Surprise...the game is rigged

[DiscoBiscuit]

thats because the people in power like blank checks and printing presses.

there is a historical importance to holding government to a gold standard, it limits the governments ability to expand beyond its means.

that concept is consistently lost on you when the gold standard comes up.

I'll show you lost. Example any aspect you consider pro. If there's historic application, I'll show you THE con(s) we suffered. If you have no historic applications you're predicting. Sorry if I don't recognize them as fruition.

furthermore the problem of no gold standard is compounded when the government holds a monopoly on currency creation...

If you wish to discuss the letter, you have to open the envelope.

yep my spidey sense is tingling but its telling me that the government taxes gold trading(remember that whole monopoly on currency stuff) and people dont work for free...

Apparently (and from multiple angles,) Spidey doesn't know finance.

a man isnt going to sell/trade you his gold for what he subjectively determines as less valuable...

and governments ''invest'' in gold in a lame attempt to skew markets, hiding just how worthless the fiat really is...

Alex is on a tear.

 

[whodare]

Those are fine for a while and the land, weed and some pharmaceuticals do have practical applications. If nobody is making those things though then eventually everyone will run out. I'm not sure what would actually be the best thing to stockpile for use as barter to sustain you. I'd have to think long and hard about that because I can't help but think the most valuable items are going to be different then most expect. My immediate notion is that it'll be things to fix stuff. Lots of people are stockpiling but I rarely hear people talk about stuff like needle and thread to repair clothes and stuff like that.

I guess two stockpiles of things one of creature comforts like cigarettes, alcohol and the like to fleece the gold owners early on as they try to cling to a semblence of thier former life and then save the practical stuff for bartering for more practical things like other peoples crops or tools they have or some form of service as trade.

you can only stockpile so much physical stuff, eventually what becomes valuable is knowledge, especially in hands on stuff.

people with IT degree's or, arts, political science etc are going to be the worst off.

and i should have clarified, i meant more than food acquisition when i said gathering and hunting, being able to see value where its not so blatantly visible is a skill that also will be highly valued..

we are on the same page for sure.

 

[HempKat]

sorry but conventional wisdom says that the younger man can afford to lose more than the older man...

the benefit if the high risk is sometimes high yields, but if your 50 and that high risk portfolio tanks, you dont have very long to rebuild...


but hey keep knocking people selling gold and dodge the clear fallacy in your statement gramps addressed

Well maybe I missed something but I thought he said someone studied and found the low risk stuff over a long period out performed more risky investments in the long term.

And therefore it is better for young people to go low risk. This makes perfect sense if the low risk truely out performs. Low risk over the long term is generally cheaper allowing the young person who has time to invest in more shares which is good because most young people have less to invest and have the time to wait the long term if it is for retirement. It would also make sense for the older investor to go with higher risk because they generally have more to work with investment wise, especially if they started young. Plus they're hopefully wiser and can make wiser choices of the higher risk stuff. Long term isn't really good for them unless they're intending it as an inheritence maybe.

Maybe I'm all wrong though I've never had much interest in investments I have a modest but comfortable life I can manage without having to have a big nest egg.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Well personally I think if you're prepping for a major societal collapse stock piling gold and silver now is foolish. It's not practical, takes up lots of space (if you have enough to do you any real good) and combined with the weight that makes you less mobile which can be bad in a survival scenario. Plus at today's price buying gold means that you're really benefiting someone else more then yourself. Better to take that money and invest it in things people will be desperate for after the collapse because they were too busy stockpiling gold. That's when you start buying the gold, when you have something the gold owners don't.

You are kind of right IMO, but if paper currencies collapse there will be a rush of capital into commodities. The masses will be more worried about their next meal and security sure, but the market lives on and the malinvestment and massive amounts of miss allocated capital of the last couple decades will have to go somewhere. Which will be commodities or things that have real value.

I know some will argue that gold and silver have no real value, but they have served as a flight to safety trade for thousands of years and will continue to do so IMO.

Here is the US epic fail chart.

