keep as close an eye on their moves on the game board. It gives one an indication on what direction they are going |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3670 Posts |
Good call Barry as for some reason I was thinking gold was more like 1700 to 1800 when they bought in. Buying in the 1400's was a good plan for them in the long term no doubt, minus that mudslide or some other crazy occurrences as nothing as we all mentioned has zero risk.....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
The part about considering gold "as safe as sovereign debt" really floored me. Sovereign debt? Holy cow! How safe and secure was that for the Wiemar Republic, Zimbabwe, the USSR, Argentina, Mexico, Yugoslavia, or all the other countries that either defaulted on their debts or did the next best thing by devaluing their currency? Probably not very. Anyone here wanna buy some Greek, Italian, Spanish, Irish, or Portuguese sovereign debt with their PMs? Gold is WAY more safe and secure an investment than any sovereign debt Ponzi scheme backed by nothing but the promises of politicians, IMHO.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
808 Posts |
 Regardless of what happens, gold will always be worth something. You can't really say that about anyone's sovereign debt. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1126 Posts |
Absolutely With Ed_B and CoinWatch Edited by stewart
06/27/2012 8:59 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
As to the University of Texas and what they know... they probably know quite a bit. For one thing, I'm sure that they did a portfolio analysis and found just how over-weight they were in paper assets. They probably also noticed that most of the world's central banks have been buying gold in multi-ton quantities lately. Central banks tend to be populated with some very smart people who can read the handwriting on the wall. The question that they are likely to have examined is not IF the fiat currencies will collapse but WHEN. Because of the out of control debt and spending problems of so many governments today, it is likely that they will be forced (kicking and squealing, no doubt) to adopt a PM-backed monetary system at some point. This is the only monetary system that has built-in checks and balances against spending themselves and their un-backed currencies into oblivion. If there ever is a global debt forgiveness program, it is likely that a PM-backed currency will be one of the conditions for it.
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 3,192 |
First Page
Posted 06/27/2012 09:37 am
