kyrosl, just as maurice mq regularly compare qcom with gold as opposed to with abx/nem, and so i humor him,
i believe you and some others and i and some others are having a bit of misunderstanding per vernacular issue perhaps, which would certainly explain why enough babyboomers are and will be economically ruined and financially doomed, forced to resort to the ballot box, thievery and trickery to try to make sorry ends meet
(i) savings - en.wikipedia.org "Saving is the conservation of money. Methods of saving include putting money aside in a bank or pension plan.[1] Saving also includes reducing expenditures, such as recurring costs. In terms of personal finance, saving specifies low-risk preservation of money, as in a deposit account, versus investment, wherein risk is higher."
(ii) investments - en.wikipedia.org "Investment is the dedication of resources or assets to creating financial benefits in the form of income or profit in the future.[1] It is related to saving or deferring consumption.[citation needed] Investment is involved in many areas of the economy, such as business management and finance no matter for households, firms, or governments. An investment involves the choice by an individual or an organization such as a pension fund, after some analysis or thought, to place or lend money in a vehicle, instrument or asset, such as property, commodity, stock, bond, financial derivatives (e.g. futures or options), or the foreign asset denominated in foreign currency, that has certain level of risk and provides the possibility of generating returns over a period of time.[2]
Investment comes with the risk of the loss of the principal sum. The investment that has not been thoroughly analyzed can be highly risky with respect to the investment owner because the possibility of losing money is not within the owner's control. The difference between speculation and investment can be subtle. It depends on the investment owner's mind whether the purpose is for lending the resource to someone else for economic purpose or not.[3]"
as to this bit of 'analysis' at best or 'insight' at worst,
<<The 1980s and the 1990s were not good for gold. The 2000s were very good. That's one good decade out of three. Not very good odds, if you bet everything on gold.>>
you are not only wrong, but very wrong, and possibly, per watch n brief going forward, fatally wrong.
why do we not start the clock ticking at the beginning of each decade that might have made a more direct difference in our respective lives, comparing that which is elemental, true, beautiful, and sovereign, namely gold, and that which is representative, paper construct, is not the dollar itself, but just as fraudulent and evil, and i mean the dj industrial average
gold now at 1,100, and dj at 10,428
if bought gold in 1950, at 35, compared to dj at 206
gold at 31x, dj at 50x; and i contend whatever dividends that could have been paid out by dj would easily be matched by simple n selective option plays on gold, less the hassle, tracking mistakes borne of dj winner bias manipulation of constituent companies, etc etc
1960 gold at 31x, dj at 17x (hypothetically saving gold vs investing dow jones at beginning of 1959 is directly relevant to my life. yours?)
1970 gold at 31x, dj at 13x
1980 gold at 2x, dj at 13x
1990 gold at 2.8x, dj at 3.8x
2000 gold at 3.8x, dj at 0.91x
so, out of 6 decades that be relevant to our lives, gold beat dj three decades, and only substantially underperformed in one decade, but going forward, gold up and dj down will see them at parity, and so gold will more than likely outperform the dow in the course of our life times.
the journey on which this thread is on, gold rise, and empire down, the sorting out of gold vs dj, is what we watch n brief for ;0)
let us keep it simple: getgold, up to 50% of nav, but getgold; do not let qcom or dj industrial or s&p500 or brazilian bonds or russian debt or chinese garlic get anywhere near 50% of nav
;0) |