On another note Germany is now offering 0% coupon on 2y Bunds (bonds). That equals negative real rates of return. The US already has negative real rates of return on their short term debt if you take into account the bogus CPI number. If you take into account real inflation we are already negative on our 10y and 30y bonds.

That's game over for people holding paper wealth, be it savings or people living off fixed income.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

sorry but conventional wisdom says that the younger man can afford to lose more than the older man...

There's also less time for an older man to accumulate a retirement fund with minimal risk. That's why it's advisable to start young and assume only the risk you're willing to lose. You can't predict the future and it takes math to determine things like how much you'll need versus how you'll get there.

the benefit if the high risk is sometimes high yields, but if your 50 and that high risk portfolio tanks, you dont have very long to rebuild...

If the 50 year old assumes low risk, they won't have much of a nest egg come retirement. Low risk investments take longer to accumulate so low risk at 50 isn't a good way to plan for retirement.

but hey keep knocking people selling gold and dodge the clear fallacy in your statement gramps addressed

I'll keep pointing out the pros and cons, whodare. You keep taking it personal - or don't.

 

[HempKat]

you can only stockpile so much physical stuff, eventually what becomes valuable is knowledge, especially in hands on stuff.

people with IT degree's or, arts, political science etc are going to be the worst off.

and i should have clarified, i meant more than food acquisition when i said gathering and hunting, being able to see value where its not so blatantly visible is a skill that also will be highly valued..

we are on the same page for sure.

Yeah I'm not really disagreeing with anything your saying I'm just kind of letting this run thru my mind trying to imagine what might be the most valuable thing in the future. Stuff like cigarettes for example is really more of a short term thing, the sooner they disappear the better and so I'm thinking I wouldn't want that in my stockpile because you're right you can only stockpile just so much. That's why I thought of needle and thread, if a single needle could become valuable then imagine what an efficient part of your stockpile a case or two of needles might be. You're right though about knowledge especially if the collapse is prolonged.

 

[SpasticGramps]

Well maybe I missed something but I thought he said someone studied and found the low risk stuff over a long period out performed more risky investments in the long term.

Most market professional say invest in higher risk products when you are young so that if something happens you will have time to recoup your investments and rebuild. Older people closer to retirement should have already built up a nice nest egg such that they can invest in low risk low yield products because if they are in high risk high yield products that go boom they'll be fucked.

This is assuming you are properly diversified. One should never be all in high risk or all in low risk. Manage your risk according to your situation. Youth allows for more flexibility with playing with high risk high yield than someone who is 60.

 

[whodare]

I'll show you lost. Example any aspect you consider pro. If there's historic application, I'll show you THE con(s) we suffered. If you have no historic applications you're predicting. Sorry if I don't recognize them as fruition.

you seem to imply im ignorant of the downsides, yet nowhere have i ever proclaimed the gold standard perfect, no system is.

what i do know is that i dont like a government that monopolizes currency production, and allows a Fed, unhindered by oversight, to produce the currency until it all comes burning down. (you have seen europe right, i guess 50% unemployment and a currency controlled by germany is cool)

If you wish to discuss the letter, you have to open the envelope.



Apparently (and from multiple angles,) Spidey doesn't know finance.



Alex is on a tear.

more sophism and ASSumptions...

i dont have to posses a degree in econ to be able to see market forces at work or when government intervention skews markets...

Alex?

i gunna talk a stab in the dark and guess your referencing alex jones.

cause i dont often visit his website, little too much for me...

mises, cato, caseyresearch, mostly people outside the mainstream, but people who dont jump to the all encompassing conspiracy theory angle..

 

[HempKat]

You are kind of right IMO, but if paper currencies collapse there will be a rush of capital into commodities. The masses will be more worried about their next meal and security sure, but the market lives on and the malinvestment and massive amounts of miss allocated capital of the last couple decades will have to go somewhere. Which will be commodities or things that have real value.

I know some will argue that gold and silver have no real value, but they have served as a flight to safety trade for thousands of years and will continue to do so IMO.

