The amount of silver is very difficult to pin down and varies according to whom you ask. Sometimes you'll see figures as low as 1/ 2 billion ounces but these numbers don't take into account things like obsolete coinage and museum pieces. The higher figures are probably more re- alistic and are generally in the neighborhood of 2 1/ 2 billion ounces.
Silver was better thought of centuries and millenia ago. But gold plays a role in commerce, is more portable, shinier, prettier, less reactive, etc. than silver. But I would agree that based on what's left that silver is a steal. It is also far more volatile in price. The gold stores have increased approx 2% a year due to mining. If currencies are printed faster than that rate then gold should appreciate proportionately.
That tennis court is 50 ft cubed. So the size of a small but rather tall house.
<< <i>The amount of silver is very difficult to pin down and varies according to whom you ask. Sometimes you'll see figures as low as 1/ 2 billion ounces but these numbers don't take into account things like obsolete coinage and museum pieces. The higher figures are probably more re- alistic and are generally in the neighborhood of 2 1/ 2 billion ounces. >>
<< <i>2006 was a good year for silver. Total annual demand is now approaching one billion ounces. >>
If annual demand is a billion ounces, how the heck can any newsletter writer say the total above ground supply is 1/2 billion ounces and still have a straight face (or any paying subscribers)? SSRI would get in big trouble with the SEC if they posted stuff that was that far removed from reality on their official website.
My ballpark guesstimate would be at least 20x annual demand or 20 billion ounces above ground, perhaps as much as 100x because so much silver is squirreled away in coins, in electronics, in silverware and jewelry. That silver did not get to the smelter in the Hunt days, so it is probably not going to the smelter unless $100 an ounce is reached.
<< <i>2006 was a good year for silver. Total annual demand is now approaching one billion ounces. >>
If annual demand is a billion ounces, how the heck can any newsletter writer say the total above ground supply is 1/2 billion ounces and still have a straight face (or any paying subscribers)? SSRI would get in big trouble with the SEC if they posted stuff that was that far removed from reality on their official website.
My ballpark guesstimate would be at least 20x annual demand or 20 billion ounces above ground, perhaps as much as 100x because so much silver is squirreled away in coins, in electronics, in silverware and jewelry. That silver did not get to the smelter in the Hunt days, so it is probably not going to the smelter unless $100 an ounce is reached. >>
Mining accounts for about 2/3 billion ounces annually and most of the shortfall comes from recycling. About 1/ 10 billion ounces are removed from the total above ground stock to make up the entire shortfall.
This is especially alarming because demand for silver is increasing geometrically and is starting to enter a steep slope. Silver production is primarily a byproduct of base metal mining now days so supply will be barely affected by higher prices.
Equally alarming is that most demand uses very tiny amounts. In a $1000 product containing 2 cents worth of silver there would be no decrease in demand even if silver prices soared many fold.
This situation is not sustainable.
With nickel the price didn't change until it blew up in everyone's face but this is less likely to occur with silver because these markets are more broadly watched.
Of course at current consumption and mining it could be as long as twenty years before there's no silver left. This is going to happen and it will probably happen long before the silver is gone.
indeed..silver around here is still one of the few sure bets out there right now.. were talking perhaps 5 dollars downside if the economy burst with the potential for 40 dollars plus upside.. and the funny thing is that this will actually increase demand for silver as the masses will buy it seeing it as a good value/investment. Only when the masses are buying and it's making the evening news do you know there's a top near.
Only when everyone is bullish is the top in.. we aren't even close to that.
Look, after quoting something as ridiculous as an estimate that 1/2 billion ounces of silver exist, above ground, all sources, very little that is said afterwards can be taken seriously unless reliable secondary sources are cited and linked. Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of silver ore, ten trillion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I could probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the "moon is silver" newsletter to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed.
Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
That says it all right there. Goverment sources are always trusted all there stats are right on even on the ecomony, I just love the CPI numbers. Love those public traded companies like Enron they'd never lie right....how about the SEC? They've alway been on the ball, I just have to laugh
Sorry I respect those like Jim Sinclair and Ted Butler that's been doing this for quite sometime and aren't Johnny come lately's. In fact there content is free...they aren't selling you a bill of goods.
Gold is traditionally weighed in Troy Ounces (31.1035 grammes). With the density of gold at 19.32 g/cm3, a troy ounce of gold would have a volume of 1.61 cm3. A metric tonne (equals 1,000kg = 32,150.72 troy ounces) of gold would therefore have a volume of 51,762 cm3 (i.e. 1.61 x 32,150.72), which would be equivalent to a cube of side 37.27cm (Approx. 1' 3'').
At the end of 2001, it is estimated that all the gold ever mined amounts to about 145,000 tonnes.
<< <i>Look, after quoting something as ridiculous as an estimate that 1/2 billion ounces of silver exist, above ground, all sources, very little that is said afterwards can be taken seriously unless reliable secondary sources are cited and linked. Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of pure silver, ten billion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the moon is silver it to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed. >>
Ted Butler is a well respected analyst.
Total world silver production in the last 40,000 years is well under 50 billion ounces and most of it has been consumed.
Again the low estimates are 1/2 billion and the high ones are 2 1/2. I tend to agree that the real numbers are probably a little higher.
But the point is that no matter what the real number is, it is impossible to use more than is produced forever. Geometrically increasing demand and stagnant production numbers will eventually collide. Already there is almost certainly more gold in the world than silver and the gold exists in massive stockpiles. Silver exists mostly in very small quantities here and there.
80,000,000 more ounces of gold will be added to stockpiles this year and silver reserves will decrease another 90,000,000 ounces.
Your right $260 gold approaching $700 since 1999. Everythign is a lousy investment if you don't understand market rotation. >>
Yeah, how about the 800 per ounce in the early 80's down to 260.....lousy I say! >>
We have so much the Hunt brothers caused this almost single handed huh? Now we have ETF's and a golbal market that good old Unlce Sam can't control by coming down on a couple people. Natural Resources are in the rest are out IMO. China and India with over a billion people each are in the 1880's Industrial age. Let's talk about 1929 I'm sure that will never happen again.
<< <i>Look, after quoting something as ridiculous as an estimate that 1/2 billion ounces of silver exist, above ground, all sources, very little that is said afterwards can be taken seriously unless reliable secondary sources are cited and linked. Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of silver ore, ten trillion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I could probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the "moon is silver" newsletter to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed.
