This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
- advertisements -
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
I can live with that.
Speaking of hard assets, hold on to your weapons and real money, because the rule of law no longer applies:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/14/if-we-cant-secure-the-doors-t...
Illegals storm Congressman's office on Capitol Hill and refuse to leave. Unfettered access and basically "untouchable" by the rule of law.
It's coming...soon...
re: graphs ...
the ordinary average (arithmetic mean) is ok
but since these are rates that lead to exponential growth or decline, maybe the geometric mean would be more .. well .. mean-ingful
the orderings might still come out the same though
#1 Peter King is a super-douche
#2 http://youtu.be/Cj0HVR3-yLA you're all illegal
This time it's different.
This is all bullshit
You cant compare stock indexes to gold because indexes don't account for the stocks that enter and exit the index.
You would have to take the stocks that comprised the index from the first year the chart started and that is what you would compare to gold.
Gold in 1960 is still the same gold in 2013. The DOW in 1960 is not the same DOW today. Hell, the DOW of 2006 is not the same DOW as now.
indexes don't account for the stocks that enter and exit the index
Bullshit. When (for example) a Dow component is replaced, the old one is sold and the new one is purchased. Same with the S&P.
How do you think SPY (minus expenses) has matched the S&P since 1997?
Duh, get a clue. (And take your socks off next time you schtup a ho.)
Stocks and bonds do not stack as easily, nor are they as shiney.
Can't print it either, can you Ben?
Just wait til one of those event markers is: Comex default
http://goldsilverbitcoin.com
The criminals on Wall Street leveraged their paper gold and silver exponentially.
Just like Bernanke and the Fed have with fractional reserve.
The emperor has no clothes.
How is this chart meaningful when the price of gold was fixed for so many years? The start date should be in the early 1970's.
Isn't it still fixed.
Good question.
What I did is construct an index of gold stocks before the early 1970s, switching to bullion from then on.
Even so, gold ends up with a weak Sharpe ratio of 0.23, poorer than that of both 10-year T-notes and stocks.
Gold is a great trading vehicle, but sucks as a buy-and-hold investment.
They say .... most of the gold ever mined .... is still with us .... compare that to all the bonds .... ever printed ?
Considering that the debt is always rolled, that might be true.
I remember Louis Rukeyser ragging on gold during his year-end reviews. Birinyi in black tie, ready to release next year's positive prediction as the ruler revealed it to him.
Inflation from the late-70s was gone, the budget was coming into balance, and gold stayed stubbornly in the low-300s. Even politically, the Iran hostages were gone from the news and the USSR seemed less of a threat. I did buy a Maple leaf (Krugs were illegal) and a nice, heavy Johnson Matthey bar.
It was about that time I submitted my first college paper using a word processor. We were at the beginning of computers entering homes and businesses. A few years later, one VP at my Fortune 500 employer was still calling the PC an "expensive status symbol", mainly because he did not know much about the one on his desk. He eventually came around, big time, by the way.
Even though I enjoy buying low, I did not do much of it with gold. Everything looked pretty bright - and it was. The market, except for about 3 days in 1987, was about to have a couple great decades for the longs.
That was a great time of positive complacency. That was the time to buy gold and complacency was the clue.
These days, at least for the past five years, excessive printing has produced a more nervous complacency. People seem to know the party will end, but they also think it may be 1982 and they just turned in their first paper done on a word processor.
The market, except for about 3 days in 1987, was about to have a couple great decades for the longs.
and I have found this to be the exact problem with the market. As over consumption fueled by loose EZ credit pumps markets higher with no regard to how it ends. The market is NOT forward looking. The market is not and investment. The market is nothing more than a Casino who's foot traffic depends on the FED's actions. Many, if not most private retirement accounts (401k, Roth, 403B, etc.) will be wiped out because of that one mantra sold to everyone: "your investing for the LONG TERM!!!". GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!!!
Complacency. I wish I had listened to his little voice in 2005 when he looked around and asked me, "If you can't buy your house today at these prices, who do you think is going to buy it from when you retire?" Fortunately I lost my job six months later and had to sell it anyway to some greater fool near the peak.
So, maybe everyone owning homes in the re-boom real estate markets we keep hearing about should go to their boss on Monday and asked to be fired so they can sell their home. It might turn out to be the best investment they ever made.
a. In theory, on the average, gold can never go up more than inflation because it is just a commodity with no increasing use in anything productive. Its average price is determined by infaltion and manipulation, not free market dynamics and a return on its use.
b. How many times has the S&P 500 been reconstituted to yield what appear to be more favorable results?
c. As for bonds and bills, the price is rigged by the Fed based on what they want to do with inflation.
On the whole, there are no good "financial" investments that are not either controlled or scams. There are however businesses that create value and can provide a return on their investment if the banks allow them to.
