Page 8 of 25 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131418 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 248

Thread: Gold as a replacement for large cash and bond savings

  1. #71

    Default

    Today has been a good day for converting to many digits to paper gold. This will in turn be converted to physical in hand. While I continue to hold stock, gold is now more than ever a replacement of my bond and cash funds, and I would say today is finally the day I have met the balance of gold I have desired to have since I first realized the value of gold money. Pop the corks!!

    Although it may be hard to see today, for anyone who has been watching the markets over time, it is easy to see why holding to much cash for to long is not very wise -- even if at times you loose value with holding gold. Realize how easy it is to create and distribute the digital dollar, and it becomes something you don't want to keep to much of, nor even support with ownership.
    “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.”Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

  2. #72

    Default

    As above, I have now met my long sought after "balance in gold", however that fiat keeps rolling in. At current gold prices near $1,700, it's even more easy to convert. Every month I also buy some more stock, but gold is my new cash. Any analysis of gold vs fiat dollar should tell everyone keeping large amount of cash (or even bonds) as savings is a mistake.

    But most people are creatures of habit. They buy things at the market with cash, so they keep confidence in it, even if you illustrate to them how they will keep loosing value over time. That's all good, for if everyone acted as us gold bugs do, no doubt they would put even more regulations on gold ownership, if not outright ban.

    5-10% in gold for "insurance" is silly. As per this thread, if you think 50-50 stocks to bonds is good, then make it 50-50 stocks to gold, that is far more rational, hardly extreme as many soft handed digit worshiping boys will tell you.

    Say bye bye bonds, it is a scam. Your choice: be a gold bug or a geek sucker?

    (Note: given the popularity of crypto "currency" -- how does that fit in? I consider it the same as stock, you can make a lot of wealth on it, but it is not like a currency, it is not like stable savings, it's like gambling on volatile stock digits, you can do very well, or bad -- so if 50-50, that cyber stuff is should be included in the 50 stock figure, it's like speculation on stock digits, not a replacement for gold core savings).

    (And what about silver and platinum bullion? I see silver like 50stock/50bond, and platinum 75stock/25bond).
    Last edited by motocat; 03-11-2021 at 02:29 PM.
    “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.”Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

  3. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motocat View Post
    Say bye bye bonds, it is a scam. Your choice: be a gold bug or a geek sucker?
    Or there's the other extreme as proposed by one morning financial show talking head...replace the "standard" investment 60 stock/40 bond balance with "40 bitcoin/crypto" to add risk and make up for the dreadful loss in bond performance many (especially some retirees) have relied. How's THAT for sticking your neck out ! Only for those retirees with the strongest hearts or best medical plans.
    Gold. The only money that matters. The only money that lasts.

  4. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motocat View Post

    ...5-10% in gold for "insurance" is silly. As per this thread, if you think 50-50 stocks to bonds is good, then make it 50-50 stocks to gold, that is far more rational, hardly extreme as many soft handed digit worshiping boys will tell you....
    I don't get why 10% for insurance is "silly". Not everyone have the same confidence in gold as you do. And if their confidence is lower it is reasonable to put less of your assets into gold.

    Then you could argue that their lack of confidence is "silly". But the market is heavily affected by what the masses feel/think. And if you want to keep/preserve your wealth you have to consider what the masses think/feel no matter how stupid it might be. This goes for any asset you hold to sell at some point in the future.

    Placing 10% in gold is a cautious approach. Admitting that the masses might not ever view gold as you, but still holding it because there is a chance they will. In other words, the difference between a 100% gold person and someone who has 10% is their view of how the masses will act in the future. Your confidence implies you think they will catch on. Or that it at least keeps it current popularity. Others are more skeptical.

    I think bitcoin is the opposite of gold. People don't hold a lot of gold because they don't think the popularity will increase. People get bitcoin because they think even more people will go even more crazy in the future. Most people only want money for nothing. They don't care what they are gambling on as long as it pays off. If that means playing a crazy game, they will do so.

  5. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RandomMan06 View Post
    I don't get why 10% for insurance is "silly". Not everyone have the same confidence in gold as you do. And if their confidence is lower it is reasonable to put less of your assets into gold.

    Then you could argue that their lack of confidence is "silly". But the market is heavily affected by what the masses feel/think. And if you want to keep/preserve your wealth you have to consider what the masses think/feel no matter how stupid it might be. This goes for any asset you hold to sell at some point in the future.

    Placing 10% in gold is a cautious approach. Admitting that the masses might not ever view gold as you, but still holding it because there is a chance they will. In other words, the difference between a 100% gold person and someone who has 10% is their view of how the masses will act in the future. Your confidence implies you think they will catch on. Or that it at least keeps it current popularity. Others are more skeptical.