People who overweight gold and silver for investment purposes are full of midas like delusional thinking coupled with paranoia and a take your hands off my stack jack selfish view, Lousy investment I say.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>People who overweight gold and silver for investment purposes are full of midas like delusional thinking coupled with paranoia and a take your hands off my stack jack selfish view, Lousy investment I say. >>
Most Americans didn't have much at all, just like today. If it hadn't been for the silver you could mine by going to your local bank I would have been in the same boat in the late 70's. You can still find a little in the 65-70 halves but those days are gone. Gold and Silver has been fixed in the US and you couldn't own it let's go back before 74 and refigure your calculations. That's just a few years earlier, most people use figures to their advantage and we know all anti-gold silver types will always only consider 1980 without disclosing the cause.
BTW the NASDAQ has done very well since it's peak of over 5000 hasn't it? Stocks must be a lousy investment by your terms, you better run to the DOW that has 30 hand selected BIG stocks out of the millions of companies out there.
There is far more above ground gold than above ground silver--and for most of the past 400 years or so, that's how it's always been, and the trend will continue. That doesn't mean silver is rarer than gold, because it isn't. Quite the contrary--silver is plentiful in comparison to gold. It is because silver is so plentiful that it hasn't traditionally been reclaimed after the manufacturing process. Silver is primarily an industrial metal--it is mined to demand, it is used, and for most industrial uses (like photography, for example), it is "consumed". Gold on the other hand is reclaimed after use in industry, so the world's supply of above ground gold is always increasing, while the world's supply of above ground silver is always fluctuating. Those investing in precious metals for "long term" gains are foolish at best, and it's disheartening to see people make catastrophic investment decisions based on bogus information, only partial facts, or the hype and agenda-driven articles written by the very people who would sell you their entire store of precious metal at current market rates. There are only 3 investment vehicles that have shown consistant gains over the past 100 years: real estate, stocks, and bonds. Everything else should be considered a hedge against inflation or a safety net in recession cycles. Commodities like precious metals and oil are volitile, and as such they are routinely traded (not held for infinity), as they offer no compounding function yet short-term gains can be made with accurate market timing or just trading the spread.
<< <i>There is far more above ground gold than above ground silver--and for most of the past 400 years or so, that's how it's always been, and the trend will continue. That doesn't mean silver is rarer than gold, because it isn't. Quite the contrary--silver is plentiful in comparison to gold. It is because silver is so plentiful that it hasn't traditionally been reclaimed after the manufacturing process. Silver is primarily an industrial metal--it is mined to demand, it is used, and for most industrial uses (like photography, for example), it is "consumed". Gold on the other hand is reclaimed after use in industry, so the world's supply of above ground gold is always increasing, while the world's supply of above ground silver is always fluctuating. Those investing in precious metals for "long term" gains are foolish at best, and it's disheartening to see people make catastrophic investment decisions based on bogus information, only partial facts, or the hype and agenda-driven articles written by the very people who would sell you their entire store of precious metal at current market rates. There are only 3 investment vehicles that have shown consistant gains over the past 100 years: real estate, stocks, and bonds. Everything else should be considered a hedge against inflation or a safety net in recession cycles. Commodities like precious metals and oil are volitile, and as such they are routinely traded (not held for infinity), as they offer no compounding function yet short-term gains can be made with accurate market timing or just trading the spread. >>
This is misleading. The amount of silver above ground has been decreasing pretty steadily for more than half a century. When governments got away from making silver coin they sold their stockpiles onto the market. The last of these stockpiles are gone now.
Silver mining returned only small quantities until the late 1850's when world production soared. This did coincide well with an increase in gold production and some other metals. It was brought about largely by the increasing availability of cheap steel made possible by the industrial revolu- tion and by the bessemer furnace. There were numerous other factors at play as well.
It is true that silver is cheap and doesn't warrant large expenses to reduce its waste but obvious- ly no one intentionally destroys or wastes it in significant quantities. As recently as the mid-'60's it was possible to buy silver foil in the grocery store and no doubt little of this still exists and the lion's share now resides in landfill that has been long forgotten.
I agree that investing in gold for the long term is an error. Gold can make an excellent short term investment preceding periods of high inflation and constitutes a good insurance policy for a small fraction of ones wealth in the longer term. Long term investment in it is usually a losing proposition (like most things).
I don't agree that silver is a poor long term investment (or that only hard money types like it). Silver is a bet on the future. When you buy silver you are betting that the economy does well and continues to consume silver. You are betting thaty scientists continue to find new uses to enrich peoples' lives. You are betting that current trends continue. Yes, you also get a few of the benefits of gold like the insurance aspect but that's not a sufficient reason to buy it.
Mostly you're just betting that we can't indefinitely continue to use more of something than we can produce. There are very few operating silver mines because they simply can't produce at current prices. Some two thirds of silver is a by-product of other mining and in the event of an economic collapse gold production would likely increase while silver production would plummet to a fraction of current levels. Would this be good for silver's price? Probably not, because demand would fall even further and investor demand might lighten as well. Eventually the economy would recover and there would be even more gold in the world in relation to silver.
<< <i>Silver is a lousy bet of any significance ...so is gold. >>
So is the dollar, worth nothing more than the fire you can build with it.......... it's just paper than can be printed in any amount and they are doing it to our doom.
<< <i>People who overweight gold and silver for investment purposes are full of midas like delusional thinking coupled with paranoia and a take your hands off my stack jack selfish view, Lousy investment I say. >>
Most Americans didn't have much at all, just like today. If it hadn't been for the silver you could mine by going to your local bank I would have been in the same boat in the late 70's. You can still find a little in the 65-70 halves but those days are gone. Gold and Silver has been fixed in the US and you couldn't own it let's go back before 74 and refigure your calculations. That's just a few years earlier, most people use figures to their advantage and we know all anti-gold silver types will always only consider 1980 without disclosing the cause.
BTW the NASDAQ has done very well since it's peak of over 5000 hasn't it? Stocks must be a lousy investment by your terms, you better run to the DOW that has 30 hand selected BIG stocks out of the millions of companies out there. >>
I ran to international!
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Yeah, how about the 800 per ounce in the early 80's down to 260.....lousy I say!
It is unfortunate that many people's perception of a market only includes it's previous down cycle (plus what negative spin the opposing camps toss in)...not the current cycle. Of course this is not done with stocks since it took from 1929 to 1954 for the stock market to break even (25 years) following the 1920's boom. And then down from 1966 to 1982 (or even 1987 for some) for the next loss cycle (16-21 yrs). Yet these comparisons are never made. If you were retiring at the start of those down years it must have been a struggle if you were counting on continued stock appreciation. Gold has had a single down cycle this century and is now in it's 2nd upward cycle. Stocks are now at the tail end of a 25 year up cycle.