This site is sounding more like CNBC daily.
This site sounds nothing like cnbc. (I think. Don't have a television, so my knowledge is limited to a snippet here and there on the web. Don't they have some money info babe with large breasts?)
Well, they have a whole buncha babes with Big American Breasts. But info? I think not. Lotta propaganda, perceptions management and pabulum.
But lotsa big titties.
Uuuuuuummmmmmm donuts!!
Go on, Tyler, punch him.
Hit him on his ear where he's not expecting it.
Make him have the best meal of his life.
+1000
Start a business, produce goods and services, accumulate.
In answer to a.). Loan your gold out and charge interest.
you presented some valid points, then went on to sound like a moron by claiming zh sounds like cnbc when tyler asked a question and presented a graph.
it seems more liekly all your time spent watching cnbc influenced your interpretation of the graoh.
'How many times has the S&P 500 been reconstituted to yield what appear to be more favorable results?'
What do you mean, 'appear to be'? Index changes are published in real time. ETFs such as SPY follow them. You can buy SPY and earn the S&P index return, minus a modest 0.10% expense ratio.
It is a complete myth that you cannot earn the index return.
Did I say that I love Silver?
80 year investment timeline?
Buy and hold, you know.
Oh yeah, and BTFD.
I find this line of reasoning specious. Today's stock market has no similarity to historical markets, both in terms of structure (HFT) and which shares comprise it.
If you have a manipulated stock market full of pets.com and lehman, that is not the same as a real stock market with companies that actually produce goods profitably. They only share name.
It thus doesn't make sense making historical comparisons of 'stock market' returns, you are comparing vastly different things.
I call the graph bullshit for the simple reason that most of the stocks since the DOW came into being have vanished and they have simply substituted the dead companies with new ones to give the impression that the DOW is still powering ahead.
great point.......kinda like not counting food/energy when calculating inflation..
It is amazing how many people know nothing about indexes.
Changes in the Dow are published. You can hold the 30 Dow stocks in a brokerage account, make the replacements when the WSJ dictates, and earn exactly the DJIA return.
How do you think DIA (Dow Diamonds) stays in business, if it's some kind of scam?
Math, kids. It ain't that complicated.
Exactly. It's all about perception and confidence. Remember they took away mark to market accounting.
Chart based upon annual return not long term buy/hold. I think it assumes rotate in at beginning of year, rotation at the end of the year.
It says 'total return.' That means that dividends are reinvested.
Each year's annual return from continuous buy-and-hold is represented.
Rotating in and out annually has no effect on total returns, other then generating commissions and slippage.
That's a valid point. Google "How is the Dow Jones Industrial average calculated?" for more info on that.
It's why when people say "Gold has never been worth zero" I can say "neither has the DOW or S&P 500". But for vastly different reasons.
Also puts a whole new light on comments from index-groupies like Jack Bogle, doesn't it?
Thanks, I needed that!
I guess I am a dumbass because I don't see any 2000-2013 plots for gold......can someone give a hillbilly some schoolin' ?
This looks exactly how one would expect. A share in a productive business which has the ability to raise prices at or above inflation and grow over time should do better than a fixed obligation or non productive asset like gold. Business earns money and can pay dividends along the way and reinvest to grow value. Gold does better than cash/Tbills because it can't be created at the whim of some idiot central banker, but takes real work, effort and cost to produce. I've never thought the comparison of gold to stocks was fair, gold versus fiat is a fairer compare as they are both monetary assets. Gold should beat fiat and it does.
sorry kids in the short term Paper Gpld and silver will be monkeyhammered....
I don't know about that. They seem to be stubbornly holding their lows.
Just to take a look in the numbers is a stupid way and too easy ... Maybe Gold never had these "mega" negative returns, but negative returns happened much more often then in stocks (right from this chart). Just to visualize something is not the right way. When you are buying Gold your are buying one asset only. But you can invest in more then 100.000 different stocks, bonds etc .... So the chance/risk to catch the worst case and going down 40% with all your stocks in your portfolio is much more lower then just to be invested in one asset like Gold.
If you want to say something say it right, but don't make noise where it is not appropriate. Do not misleading people just for your own advantage ... MAKING NOISE AGAINST EVERYTHING!
In most cases here you are right to critisize important facts, but sometimes you are overshooting the simple way.
Where would the price of gold be if the gold certificates were not available for sale?
Higher.
Bernanke and the Fed's worst enemy is gold and silver.
It's a benchmark of US dollar devaluation.
With Central banks printing insanely Gold should contuinue climbing.
Bernanke is buying US debt with money from thin air and devaluing.
If one took a look at the Fed's real balance sheet they would find it's larger then what they state.