    I think bitcoin is the opposite of gold. People don't hold a lot of gold because they don't think the popularity will increase. People get bitcoin because they think even more people will go even more crazy in the future. Most people only want money for nothing. They don't care what they are gambling on as long as it pays off. If that means playing a crazy game, they will do so.
    Right on.

    Case in point are digital assets and NFTs (Non-Fungible-Token). There are people paying millions for things I consider worthless. This next generation doesn't want to have stamps and coins, they live in a digital world. Crazy as beany babies...but if you swim against the tide, you will get swept out to sea.

    The most famous use case for NFTs is that of cryptokitties. Launched in November 2017, cryptokitties are digital representations of cats with unique identifications on Ethereum’s blockchain. Each kitty is unique and has a price in ether. They reproduce among themselves and produce new offspring, which have different attributes and valuations as compared to their parents. Within a few short weeks of being launched, cryptokitties racked up a fan base that spent $20 million worth of ether purchasing, feeding, and nurturing them. Some enthusiasts even spent upwards of $100,000 on the effort.

    Now we have artwork going for millions. The first virtual Non-Fungible Token (NFT) artwork to be sold at a major auction house closed at $69,346,250 during an online auction by Christie's on Thursday 3/11/21. The record-breaking sale of "Everydays: The First 5000 Days" catapults the creator, Mike Winkelmann, who goes by Beeple, near the summit of the most expensive living artists to date, placing him just below David Hockney and Jeff Koons. Hockney's painting "Portrait of an Artist (Pool with Two Figures)" sold for $90.3 million in 2018, while Koons' stainless steel sculpture "Rabbit" topped the list at $91.1 million in 2019.

    My personal opinion is that none of those "art" piece are worth spit. But, I am obviously wrong. The bottom line is that something is worth whatever the last poor soul pays for it.

  6. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RandomMan06 View Post
    I don't get why 10% for insurance is "silly". Not everyone have the same confidence in gold as you do. And if their confidence is lower it is reasonable to put less of your assets into gold.

    Then you could argue that their lack of confidence is "silly". But the market is heavily affected by what the masses feel/think. And if you want to keep/preserve your wealth you have to consider what the masses think/feel no matter how stupid it might be. This goes for any asset you hold to sell at some point in the future.

    Placing 10% in gold is a cautious approach. Admitting that the masses might not ever view gold as you, but still holding it because there is a chance they will. In other words, the difference between a 100% gold person and someone who has 10% is their view of how the masses will act in the future. Your confidence implies you think they will catch on. Or that it at least keeps it current popularity. Others are more skeptical.

    I think bitcoin is the opposite of gold. People don't hold a lot of gold because they don't think the popularity will increase. People get bitcoin because they think even more people will go even more crazy in the future. Most people only want money for nothing. They don't care what they are gambling on as long as it pays off. If that means playing a crazy game, they will do so.
    Nowhere do I say I'm "100%" gold -- rather only that it is smart to replace large long term cash and bond savings with gold. For example, along the lines of your stock/bond split should be 100-age, if you are 40 years old, it should then be 60/40 or 60%stocks/40%gold -- no more bonds. (Though I do think 5% local currency can also be good). I agree that the masses do effect value. However, the simple facts are that gold has done far better than bonds or cash in holding value over time - so no matter masses aided in that or not, that is the fact, a fact that make it rather "silly" to hold cash/bonds over long periods as part of your financial portfolio when there is stable alternative that has done better, and is discrete to boot.

    Note: on bitcoin, despite what the financial news may have led you to believe, FAR more people own and know gold than bitcoin. This is not to say not to get bitcoin to grow your digits -- it's actually like a hot stock you can make a lot on, however it is not a substitute for gold, anymore than Tesla stock is a substitute for cash savings. So do get that bitcoin or even "cryptokitties" in hopes of multiplying your digits, just know what it is (i.e.: not a PM coin or currency, but digits that can go crazy, like a special stock)
    Last edited by motocat; 03-12-2021 at 01:34 PM.
    “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.”Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

  7. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motocat View Post
    Nowhere do I say I'm "100%" gold -- rather only that it is smart to replace large long term cash and bond savings with gold. For example, along the lines of your stock/bond split should be 100-age, if you are 40 years old, it should then be 60/40 or 60%stocks/40%gold -- no more bonds. (Though I do think 5% local currency can also be good). I agree that the masses do effect value. However, the simple facts are that gold has done far better than bonds or cash in holding value over time - so no matter masses aided in that or not, that is the fact, a fact that make it rather "silly" to hold cash/bonds over long periods as part of your financial portfolio when there is stable alternative that has done better, and is discrete to boot.

    Note: on bitcoin, despite what the financial news may have led you to believe, FAR more people own and know gold than bitcoin. This is not to say not to get bitcoin to grow your digits -- it's actually like a hot stock you can make a lot on, however it is not a substitute for gold, anymore than Tesla stock is a substitute for cash savings. So do get that bitcoin or even "cryptokitties" in hopes of multiplying your digits, just know what it is (i.e.: not a PM coin or currency, but digits that can go crazy, like a special stock)
    Nowhere did i say you said you were "100% gold". And you did not say i said you said it. But why open with this sentence implying that i did?