Those investing in precious metals for "long term" gains are foolish at best, and it's disheartening to see people make catastrophic investment decisions based on bogus information
This is similar to investing in stocks today with slick information based on less than full disclosure by corporate America, not to mention the bogus information released every month/qtr by the BLS. Enron, Fannie, LTCM, Refco are all examples of derivative busts. A much bigger fish is out there waiting to be landed.
Gold and stock funds should probably not be in anyone's long term portfolios with all the financial hijinks going around today. Invest during the up cycles and move on to the next thing. 25 years of an uptrend is more than anyone can hope for.
There are only 3 investment vehicles that have shown consistant gains over the past 100 years: real estate, stocks, and bonds. Everything else should be considered a hedge against inflation or a safety net in recession cycles.
Does that mean that the next 100 years (or 10 yrs) will produce similar results? Does the fact of moving towards a pure fiat currency from 1913 have any bearing on the "last 100 years?" Certainly. Note that we only have 33 years of pure fiat history in the books. There's much more to be played out. Killing commodities in 1980-1982 was fairly easy compared to what has to take place today. Let's not forget that the Dow and gold have essentially identical returns from 1929 to date (the gains from both are mainly due to inflation rather than anything else). The Dow ensures that the top companies stay in the index while also-rans are discarded. Yet gold remains 100% the same. Rather than consistent gains for stocks & bonds over the past 100 yrs, it would be more accurate to say they have consistent cycles. Inflation has a consistent average "gain" of 2-3% per year since 1913 as well.
I can't believe the amount of negativity directed at people who believe in gold/silver as a sound investment!!
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in: a) cash b) stocks and bonds c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive.
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages.
Silver is a highly practical metal, with numerous industrial uses often with no equivalent peer metal. It is a better electrical conductor than gold but reacts (tarnishes) more easily. Most mined and used silver is irrecoverably lost to us, as opposed to gold. It is my understanding that silver is also becoming precipitously more expensive to mine as surface resources having been thinning remarkably. Investing in any metal commodity is speculative of course. But there are a lot of reasons that seem to be coming together that have been discussed. Also a bit of physical availability has been swept under the rug by regulators who have chosen to go down the path with blinders on by continually lowering the margin and delivery requirements for the funds. Should silver move, there could be some issues.
<< <i>I can't believe the amount of negativity directed at people who believe in gold/silver as a sound investment!!
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in: a) cash b) stocks and bonds c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
Hands down for a buy and hold strategy for 40 years would be international stocks.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i> all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
Hands down for a buy and hold strategy for 40 years would be international stocks. >>
International stocks have been dogs compared to the US stocks. You get better gains when you take bigger risk. Go ahead and invest in China, South America or the middle east and see what happens when they nationalize everything. I have about 15 to 20 percent in International stock but they are mainly Euoropean based. Most third world countries are so corupt you'd be wise to deversify and that means some stocks, bonds, cash, and gold/silver and keep on top of it because you can't fall in love with anything their are market phases in all assest classes.
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any. >>
You can't be in love with any stock. Railroad, auto makers, Pullman would all have bit you. Times change and you have to change with the times. If you were in any tech stocks Microsoft, IBM, Cisco etc you can see what the buy and hold got you not that they've pasted their days like pullman and all the companies that wen't belly up over the years but you have to watch out for your best interest and many stock brokers are more interested in selling your stocks and buying new ones to make the all mighty comish.
Buy and hold works fairly well in your 20's or early 30's but stinks once your over 40 and you sure don't want to bet the farm in your 50's or 60's.
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any. >>
You can't be in love with any stock. Railroad, auto makers, Pullman would all have bit you. Times change and you have to change with the times. If you were in any tech stocks Microsoft, IBM, Cisco etc you can see what the buy and hold got you not that they've pasted their days like pullman and all the companies that wen't belly up over the years but you have to watch out for your best interest and many stock brokers are more interested in selling your stocks and buying new ones to make the all mighty comish.
Buy and hold works fairly well in your 20's or early 30's but stinks once your over 40 and you sure don't want to bet the farm in your 50's or 60's. >>
If your advisor does not have your interest at heart get another advisor. There are plenty out there. Divesification is a key to successful investing. Indexes and ETF's provide this with low cost. The biggest threat to successful investing is the indiviual investor themselves. They often yank themselves out of the market due to fear or fail to invest due to fear. Meanwhile the returns continue without the participation of many individual investors. I say it again, gold and silver are lousy long term investments and should not be overweighted in any portfolio.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I will be interested to see in a few years who is eating crow on this subject...
I do agree gold bullion is a lousy "investment" but a good store of value once your money is made. It is like an insurance policy against risky economic times.
Silver may be a great investment but due to the lack of solid information on supply I don't think I am going to convince anyone one way or the other. I personally think it is a good investment and a good store of value at the same time however.
The US stock market is little more than a casino IMO or all your gains are eaten up in inflation. I don't have any confidence in the future of the US economy with the way it is being mismanaged at this time. I believe the dollar is headed lower, maybe a lot lower...
So I put my money in international stocks (90%) and silver (10%). The only reason I do not have more silver as a percent of the total is my 401K only carry stocks and bonds.
Whatever you decide, good luck, I hope you make the right decision!
The regulators have tried many different tricks to derail gold. But there's only so much physical gold held by banks that they can use to force prices down. Just ask the UK who sold over half of their gold at $260/oz. Hedging forward production hasn't worked. Nor has naked short selling.
The regulators have tried many different tricks to derail gold. But there's only so much physical gold held by banks that they can use to force prices down. Just ask the UK who sold over half of their gold at $260/oz. Hedging forward production hasn't worked. Nor has naked short selling.
roadrunner >>
I LOVE these bear market gurus. Do you knw how long they have been on the WRONG side of the trade? More than just the previous year.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>I can't believe the amount of negativity directed at people who believe in gold/silver as a sound investment!!
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in: a) cash b) stocks and bonds c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
I think you're failing to realize a few points, or leaving them out. Yes, our government prints fiat money at will. But this is nothing new. It's been happening since the 1930's. Yes, we experience inflation every year. This is neither something new nor something alarming. In fact, many periods of time inflation has far exceeded today's rates. At 4-5% per year, inflation is under control. Even with inflation, we see rises in salaries which balance out the effect. There isn't anything happening now that wasn't happening 50 years ago--the alarmists like to point out facts of today's economy while leaving out the same facts of yesterday's economy.
