Gold is a stagnant investment

In other words, gold doesn't go up in value. It just goes up in price.

Good hedge against inflation, but stocks are probably the best long term investment. If they suck over the long term, we're all screwed anyway.

I don't think most people buy gold looking to make money, as Turk said its mainly a hedge against inflation and an economic disaster.

quote:

---

and an economic disaster.

---

The way I see it, in such a scenario gold would be worthless to the average owner because the guy with more guns is just going to take it from you.

quote:

---

If the guy with more guns is willing to take your gold, what's keeping him from taking everything you own? If your deduction is correct then there would be no point in acquiring anything of presumed value.

---

What?

Let me single out the point I think you missed. People don't acquire wealth for the specific purpose of hedging against catastrophe (They acquire it for that a bit, but also for vacation, shite to buy, retirement, etc). Some gold buyers do buy for that purpose.

What I was saying was, if you are buying gold for the specific purpose as a store of wealth during a catastrophe, my opinion is that you are wasting your time because gold will probably never fulfill that purpose because I feel in such a scenario you will never peacefully be able to transact with it to acquire goods. Therefore, it is neither helping you during times absent catastrophe or during them and therefore could be seen as a waste of time and effort.

However, my assets for investment, while they can be stolen during such a catastrophe and therefore "worthless," are clearly not worthless in the absence there of.

Hence, the flaw in your argument.

Of Course, you could have the scenario where there is economic catastrophe of such proportions where gold was the only reliable asset yet civil order and peace were in abundance as well, but in my opinion that is doubtful to occur. And in my opinion, the Great Depression doesn't count as an example but I'm willing to hear the argument.

quote:

---

he way I see it, in such a scenario gold would be worthless to the average owner because the guy with more guns is just going to take it from you.

---

There's a pretty wide field between "economic catastrophe" and "end of civilization"

Most charts don't back that far, because the price of gold used to be fixed to the currency.

If you want historical market values going back to the 13rd century, you can check out measuringworth.com.

FDR put the brakes on that when he was inaugurated by forcing a gold buy back.

That could take place in a future economic disaster, of course, but I think the general public would be a lot more resistant to such an order today.

First scenario my opinion is that could work if your local economy isn't the USA since if the USA collapses there will not be many places to move to who are not suffering almost as badly.

The second scenario could work if you could protect your assets of course, regardless of place of residence.

Obviously its all theoretical and if you have the money and the gold insurance works then you win and I lose.