- Joined
- 12 November 2007
- Posts
- 2,944
- Reactions
- 4
I am stunned! Basically you are advocating willful ignorance when it comes to understanding the over all environment we are operating in. I must say it explains many of your attitudes and your approach to gold. Personally I prefer to sail with the tradewinds.
The issues will be fixed, and it is far from certain that there will be big shocks.
1, Many years ago 7% was a very normal return on real estate. From that comment I glean that your long term has not been that long in the scheme of things.
2, Country real estate could better 10% yield as recently as the early 90's.
3, We are now in a bubble, yields will return to and exceed those levels at some point, we always overshoot!
.
The issues will be fixed, and it is far from certain that there will be big shocks.
1, Capital city rental properties offer stability of cashflows almost unheard of in any other business, While also offering a large degree of protection against inflation. If it were offering 7% gross rent I would venture to say alot of capital would start heading into it and drive the yield lower with in a short period of time.
2, And so it should offer higher yeild than the city, There are other risk factors.
3, many areas are over priced, I have agreed with that many times. But 7% would be an over shoot, and would only last as long as other asset classes were depressed and offering high yields. ie. if the stock market started yielding say 10%, or term deposits were 9% then property may leak capital for a while.
There will be more 'shocks' & it is far from certain that the 'issues' will be fixed.
At least they won't be fixed on current income/expense projections, for any country with debt problems ie the usual Euro ones, Japan, & most importantly the US (China too has 'hidden' debt that is going to make llife hard for them too)
For the US to get their house in order there will be need to be recession inducing cuts to gov exp - simple maths. Or a massive increase in revenues. Or both.
It's only a matter of time.
As for Buffet, he was just very good, and lucky, in taking advantage of the greatesst era of monetary expansion the world has seen. Otherwise known as a Ponzi scheme. Like you say, all bubbles burst eventually......this one has gone for over 40 years.
I bet we head to a new currency
Well put, but of course unlike say stocks, where you can calculate value based on measures like ROE, it is harder to determine 'what the value should be' with gold. It's value is highly dependent on pure politics/government action, which can thus make it very hard to calculate. Typical valuation methods for gold involve changes in monetary bases, sizes of government debts and deficits, the noises that come from central bankers, rates of credit expansion/contraction etc. All currently appear to say 'gold will steadily increase in value', except for the state of credit expansion (which is contracting because large numbers of banks overseas are more or less stuffed).3, I agree, and I always have. But at some point when the price has outperformed what it is hedging it may lose it's "safe and sound" status. It's not a hedge at any price.
I get your point, but how is a 500% rise in 10 years not an investment?
2, Yes, I aggree with that. As with any commodity or real thing. But is it the best thing to hold to achieve this, and can it achieve this if it is bought at any price. What price do you see as being to high to have a resonable chance of meeting this end.
3, Again is it the best asset to hold long term as a hedge against this, and is buying it at any price going to work out well for you. obviously their is a tipping point where it becomes to expensive and to risky to hold gold, Like all assets the asset class itself does not garantee a good result,
Not if, but when IMO. I might run a book on what year this happens, so place your bets right here.
Wagers accepted in Gold and silver only.
"the price will increase with the money supply"
That's my point though, for nearly a decade gold has increased much, much, much more than the inflation of the money supply.
You also said that gold should be valued at the total sum of every piece of the economy, that's just rubbish. The total value of the money supply is far less than the total value of every thing, the total value of say the earth would be millions of trillions, but this does not mean there had to be millions of trillions worth of currency, the same dollar can be spent 10 times a day.
And as much as the gold bugs like, gold is not going to be the base of any major currency in the future, no world government is going to put themselves in that position,
"the price will increase with the money supply"
That's my point though, for nearly a decade gold has increased much, much, much more than the inflation of the money supply.
And as much as the gold bugs like, gold is not going to be the base of any major currency in the future, no world government is going to put themselves in that position,
Regardless, any new currency that will ever come about will be able to be exchanged with gold.
And as much as the gold bugs like, gold is not going to be the base of any major currency in the future, no world government is going to put themselves in that position,
Do you even have any idea what you are talking about?
Latest ConFinStat from the ECB October 2011.
Hint, if you can't find the gold, it's number ONE on the list in the assets column.
What about Euro reserves, since the inception of the Euro, as measured by the quarterly Mark To Market ECB ConFinStat?
H/T FOFOA.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?