Your financial adviser is under 40, but that doesn't mean he hasn't "experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver". I'm under 40 and I've owned it and still own it. You're saying this because you know that between 1980 and 2000, silver and gold were dog investments. And prior to that, shortly after the fixed price was done away with, silver and gold skyrocketed. So you're defining this "good investment" based on what happened during a very specific period of time over 30 years ago. And anyone that isn't old enough to have seen that period of precious metals inflation hasn't experienced the benefits, lol. But we do know the benefits because it's part of history, it's on charts--we know in retrospect what was or would have been a great investment in any given year. But that's all nonsense, because we can say the same thing with the world series results--if only we had bet on the winning team each year, of course that would require fortune telling, and that has no place in a solid investment plan. It's gambling. The best we can do is have a solid strategy and if we know enough about the markets we may be able to time them, but that doesn't mean betting the farm on longshots.
If you believe the secret to investing is to not make money; rather to just not lose it, then you're setting your sights far too low. I don't know anyone but a major defeatest who would have such a plan. Make no mistake--the goal of investing long term is to make money. In economic down years (which cycles like everything else), the short-term goal might be to preserve value, but the long term goal of any investment strategy is to increase net worth in real dollars.
As far as forgetting 5000 years of history, I suggest we do forgot about 4900 years of it. Ancient history does not apply to modern times. Stocks and cash didn't exist 5000 years ago. 5000 years ago, silver was more valuable than gold. The technology of the time was such that people speared boars for food and drug women into caves by the hair. The wheel was a neat trick. Come on, now. The modern economic era, 1920's to present, is what we should focus on when doing research for investment history. We know that inflation exists and is generally a constant. We know inflation increases at an average annual rate of about 5% per year. We know that the stock market increases at an average annual rate of about 10% per year. We know, based on the difference between the two, that the average investor can expect to earn about 5% real growth in their nestegg each year. This is all playing with fiat dollars.
Look at the rate of return for various investments long-term. Start with any year you wish so that we don't exclude the big precious metals boom of the 70's. You will see that even including that stellar decade for PMs, stocks come out the clear winner. You can't argue this fact--really!
Reputable financial planners do not profit from selling you junk, or hurting your net worth. Scumbags do. But there are scumbags in every profession. If I make a commission based on the perfomance of your investments, I have no vested interest in screwing you. Indeed, most of the business in this industry is generated by word of mouth--yet another incentive to ensure you and your investments perform well. Beware of the conspiracy theorists that drone on and on about invisible market makers, ghosts in the financial industry, short selling, and market manipulators--those are buzzwords for SCAM, aka pump and dump schemes. It's a common tactic employed by unscrupulous boiler rooms to scare people into parting with their money in high risk investments, thinking they are rebelling against the "system" or planning for a great economic collapse. The only thing that ever collapses is the net worth of the individual investors that fall for these ploys.
<< <i>I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in: a) cash b) stocks and bonds c) gold/silver >>
This is not appropriate for anyone to decide in this one-sided manner. This is a complete lack of diversification. One should never invest more than 33 1/3% of new monies in each of the above three areas. Cash is good to have for short term favorable investments discovered after the initial investment is made. In essence, only $66,000 should be allocated, 1/2 to stock and bonds, and the other 1/2 split between real estate and gold/silver. In this way, you remain diversified. The cash of $34,000 should be retained for the next round of investing as soon as you regenerate the $34,000 in cash funds.
While I am a believer in the long term growth in the value of silver (really more an indication of the decline in the value of the US dollar), I believe that silver should be held primarily as a store of value and not as an "investment." It is also a store of value in case of emergencies which we have not seen in our collective lifetimes but could happen in case of complete or even partial currency devaluation.
Essentially the "value" of silver is just an indicator of the increasingly noticeable ravishes of inflation. Just as it occurred in the times of the Roman Empire, AD 180 to AD 225, real silver showed great resilience in HOLDING its value relative to the depreciating value of the coins that were once silver and then became more and more debased to the point of being "silver washed" (coated with silver through chemical/electrolyte means). It took a full 45 years before Roman citizens fully realized the debasing of their coinage had gone on too long. Based on this historical precedent, we are in the 41st year since the United States last issued 90% silver coins (which was in early 1966, not in 1964 as most erroneously believe). Our day of reckoning could be quite soon, indeed. But this is subject for another thread.
Even with inflation, we see rises in salaries which balance out the effect. There isn't anything happening now that wasn't happening 50 years ago--the alarmists like to point out facts of today's economy while leaving out the same facts of yesterday's economy.
I don't agree that real wages have kept up on average since the 1970's. It works for execs and most professionals however. But real average wages are down since the 70's and have not kept up. The have vs the have nots.
The playground we currently have with the huge scope of derivatives was TOTALLY absent from the financial market of even 10-20 years ago, let alone 50 yrs ago. The increase in derivatives from a few trillion to hundreds of trillions is a 1990's and later phenomena. How will a weakness or failure in this area affects the entire economy is anyone's guess. Fannie, Refco, Enron, LTCM are just small scale examples of the early returns coming in.
Curing the economy of inflation in 1979-1982 worked with massive interest rates. That game is not available to the FED this time around. Our economy is much different in orientation than in 1980. One could say there are many differences. M3 is now 13X the size of what it was in 1982. Yet we've seen nothing like a 13X in the overall cost of living. That is because our inflation has been exported. When those dollars come back what happens? When Asian goods are not cheap and plentiful like they are now what will happen? For now China is helping to float the US Economy much like we did to help out Great Britain in the later 1920's when they did not want to raise interest rates (so we printed money to help out...that game ended badly). Seems like much the same game today with us and China.
Weather11am
Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭
Comments
Total Platinum could fit in a car trunk
Gold, 50 cubic feet... A regulation tennis court.
Silver... never heard one for silver. Many tons.
To support LordM's European Trip, click here!
Interestingly there is far less silver and it decreases every single day.
to whom you ask. Sometimes you'll see figures as low as 1/ 2 billion
ounces but these numbers don't take into account things like obsolete
coinage and museum pieces. The higher figures are probably more re-
alistic and are generally in the neighborhood of 2 1/ 2 billion ounces.
Then, why is silver so cheap, and gold so expensive?
To support LordM's European Trip, click here!
Platinum- a football field covered to 1 inch
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
<< <i>You mean, there's more gold above ground than silver?
