Ronnie 666 said:
Hey wrcmad so you think it's rational an good economic practice to print money and monetize the debt. It's leads to economic recovery and wealth creation for all. I am not critical of sceptics, I am critical of insanity. This is clearly an article written by a paper bug probably a silver fish. Lost my shirt hahahaha. That hurts almost split my shirt. Keep investing in paper there are a lot of silver fish that need to eat.
Please don't believe what you read in the Sydney newspapers, after all I only buy them so my puppy has something to aim at.
I apologise. I didn't realise what a raw nerve my jest had hit.
I never mentioned anything about money printing and it's effects. That drum has been beating for years (No. 1
).
And FYI, I bought physical gold last night.
However, your reaction reinforces the point of the article to some extent.
While I don't take seriously the line that gold bugs lost their shirts, I think the article has some legs - for the most part, it merely lays out good investment philosophy for most investment classes.
trew said:
So commodities have no fundamentals ?
I guess all the world's oil, coal and copper companies just operate at random then.
They just toss a coin when deciding if they should spend a few billion opening a new mine.
What a totally stupid thing to say.
No, they don't just toss a coin or operate at random. Investment decisions are, however, based on "whatever the next guy is willing to pay for them", and projections (best guestimates) of this number. Simple demand/supply.
As you know, I am an advocate of supply/demand and market dynamics. It works for me, and always has.
I don't buy the theory that the fundamentals of gold are based conveniently on one single monetary supply figure of a chosen nation - in my mind, this tired argument does not amount to "fundamentals", it is merely an isolated data point of convenience and last resort.
Stupid? What stupid?
Geezus, you guys need to relax a bit. This is exactly what No.10 spells out plain and clear.