Here is the US epic fail chart.
View Image

On another note Germany is now offering 0% coupon on 2y Bunds (bonds). That equals negative real rates of return. The US already has negative real rates of return on their short term debt if you take into account the bogus CPI number. If you take into account real inflation we are already negative on our 10y and 30y bonds.

That's game over for people holding paper wealth, be it savings or people living off fixed income.

Well I think the game changer in the modern world will be the population. If there is some major failure I think the much larger population will react such that it's not going to go anything like it might have with say the fall of Rome. I know here in America if a collapse happens anytime soon it's a very likely possibility that the majority will mob against the rich French Revolution like and likely much of the wealth to start a new system will be lost in the process. Plus investing in gold now for most people just doesn't seem practical for the vast majority as there is not enough certainy gold will rise as the standard again to make what little anyone starting now might get, really worthwhile. For example to try to keep going in the direction we are going I can see things like Lithium, Silicon and other materials essential for electronics taking gold's place.

 

[whodare]

There's also less time for an older man to accumulate a retirement fund with minimal risk. That's why it's advisable to start young and assume only the risk you're willing to lose. You can't predict the future and it takes math to determine things like how much you'll need versus how you'll get there.

sage advice(in bold)...


i guess if you wait until 50 to begin a retirement your already behind the curve...

being young id spread my assets with a majority focus on high risk with a solid backbone of security...

maybe 70/30% high/low as i progress id likely transition more of my funding into the low risk so by 50 id maybe be reversed 30/70 high low...

If the 50 year old assumes low risk, they won't have much of a nest egg come retirement. Low risk investments take longer to accumulate so low risk at 50 isn't a good way to plan for retirement.

thats assuming hes only starting retirement planning/saving at 50.
in that case your behind already so yes get into some high risk portfolios, what do you have to lose at this point, certainly a lot less than you have too gain...


this argument is pointless though as investing decisions like other transactions are based on a subjective value. people need to make their own decisions based on what their goals are...

can low risk young get you to retirement yes, but if your willing to actively manage your plan high risk offers way more upside while you still have time to recoup losses, but at the same time an older man who wants to start a retirement plan may choose to go high risk in an attempt to avoid working until death...

 

[HempKat]

Most market professional say invest in higher risk products when you are young so that if something happens you will have time to recoup your investments and rebuild. Older people closer to retirement should have already built up a nice nest egg such that they can invest in low risk low yield products because if they are in high risk high yield products that go boom they'll be fucked.

This is assuming you are properly diversified. One should never be all in high risk or all in low risk. Manage your risk according to your situation. Youth allows for more flexibility with playing with high risk high yield than someone who is 60.

Yeah but one difference is that incomes are trending downward and so a young person might be less able to recoup down the road so I'm not sure that philosophy fits now. At one time it did when generation after generation incomes were rising. As for the older person they would only be fucked if they went all in on high risk. I was thinking they could just dabble in high risk so that if they lost it wasn't a big deal. High risk generally has a greater return so you can invest less and still do well if it pays out. Kind of like going to vegas nly bet what you can afford to lose.

 

[SpasticGramps]

For example to try to keep going in the direction we are going I can see things like Lithium, Silicon and other materials essential for electronics taking gold's place.

Definelty a concern of mine too which is why I really like silver over gold.

Most of my money is in waterfront property and land. All paid off. No debt for this guy. I'm starting to look into oil and gas leases too. I'm just waiting for the bottom to fall out of the oil market like it always does. Buy when there is blood in the streets.

 

[whodare]

^^^^ aint that the truth...

im staying out of the market for now, more focused on the physical, like my home.

 

[HempKat]

Right now my primary concern is do I light up now or wait the 9 minutes until 4:20

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

you seem to imply im ignorant

Wasn't your original implication "lost"?

of the downsides, yet nowhere have i ever proclaimed the gold standard perfect, no system is.

Pro and cons whodare. Nobody forced perfection into the exchange. Nowhere do you proclaim down sides to gold currency.

what i do know is that i dont like a government that monopolizes currency production,

Never mind that government monopolized currency production before the fed.

and allows a Fed,

Like most if not all the countries we wish to compete with.

unhindered by oversight

i.e. your idea of oversight. When you don't know of the oversight the Fed receives, "unhindered" is an interesting choice of words.

to produce the currency until it all comes burning down.