Then, why is silver so cheap, and gold so expensive? >>
Tradition. Momentum.
Eventually people will wake up and stop it or we'll run out of silver and it will stop.
That tennis court is 50 ft cubed. So the size of a small but rather tall house.
roadrunner
<< <i>The amount of silver is very difficult to pin down and varies according
to whom you ask. Sometimes you'll see figures as low as 1/ 2 billion
ounces but these numbers don't take into account things like obsolete
coinage and museum pieces. The higher figures are probably more re-
alistic and are generally in the neighborhood of 2 1/ 2 billion ounces. >>
From the SSRI website link
<< <i>2006 was a good year for silver. Total annual demand is now approaching one billion ounces. >>
If annual demand is a billion ounces, how the heck can any newsletter writer say the total above ground supply is 1/2 billion ounces and still have a straight face (or any paying subscribers)? SSRI would get in big trouble with the SEC if they posted stuff that was that far removed from reality on their official website.
My ballpark guesstimate would be at least 20x annual demand or 20 billion ounces above ground, perhaps as much as 100x because so much silver is squirreled away in coins, in electronics, in silverware and jewelry. That silver did not get to the smelter in the Hunt days, so it is probably not going to the smelter unless $100 an ounce is reached.
<< <i>
From the SSRI website link
<< <i>2006 was a good year for silver. Total annual demand is now approaching one billion ounces. >>
If annual demand is a billion ounces, how the heck can any newsletter writer say the total above ground supply is 1/2 billion ounces and still have a straight face (or any paying subscribers)? SSRI would get in big trouble with the SEC if they posted stuff that was that far removed from reality on their official website.
My ballpark guesstimate would be at least 20x annual demand or 20 billion ounces above ground, perhaps as much as 100x because so much silver is squirreled away in coins, in electronics, in silverware and jewelry. That silver did not get to the smelter in the Hunt days, so it is probably not going to the smelter unless $100 an ounce is reached. >>
Mining accounts for about 2/3 billion ounces annually and most of the shortfall
comes from recycling. About 1/ 10 billion ounces are removed from the total above
ground stock to make up the entire shortfall.
This is especially alarming because demand for silver is increasing geometrically
and is starting to enter a steep slope. Silver production is primarily a byproduct
of base metal mining now days so supply will be barely affected by higher prices.
Equally alarming is that most demand uses very tiny amounts. In a $1000 product
containing 2 cents worth of silver there would be no decrease in demand even if
silver prices soared many fold.
This situation is not sustainable.
With nickel the price didn't change until it blew up in everyone's face but this is
less likely to occur with silver because these markets are more broadly watched.
Of course at current consumption and mining it could be as long as twenty years
before there's no silver left. This is going to happen and it will probably happen
long before the silver is gone.
Only when everyone is bullish is the top in.. we aren't even close to that.
Gold vs Silver
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of silver ore, ten trillion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I could probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the "moon is silver" newsletter to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed.
/edit typos
That says it all right there. Goverment sources are always trusted all there stats are right on even on the ecomony, I just love the CPI numbers. Love those public traded companies like Enron they'd never lie right....how about the SEC? They've alway been on the ball, I just have to laugh
Sorry I respect those like Jim Sinclair and Ted Butler that's been doing this for quite sometime and aren't Johnny come lately's. In fact there content is free...they aren't selling you a bill of goods.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
At the end of 2001, it is estimated that all the gold ever mined amounts to about 145,000 tonnes.
http://www.gold.org/discover/knowledge/faqs/#3
feel free to do the math.
<< <i>gold and silver are lousy investments >>
Your right $260 gold approaching $700 since 1999. Everythign is a lousy investment if you don't understand market rotation.
<< <i>Look, after quoting something as ridiculous as an estimate that 1/2 billion ounces of silver exist, above ground, all sources, very little that is said afterwards can be taken seriously unless reliable secondary sources are cited and linked. Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of pure silver, ten billion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the moon is silver it to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed. >>
Ted Butler is a well respected analyst.
Total world silver production in the last 40,000 years is well under 50 billion ounces and most of it has been consumed.
Again the low estimates are 1/2 billion and the high ones are 2 1/2. I tend to agree that the real numbers are probably a little higher.
But the point is that no matter what the real number is, it is impossible to use more than is produced forever. Geometrically increasing demand and stagnant production numbers will eventually collide. Already there is almost certainly more gold in the world than silver and the gold exists in massive stockpiles. Silver exists mostly in very small quantities here and there.
80,000,000 more ounces of gold will be added to stockpiles this year and silver reserves will decrease another 90,000,000 ounces.
<< <i>
<< <i>gold and silver are lousy investments >>
Your right $260 gold approaching $700 since 1999. Everythign is a lousy investment if you don't understand market rotation. >>
Yeah, how about the 800 per ounce in the early 80's down to 260.....lousy I say!
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>gold and silver are lousy investments >>
Your right $260 gold approaching $700 since 1999. Everythign is a lousy investment if you don't understand market rotation. >>
Yeah, how about the 800 per ounce in the early 80's down to 260.....lousy I say! >>
We have so much the Hunt brothers caused this almost single handed huh? Now we have ETF's and a golbal market that good old Unlce Sam can't control by coming down on a couple people. Natural Resources are in the rest are out IMO. China and India with over a billion people each are in the 1880's Industrial age. Let's talk about 1929 I'm sure that will never happen again.
<< <i>Look, after quoting something as ridiculous as an estimate that 1/2 billion ounces of silver exist, above ground, all sources, very little that is said afterwards can be taken seriously unless reliable secondary sources are cited and linked. Again, not newsletters, but something that can be trusted and verified like statements from publicly traded companies, or government stats that track production.
I find it frightening what sources people are using for information. There are a lot of newbies on board that will read something on the Internet and believe it. I have hammered against the precious metal newsletters. I believe this thread is another example of really bad information being forwarded to this message board. If I hadn't taken ten minutes to do a search and refute the made up numbers, a lot of newbies would have gone home believing information that is off by at least an order of magnitude, possibly two orders of magnitude or more (possibly 50 billion ounces or more instead of 1/2 billion ounces of silver).
Anyone who has read either the 1/2 billion or even the 2 1/2 billion ounce figure and made any investment decisions on that "information" is in way over their head. May as well make investment decisions based on the moon being made out of silver ore, ten trillion metric tonnes worth, and that there is a secret base over there mining it. If I had ten alts, I could probably promote it, and write a newsletter, and sell the "moon is silver" newsletter to some of the members here. Sheesh.
There are plenty of folks with an agenda. Near the top of the list are newsletter writers. I want to double check anything I see in a newsletters, preferably with verifiable sources like the SSRI link I posted. Again, publicly traded company websites have to have information that is factual or close to factual. If there is agenda driven misinformation of the sort posted in this thread and often appears in newsletters, the SEC would be investigating, with fines and sanctions imposed.
/edit typos >>
Check out this site.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>People who overweight gold and silver for investment purposes are full of midas like delusional thinking coupled with paranoia and a take your hands off my stack jack selfish view, Lousy investment I say. >>
Most Americans didn't have much at all, just like today. If it hadn't been for the silver you could mine by going to your local bank I would have been in the same boat in the late 70's. You can still find a little in the 65-70 halves but those days are gone. Gold and Silver has been fixed in the US and you couldn't own it let's go back before 74 and refigure your calculations. That's just a few years earlier, most people use figures to their advantage and we know all anti-gold silver types will always only consider 1980 without disclosing the cause.
BTW the NASDAQ has done very well since it's peak of over 5000 hasn't it? Stocks must be a lousy investment by your terms, you better run to the DOW that has 30 hand selected BIG stocks out of the millions of companies out there.
<< <i>There is far more above ground gold than above ground silver--and for most of the past 400 years or so, that's how it's always been, and the trend will continue. That doesn't mean silver is rarer than gold, because it isn't. Quite the contrary--silver is plentiful in comparison to gold. It is because silver is so plentiful that it hasn't traditionally been reclaimed after the manufacturing process. Silver is primarily an industrial metal--it is mined to demand, it is used, and for most industrial uses (like photography, for example), it is "consumed". Gold on the other hand is reclaimed after use in industry, so the world's supply of above ground gold is always increasing, while the world's supply of above ground silver is always fluctuating. Those investing in precious metals for "long term" gains are foolish at best, and it's disheartening to see people make catastrophic investment decisions based on bogus information, only partial facts, or the hype and agenda-driven articles written by the very people who would sell you their entire store of precious metal at current market rates. There are only 3 investment vehicles that have shown consistant gains over the past 100 years: real estate, stocks, and bonds. Everything else should be considered a hedge against inflation or a safety net in recession cycles. Commodities like precious metals and oil are volitile, and as such they are routinely traded (not held for infinity), as they offer no compounding function yet short-term gains can be made with accurate market timing or just trading the spread. >>
This is misleading. The amount of silver above ground has been decreasing pretty steadily
for more than half a century. When governments got away from making silver coin they sold
their stockpiles onto the market. The last of these stockpiles are gone now.
Silver mining returned only small quantities until the late 1850's when world production soared.
This did coincide well with an increase in gold production and some other metals. It was brought
about largely by the increasing availability of cheap steel made possible by the industrial revolu-
tion and by the bessemer furnace. There were numerous other factors at play as well.
It is true that silver is cheap and doesn't warrant large expenses to reduce its waste but obvious-
ly no one intentionally destroys or wastes it in significant quantities. As recently as the mid-'60's
it was possible to buy silver foil in the grocery store and no doubt little of this still exists and the
lion's share now resides in landfill that has been long forgotten.
I agree that investing in gold for the long term is an error. Gold can make an excellent short term
investment preceding periods of high inflation and constitutes a good insurance policy for a small
fraction of ones wealth in the longer term. Long term investment in it is usually a losing proposition
(like most things).
I don't agree that silver is a poor long term investment (or that only hard money types like it). Silver
is a bet on the future. When you buy silver you are betting that the economy does well and continues
to consume silver. You are betting thaty scientists continue to find new uses to enrich peoples' lives.
You are betting that current trends continue. Yes, you also get a few of the benefits of gold like the
insurance aspect but that's not a sufficient reason to buy it.
Mostly you're just betting that we can't indefinitely continue to use more of something than we can
produce. There are very few operating silver mines because they simply can't produce at current
prices. Some two thirds of silver is a by-product of other mining and in the event of an economic
collapse gold production would likely increase while silver production would plummet to a fraction of
current levels. Would this be good for silver's price? Probably not, because demand would fall even
further and investor demand might lighten as well. Eventually the economy would recover and there
would be even more gold in the world in relation to silver.
Silver is a bet on the future, not against it.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>Silver is a lousy bet of any significance ...so is gold. >>
So is the dollar, worth nothing more than the fire you can build with it.......... it's just paper than can be printed in any amount and they are doing it to our doom.
<< <i>
<< <i>People who overweight gold and silver for investment purposes are full of midas like delusional thinking coupled with paranoia and a take your hands off my stack jack selfish view, Lousy investment I say. >>
Most Americans didn't have much at all, just like today. If it hadn't been for the silver you could mine by going to your local bank I would have been in the same boat in the late 70's. You can still find a little in the 65-70 halves but those days are gone. Gold and Silver has been fixed in the US and you couldn't own it let's go back before 74 and refigure your calculations. That's just a few years earlier, most people use figures to their advantage and we know all anti-gold silver types will always only consider 1980 without disclosing the cause.
BTW the NASDAQ has done very well since it's peak of over 5000 hasn't it? Stocks must be a lousy investment by your terms, you better run to the DOW that has 30 hand selected BIG stocks out of the millions of companies out there.
I ran to international!
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
It is unfortunate that many people's perception of a market only includes it's previous down cycle (plus what negative spin the opposing camps toss in)...not the current cycle. Of course this is not done with stocks since it took from 1929 to 1954 for the stock market to break even (25 years) following the 1920's boom. And then down from 1966 to 1982 (or even 1987 for some) for the next loss cycle (16-21 yrs). Yet these comparisons are never made. If you were retiring at the start of those down years it must have been a struggle if you were counting on continued stock appreciation. Gold has had a single down cycle this century and is now in it's 2nd upward cycle. Stocks are now at the tail end of a 25 year up cycle.
Those investing in precious metals for "long term" gains are foolish at best, and it's disheartening to see people make catastrophic investment decisions based on bogus information
This is similar to investing in stocks today with slick information based on less than full disclosure by corporate America, not to mention the bogus information released every month/qtr by the BLS.
Enron, Fannie, LTCM, Refco are all examples of derivative busts.
A much bigger fish is out there waiting to be landed.
Gold and stock funds should probably not be in anyone's long term portfolios with all the financial hijinks going around today.
Invest during the up cycles and move on to the next thing. 25 years of an uptrend is more than anyone can hope for.
There are only 3 investment vehicles that have shown consistant gains over the past 100 years: real estate, stocks, and bonds. Everything else should be considered a hedge against inflation or a safety net in recession cycles.
Does that mean that the next 100 years (or 10 yrs) will produce similar results? Does the fact of moving towards a pure fiat currency from 1913 have any bearing on the "last 100 years?" Certainly. Note that we only have 33 years of pure fiat history in the books. There's much more to be played out. Killing commodities in 1980-1982 was fairly easy compared to what has to take place today.
Let's not forget that the Dow and gold have essentially identical returns from 1929 to date (the gains from both are mainly due to inflation rather than anything else). The Dow ensures that the top companies stay in the index while also-rans are discarded. Yet gold remains 100% the same. Rather than consistent gains for stocks & bonds over the past 100 yrs, it would be more accurate to say they have consistent cycles. Inflation has a consistent average "gain" of 2-3% per year since 1913 as well.
roadrunner
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in:
a) cash
b) stocks and bonds
c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>I can't believe the amount of negativity directed at people who believe in gold/silver as a sound investment!!
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in:
a) cash
b) stocks and bonds
c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
Hands down for a buy and hold strategy for 40 years would be international stocks.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
Hands down for a buy and hold strategy for 40 years would be international stocks. >>
International stocks have been dogs compared to the US stocks. You get better gains when you take bigger risk. Go ahead and invest in China, South America or the middle east and see what happens when they nationalize everything. I have about 15 to 20 percent in International stock but they are mainly Euoropean based. Most third world countries are so corupt you'd be wise to deversify and that means some stocks, bonds, cash, and gold/silver and keep on top of it because you can't fall in love with anything their are market phases in all assest classes.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any. >>
You can't be in love with any stock. Railroad, auto makers, Pullman would all have bit you. Times change and you have to change with the times. If you were in any tech stocks Microsoft, IBM, Cisco etc you can see what the buy and hold got you not that they've pasted their days like pullman and all the companies that wen't belly up over the years but you have to watch out for your best interest and many stock brokers are more interested in selling your stocks and buying new ones to make the all mighty comish.
Buy and hold works fairly well in your 20's or early 30's but stinks once your over 40 and you sure don't want to bet the farm in your 50's or 60's.
Hoard the keys.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>You forget the power of dividends. With dividends reinvested, the comparison of the DOW to gold since 1929 well, there is no comaprison. >>
Well lets not forget the buy, sell, management fess, and broker fees. That takes a big chuck out of reinvestment since many don't pay a dime and most are 2% or less. The best are under 4% and those are slow steady stock like the oils that aren't just jumping out of the universe. Yes my friend buy stocks and mutual funds do indeed have their storage fees too.
Really in general growth funds have choose to increase the value of their stock by buying it back and increasing it's value while value funds don't raise as fast due to them putting their money back into divends. Both approaches have their advantages. >>
If you bought the DOW and reinvested dividends thru a direct company reinvest and YOU held without doing alot of trading, you would be way ahead with low fees, if any. >>
You can't be in love with any stock. Railroad, auto makers, Pullman would all have bit you. Times change and you have to change with the times. If you were in any tech stocks Microsoft, IBM, Cisco etc you can see what the buy and hold got you not that they've pasted their days like pullman and all the companies that wen't belly up over the years but you have to watch out for your best interest and many stock brokers are more interested in selling your stocks and buying new ones to make the all mighty comish.
Buy and hold works fairly well in your 20's or early 30's but stinks once your over 40 and you sure don't want to bet the farm in your 50's or 60's. >>
If your advisor does not have your interest at heart get another advisor. There are plenty out there. Divesification is a key to successful investing. Indexes and ETF's provide this with low cost. The biggest threat to successful investing is the indiviual investor themselves. They often yank themselves out of the market due to fear or fail to invest due to fear. Meanwhile the returns continue without the participation of many individual investors. I say it again, gold and silver are lousy long term investments and should not be overweighted in any portfolio.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
What is factual is that COMEX silver has a net short position more concentrated and larger, relative to real world supplies
http://www.popforum.net/images/smiles/icon_popcorn.gif">
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
<< <i>Where the mighty regulators? They sure came down on the hunt's but stay in the background all the way until in a real issue.
What is factual is that COMEX silver has a net short position more concentrated and larger, relative to real world supplies >>
I don't care about the Hunt's and I don't care about the regulators. I care what choices I can control.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I do agree gold bullion is a lousy "investment" but a good store of value once your money is made. It is like an insurance policy against risky economic times.
Silver may be a great investment but due to the lack of solid information on supply I don't think I am going to convince anyone one way or the other. I personally think it is a good investment and a good store of value at the same time however.
The US stock market is little more than a casino IMO or all your gains are eaten up in inflation. I don't have any confidence in the future of the US economy with the way it is being mismanaged at this time. I believe the dollar is headed lower, maybe a lot lower...
So I put my money in international stocks (90%) and silver (10%). The only reason I do not have more silver as a percent of the total is my 401K only carry stocks and bonds.
Whatever you decide, good luck, I hope you make the right decision!
no punches pulled here.
The regulators have tried many different tricks to derail gold.
But there's only so much physical gold held by banks that they can use to force prices down. Just ask the UK who sold over half of their gold at $260/oz. Hedging forward production hasn't worked. Nor has naked short selling.
roadrunner
<< <i>Financial quotes from the previous year
no punches pulled here.
The regulators have tried many different tricks to derail gold.
But there's only so much physical gold held by banks that they can use to force prices down. Just ask the UK who sold over half of their gold at $260/oz. Hedging forward production hasn't worked. Nor has naked short selling.
roadrunner >>
I LOVE these bear market gurus. Do you knw how long they have been on the WRONG side of the trade? More than just the previous year.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
roadrunner
<< <i>I can't believe the amount of negativity directed at people who believe in gold/silver as a sound investment!!
We are in a period of time when ALL countries and governments are printing money at will, without any restrictions to the amount of money - this is the true definition of INFLATION......Massive inflation. It just hasn't hit us yet because of all the sugarcoating by government statistics.
When the cra_ hits the fan, where are you going to run? Stocks, bonds, cash.......Hardly.
My financial adviser is younger than 40 years of age and he just shakes his head when I talk to him about gold and silver. And you know what?...I can't blame him because if you are younger than 40, you have never experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver.
True, if you invested in gold during 1980 to 2000, you lost your shirt, AND, you missed out on the largest bull run of Stocks in history. I missed out on both, since I was paying off a house and raising a young family.
But now I recognize we are in a period of high inflation and there is no place I would rather be than gold/silver.
The true secret to investing is not to make money, but rather, is not to LOSE money. What other "store of wealth" is there but gold/silver.
How easy it is to forget history!!....5000 years of it!!
I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in:
a) cash
b) stocks and bonds
c) gold/silver
all I have to say is, I feel sorry for the people that did not choose c). The loss potential could be massive. >>
I think you're failing to realize a few points, or leaving them out. Yes, our government prints fiat money at will. But this is nothing new. It's been happening since the 1930's. Yes, we experience inflation every year. This is neither something new nor something alarming. In fact, many periods of time inflation has far exceeded today's rates. At 4-5% per year, inflation is under control. Even with inflation, we see rises in salaries which balance out the effect. There isn't anything happening now that wasn't happening 50 years ago--the alarmists like to point out facts of today's economy while leaving out the same facts of yesterday's economy.
Your financial adviser is under 40, but that doesn't mean he hasn't "experienced the benefits of owning gold and silver". I'm under 40 and I've owned it and still own it. You're saying this because you know that between 1980 and 2000, silver and gold were dog investments. And prior to that, shortly after the fixed price was done away with, silver and gold skyrocketed. So you're defining this "good investment" based on what happened during a very specific period of time over 30 years ago. And anyone that isn't old enough to have seen that period of precious metals inflation hasn't experienced the benefits, lol. But we do know the benefits because it's part of history, it's on charts--we know in retrospect what was or would have been a great investment in any given year. But that's all nonsense, because we can say the same thing with the world series results--if only we had bet on the winning team each year, of course that would require fortune telling, and that has no place in a solid investment plan. It's gambling. The best we can do is have a solid strategy and if we know enough about the markets we may be able to time them, but that doesn't mean betting the farm on longshots.
If you believe the secret to investing is to not make money; rather to just not lose it, then you're setting your sights far too low. I don't know anyone but a major defeatest who would have such a plan. Make no mistake--the goal of investing long term is to make money. In economic down years (which cycles like everything else), the short-term goal might be to preserve value, but the long term goal of any investment strategy is to increase net worth in real dollars.
As far as forgetting 5000 years of history, I suggest we do forgot about 4900 years of it. Ancient history does not apply to modern times. Stocks and cash didn't exist 5000 years ago. 5000 years ago, silver was more valuable than gold. The technology of the time was such that people speared boars for food and drug women into caves by the hair. The wheel was a neat trick. Come on, now. The modern economic era, 1920's to present, is what we should focus on when doing research for investment history. We know that inflation exists and is generally a constant. We know inflation increases at an average annual rate of about 5% per year. We know that the stock market increases at an average annual rate of about 10% per year. We know, based on the difference between the two, that the average investor can expect to earn about 5% real growth in their nestegg each year. This is all playing with fiat dollars.
Look at the rate of return for various investments long-term. Start with any year you wish so that we don't exclude the big precious metals boom of the 70's. You will see that even including that stellar decade for PMs, stocks come out the clear winner. You can't argue this fact--really!
Reputable financial planners do not profit from selling you junk, or hurting your net worth. Scumbags do. But there are scumbags in every profession. If I make a commission based on the perfomance of your investments, I have no vested interest in screwing you. Indeed, most of the business in this industry is generated by word of mouth--yet another incentive to ensure you and your investments perform well. Beware of the conspiracy theorists that drone on and on about invisible market makers, ghosts in the financial industry, short selling, and market manipulators--those are buzzwords for SCAM, aka pump and dump schemes. It's a common tactic employed by unscrupulous boiler rooms to scare people into parting with their money in high risk investments, thinking they are rebelling against the "system" or planning for a great economic collapse. The only thing that ever collapses is the net worth of the individual investors that fall for these ploys.
<< <i>I ask you....If you had $100,000 to invest for 40 years and you can only invest it in one group and not move it around, would you invest it in:
a) cash
b) stocks and bonds
c) gold/silver
>>
This is not appropriate for anyone to decide in this one-sided manner. This is a complete lack of diversification. One should never invest more than 33 1/3% of new monies in each of the above three areas. Cash is good to have for short term favorable investments discovered after the initial investment is made. In essence, only $66,000 should be allocated, 1/2 to stock and bonds, and the other 1/2 split between real estate and gold/silver. In this way, you remain diversified. The cash of $34,000 should be retained for the next round of investing as soon as you regenerate the $34,000 in cash funds.
While I am a believer in the long term growth in the value of silver (really more an indication of the decline in the value of the US dollar), I believe that silver should be held primarily as a store of value and not as an "investment." It is also a store of value in case of emergencies which we have not seen in our collective lifetimes but could happen in case of complete or even partial currency devaluation.
Essentially the "value" of silver is just an indicator of the increasingly noticeable ravishes of inflation. Just as it occurred in the times of the Roman Empire, AD 180 to AD 225, real silver showed great resilience in HOLDING its value relative to the depreciating value of the coins that were once silver and then became more and more debased to the point of being "silver washed" (coated with silver through chemical/electrolyte means). It took a full 45 years before Roman citizens fully realized the debasing of their coinage had gone on too long. Based on this historical precedent, we are in the 41st year since the United States last issued 90% silver coins (which was in early 1966, not in 1964 as most erroneously believe). Our day of reckoning could be quite soon, indeed. But this is subject for another thread.
I don't agree that real wages have kept up on average since the 1970's. It works for execs and most professionals however.
But real average wages are down since the 70's and have not kept up. The have vs the have nots.
The playground we currently have with the huge scope of derivatives was TOTALLY absent from the financial market of even 10-20 years ago, let alone 50 yrs ago. The increase in derivatives from a few trillion to hundreds of trillions is a 1990's and later phenomena. How will a weakness or failure in this area affects the entire economy is anyone's guess. Fannie, Refco, Enron, LTCM are just small scale examples of the early returns coming in.
Curing the economy of inflation in 1979-1982 worked with massive interest rates. That game is not available to the FED this time around. Our economy is much different in orientation than in 1980.
One could say there are many differences. M3 is now 13X the size of what it was in 1982. Yet we've seen nothing like a 13X in the overall cost of living. That is because our inflation has been exported. When those dollars come back what happens? When Asian goods are not cheap and plentiful like they are now what will happen? For now China is helping to float the US Economy much like we did to help out Great Britain in the later 1920's when they did not want to raise interest rates (so we printed money to help out...that game ended badly). Seems like much the same game today with us and China.
roadrunner