    I argued against your claim that 10% as insurance is silly. This is not a quote either, but it is pretty close to what you wrote. Then i put the 10% (which i claim you imply is too little) up against the extreme of 100%. If i had written 50% the point would still be the same.

    Secondly i was talking about the percentage of cash/bonds-savings-value placed in gold, which i do get the impression that you think should be at least close to 100%. I.e 100% gold, no cash/bonds in addition to whatever stocks you have.

    No matter what numbers you use, my point is still the same. Perhaps not a good point, but that is up to each and everyone to judge.

    As for BTC we seem to agree more or less.

  8. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RandomMan06 View Post
    Nowhere did i say you said you were "100% gold". And you did not say i said you said it. But why open with this sentence implying that i did?

    I argued against your claim that 10% as insurance is silly. This is not a quote either, but it is pretty close to what you wrote. Then i put the 10% (which i claim you imply is too little) up against the extreme of 100%. If i had written 50% the point would still be the same.

    Secondly i was talking about the percentage of cash/bonds-savings-value placed in gold, which i do get the impression that you think should be at least close to 100%. I.e 100% gold, no cash/bonds in addition to whatever stocks you have.

    No matter what numbers you use, my point is still the same. Perhaps not a good point, but that is up to each and everyone to judge.

    As for BTC we seem to agree more or less.
    Quote: "the difference between a 100% gold person and someone who has 10% is their view of how the masses will act in the future."

    That seems to imply I'm a 100% gold person, which I would never be as I understand the importance of diversity in assets. I often hear the "10%" gold thing from the standard financial advisors who always recommend a stock/bond blend, depending on risk tolerance, age, etc. And that's from advisors considered "pro gold", while many will repeat gold is a bad idea, period.

    I say these standard financial advisors are just like parrots who repeat the same thing. They have not done their research, been students of monetary history, studied charts, nor do I think most know even how those dollar digits are created and will be even more so in the future. I've come to this opinion based on discussions with such professionals. They are considered "experts" who are worth paying for their knowledge, yet they just repeat the same old advice, offer little real understanding of current monetary policy.

    This thread was made to recommend throwing out that standard financial advice. Say no to large long term bond and cash holdings. It's a mistake, based on decades old practices, something any well learned financial advisor should now throw out. Thing is, they are orthodox in their views, slow to change, and poor students of history. Bad advice leads to bad financial practices, wealth is lost. The myth that you can get the best advice from well paid professionals is false. You can get better advice from anonymous forum posters who do it for free, and have even based their timing on "cat tales". That is the state of the financial world, some like to think it is more sane, and pay good amounts to keep that belief. I'm here to lead another way, away from banker servitude, to a better preservation of your wealth, and it's all free. Or talk to so many other kitco gold bugs, or even those who work for kitco. If you want to be a sucker to help the masses keep confidence in the bankers fiat dollar, keep those bonds, CDs, cash. Just don't get mad at us gold savers because we have done so much better than those bond/cash worshipers over the years, not everyone want's to be part of the welfare to tricksters scheme, some of us just want to preserve our wealth, we have more important things to be concerned with than keeping cats fat.

    (Note: my recommendation for long term savings in gold vs bonds or cash is not to say hold no bond/cash based digits for more short term plays or currency for possible near future expenses. I still hold such myself as part of my trading style and for expenses -- however I don't consider those funds as part of my long term core savings, and it's not like many pay in gold, while that "dry powder" keeps on piling up, or shall we say digits in a bankers ledger keep on adding up -- cheap little fraudulent things, now literally "a dime a dozen"; while I prefer quality money that lasts, money my noble forefathers also valued, a preference not just based on respecting tradition, but based on what can now be observed, and how "the masses" act, what they demand -- free digits you know.
    Last edited by motocat; 03-12-2021 at 07:03 PM.
    “Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.”Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

  9. #79

    Default

    I guess i would be a 50% 50% person. 50% in pm, 50% in an income positive, recession and shtf proof business.

  10. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motocat View Post
    Quote: "the difference between a 100% gold person and someone who has 10%"

    That seems to imply I'm a 100% gold person, which I would never be as I understand the importance of diversity in assets.

    ...

    I wrote "a 100% gold person". I'm making a point discussing the scale from 0% to 100%. You clearly meant people going for 5-10% were "silly" whatever we are talking percentages of so you are obviously advocating a way higher percentage than that. And this stems IMO from your confidence in gold. Exactly where you are on this scale is of no major importance.

    My point was the consideration people make before allocating their savings and why a lot of people end up in the lower end of the scale for gold.
    Last edited by RandomMan06; 03-12-2021 at 07:11 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •