PDA

View Full Version : Why I don't Trust Gold



Twisted Titan
27th May 2010, 12:00 PM
Sure you dont .........


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704032704575268462477689760.html


This is a very sad day for me.

In Part One of this series, when I argued that gold might be about to go vertical, I made a whole bunch of new friends among the gold bugs.

And now I'm going to lose them all.

That's because even though I think gold might be about to take off, I don't recommend you rush out and put all your money into gold bars or exchange-traded funds that hold bullion.


And this is for one simple reason: At some levels, gold, as an investment, is absolutely ridiculous.

Warren Buffett put it well. "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace," he said. "Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."

And that's not the half of it.

Gold is volatile. It's hard to value. It generates no income.

Yes, it's a "hard asset," but so are lots of other things—like land, bags of rice, even bottled water.

It's a currency "substitute," but it's useless. In prison, at least, they use cigarettes: If all else fails, they can smoke them. Imagine a bunch of health nuts in a nonsmoking "facility" still trying to settle their debts with cigarettes. That's gold. It doesn't make sense.

As for being a "store of value," anyone who bought gold in the late 1970s and held on lost nearly all their purchasing power over the next 20 years.

I get worried when I see people plunging heavily into gold at $1,200 an ounce. What if the price goes back to where it was just a few years ago, at $500 or $600 an ounce? Will you buy more? Sell?

My concerns about gold go even further than that.

Let's step inside the gold market for a moment.

Everyone knows the price has risen about fivefold in the past decade. But this is not due to some mystical truth or magical act of levitation. It is simply because there have been more buyers than sellers.

Banal, but true—and sometimes worth repeating.

If the price rises you'd think there must be a shortage. But data provided by the World Gold Council, an industry body, tell a remarkable story.

Over that period the world has produced—or, more accurately, recovered—far more gold than anyone actually wanted to use. Since 2002, for example, total demand for gold from goldsmiths and jewelers, and dentists, and general industry, has come to about 22,500 tonnes.

But during the same period, more than 29,000 tonnes has come on to the market.

The surplus alone is enough to produce about 220 million one-ounce gold American Buffalo coins. That's in eight years.

Most of the new supply has come from mine production. Some, though a dwindling amount, has come from central banks. And a growing amount has come from recycling—old jewelry and the like being melted down for scrap. (This is a perennial issue with gold. I never understand why the fans think gold's incredible durability—it doesn't waste or corrode—is bullish for the market. It's bearish.) So if supply has consistently exceeded user demand, how come the price of gold has still been rising?

In a word, hoarding.

Gold investors, or hoarders, have made up all the difference. They are the only reason total "demand" has exceeded supply.

Lots of people have been buying gold in the hope it would rise. But the only way it can rise is if still more people buy it, hoping it will rise still further. And so on.

What do we call an investment scheme where current members' returns depend entirely on new money brought in by new members?

A Ponzi scheme.

Yes, as I wrote earlier, gold may well be the next big bubble. And that may mean there is big money to be made in speculation.

But I don't trust it as an investment.

How can you square this golden circle? I'll tell you in Part Three.

This is the second part of a three-part series on gold, "The Gold, the Bad and the Ugly." Next up: The way to play gold.

Write to Brett Arends at brett.arends@wsj.com

Twisted Titan
27th May 2010, 12:06 PM
As for being a "store of value," anyone who bought gold in the late 1970s and held on lost nearly all their purchasing power over the next 20 years.

mamboni
27th May 2010, 12:14 PM
The author is woefully ignorant of gold vis-a-vis money. That he is published by the WSJ is sad, even tragic.

madfranks
27th May 2010, 12:16 PM
Warren Buffett put it well. "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace," he said. "Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."

In the same line of thinking, paper FRNs have no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be just as confused as to why banks employ guards to watch over pieces of paper. I have an answer for the man: GOLD IS MONEY. That is it's utility. It is an incorruptible medium of exchange. Paper FRNs are a counterfeit substitute to real God-given money.


As for being a "store of value," anyone who bought gold in the late 1970s and held on lost nearly all their purchasing power over the next 20 years.

Yes and the same could be said for any stock, bond, or currency that is bought at the high and sold at the bottom. Thanks for the newsflash.

I don't even want to respond to the rest of this ignorant trash.

joe_momma
27th May 2010, 12:19 PM
Well, he is correct that he'll lose his new "gold bug" friends.

Technically, he is correct - why the heck is gold valuable - other than electrical properties it has limited use (given the scarcity) for practical applications.

'Course, with 6,000 years of civilization based on the lust for gold (in most cultures) one could argue there is almost a hard wired valuation of gold in humans now.....

ximmy
27th May 2010, 12:34 PM
I feel like I just read a third graders review of gold...

Numb-nuts keeps calling it an investment, it's a hedge..
although...
it is/will be a bubble.. I'm counting on it.
He doesn't mention China as the leading gold producer.

Report grade... C- (good effort, needs research, does not understand investments)

sunshine05
27th May 2010, 12:36 PM
Warren Buffett put it well. "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace," he said. "Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."

In the same line of thinking, paper FRNs have no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be just as confused as to why banks employ guards to watch over pieces of paper. I have an answer for the man: GOLD IS MONEY. That is it's utility. It is an incorruptible medium of exchange. Paper FRNs are a counterfeit substitute to real God-given money.


As for being a "store of value," anyone who bought gold in the late 1970s and held on lost nearly all their purchasing power over the next 20 years.

Yes and the same could be said for any stock, bond, or currency that is bought at the high and sold at the bottom. Thanks for the newsflash.

I don't even want to respond to the rest of this ignorant trash.


Well said:)

Twisted Titan
27th May 2010, 12:37 PM
The author is woefully ignorant of gold vis-a-vis money. That he is published by the WSJ is sad, even tragic.



He is anthesis part of the dialectic that will make sure the average sheep will not escape what is prepared for them

madfranks
27th May 2010, 12:50 PM
Technically, he is correct - why the heck is gold valuable - other than electrical properties it has limited use (given the scarcity) for practical applications.


Stability is a good trait in money. If it was consumable like cigarettes, it would be much harder to gauge prices. If it was printable like FRNs, it would be much harder to gauge prices. The fact that gold is "good for nothing", can't be created, can't be consumed, is what makes it an incredibly stable currency.

StackerKen
27th May 2010, 01:17 PM
'Course, with 6,000 years of civilization based on the lust for gold (in most cultures) one could argue there is almost a hard wired valuation of gold in humans now.....




Thats what I was thinking too. Been Valuable for a long time.
I don't see that changing.

gunDriller
27th May 2010, 01:20 PM
in a sane world, we would probably find a different medium of exchange.

it takes about 249 tons of cyanide to produce one ton of gold. actually, i could be wrong - anybody know the number for a particular mine ?

anyway, in a sane world, we wouldn't trash the environment in order to create our medium of exchange.

however, it's not a sane world.

if i could produce an ounce of gold at will, and then proceeded to produce 13 trillion such ounces ... only God can do that, i guess ?

well, that's approximately what the US government has done by going $13 trillion in debt - or is it $100 trillion ?

they have acted like they can produce a medium of exchange, at will, with no effect on its value. and then chosen to go DEEP DEEP DEEP into debt.

in a way, gold and silver are a kind of "insanity indicator" of the US government. the more insane they behave, the more gold & silver go up.

which 2 presidents created astronomical amounts of debt ? Bush 43 & Obama - starting in 2001.

it almost seems like, since we had these 2 insane presidents, Gold & Silver have voted on their sanity and their very stupid debt habits.

according to Gold and Silver, Bush & Obama are insane.

but ... you probably already knew that ! 8)

i call this the "Geo-political Insanity Index" Feature of Gold & Silver.

Hatha Sunahara
27th May 2010, 01:56 PM
Technically, he is correct - why the heck is gold valuable - other than electrical properties it has limited use (given the scarcity) for practical applications.


Stability is a good trait in money. If it was consumable like cigarettes, it would be much harder to gauge prices. If it was printable like FRNs, it would be much harder to gauge prices. The fact that gold is "good for nothing", can't be created, can't be consumed, is what makes it an incredibly stable currency.



People who used cigarett4s for money just didn't have any gold. Paper money has no utility other than it can be burned for its BTU content, but people trust it. What will you use as a medium of exchange when all the paper money is perceived as worthless?

Gold would be worthless if the bankers found a way to print it. Until then, gold and silver are the only stable effective forms of money. I don't read the WSJ any more because of idiotic pieces like this they publish so frequently now.

Hatha

mick silver
27th May 2010, 01:59 PM
Why I don't Trust anyone who dont trust gold he full of his self

StreetsOfGold
27th May 2010, 02:04 PM
I'ld like to see him convice ANY central bank of this

Twisted Titan
27th May 2010, 03:13 PM
I'ld like to see him convice ANY central bank of this



DING!!! DING!!! DING!! DING!! DING!!! DING!! DING!!!


For all its flaws why do banks have vaults and vaults of it???


T

osoab
27th May 2010, 04:01 PM
I feel like I just read a third graders review of gold...

Numb-nuts keeps calling it an investment, it's a hedge..
although...
it is/will be a bubble.. I'm counting on it.
He doesn't mention China as the leading gold producer.

Report grade... C- (good effort, needs research, does not understand investments)


I was thinking the same thing that this was dumbed down. But it has really been written for your everyday joe that probably can't read past a 6th grade level and comprehend it all.
The author covered all the traditional bases of not owning gold. Repetition.

Was this put out on the major web portal news sites for the non-subscribtions holders?

Come to think about it. I felt like I was reading Jon Nadler.

EE_
27th May 2010, 04:28 PM
Stock investors, or suckers, have made up all the difference. They are the only reason total "delusional fictitious demand" has exceeded an infinite supply.

Lots of people have been buying stocks in the hope they would rise. But the only way they can rise is if still more suckers buy them, hoping stocks will rise still further. And so on.

What do we call a paper investment scheme where current members' returns depend entirely on new fiat brought in by new suckers?

A gigantic Ponzi stock scheme.

And that is why the DOW is sitting lower today then it was ten years ago.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EDJI

Wandering Wastrel
27th May 2010, 05:10 PM
The author is woefully ignorant of gold vis-a-vis money. That he is published by the WSJ is sad, even tragic.
It is neither sad nor tragic that this is published by the WSJ. It's normal. The WSJ's existence is dependent on Wall Street's existence. The more people start buying gold, the less relevant the stock exchanges will be, and the less secure the WSJ's existence becomes.

It makes sense... the Fed, the stock exchanges, and the WSJ -- all peddlers of worthless paper.

oldmansmith
27th May 2010, 05:28 PM
Exactly. All those wall street buildings and wall street bonuses aren't paid for by sheeple making money. They are paid for by people (suckers) LOSING their money.

F the bankters. Buy gold coins, hide them well, and watch wall street whither on the vine. I won't shed a tear.

kiffertom
27th May 2010, 05:34 PM
the reason why gold IS money is that it has no other uses. imagine if you could wipe your ass with it like you could frn's. then there would be less and less of it and it would be scarce and it wouldnt be money. true money has no other uses. thats why its money!!