Now there's a great place to use the word subjective.

(you have seen europe right, i guess 50% unemployment and a currency controlled by germany is cool)

You're taking a shot at austerity (and I might add) w/o realizing.

Since we know enough about Europe's troubles to get into it, Europe has taken the austere approach, led by Angela Merkel and... ooops - no more Nicolas Sarkozy. New elections have seen leaders promising investment vs austerity so they'll grow their economies versus withering on the vine.

more sophism and ASSumptions...

Versus your visions of Apocalypse. If you know what sophism means, try pointing it out.

i dont have to posses a degree in econ to be able to see market forces at work or when government intervention skews markets...

Doesn't take a degree to recognize you're not saying anything beyond "WOLF!"

Alex believes finance and Joe-sidewalk-hatred-of-shit-he-doesn't-understand are the same thing.

cause i dont often visit his website, little too much for me...

Not too much for Ron Paul to appear on the show a dozen times. I bet they hang a giant, neon "conspiracy hell" sign from the rafters.

Alex is one of Ron's biggest megaphones.

mises, cato, caseyresearch, mostly people outside the mainstream, but people who dont jump to the all encompassing conspiracy theory angle..

Is your president a natural born citizen?

 

[SpasticGramps]

HempKat must be another Alex Jones conspiracy theorist too then eh? Talking about monetization of debt eventually leading to inflation and currency collapse and all.

I'd love to see Europe really dive head first into this fairy tale "growth" strategy. I hope they go out and borrow and spend as much money as they possibly can. Oh, wait. They are already almost locked out of capital markets with their current balance sheets and their banks are failing. What to do? What to do?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

sage advice(in bold)...


i guess if you wait until 50 to begin a retirement your already behind the curve...

being young id spread my assets with a majority focus on high risk with a solid backbone of security...

maybe 70/30% high/low as i progress id likely transition more of my funding into the low risk so by 50 id maybe be reversed 30/70 high low...



thats assuming hes only starting retirement planning/saving at 50.
in that case your behind already so yes get into some high risk portfolios, what do you have to lose at this point, certainly a lot less than you have too gain...


this argument is pointless

stop making it?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

HempKat must be another Alex Jones conspiracy theorist too then eh? Talking about monetization of debt eventually leading to inflation and currency collapse and all.

I'd love to see Europe really dive head first into this fairy tale "growth" strategy. I hope they go out and borrow and spend as much money as they possibly can. Oh, wait. They are already almost locked out of capital markets with their current balance sheets and their banks are failing. What to do? What to do?

Admit that austerity in contractions deepens contractions?

Would be tough to compare Hemp to Alex. Alex never deviates from 100% pro or con. Can't say for sure but I bet Hemp doesn't play spooky musical noise in the background.

 

[HempKat]

HempKat must be another Alex Jones conspiracy theorist too then eh? Talking about monetization of debt eventually leading to inflation and currency collapse and all.

I'd love to see Europe really dive head first into this fairy tale "growth" strategy. I hope they go out and borrow and spend as much money as they possibly can. Oh, wait. They are already almost locked out of capital markets with their current balance sheets and their banks are failing. What to do? What to do?

Actually and as I said I really don't have much interest in this stuff. I've had a low opinion of the stock market for a long time I see it as a breeding ground for greed and corruption. To be perfectly honest most of what I'm expressing here is stuff I've picked up from you, Disco, whodare and a few others blended with watching the news when it shows governments and economies failing in other countries.

We already have the occupy movement and that's the pacifistic expression but if you feel around by listening and talking to people you can sense there is a much larger group waiting to see a collapse so they can spring into anarchy and eliminate the elite whom they'll ultimately blame for their plight.

 

[dagnabit]

If you know what sophism means, try pointing it out.

Alex is one of Ron's biggest megaphones.

Is your president a natural born citizen?

^