Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: DE, this un's fur you, my friend - not a slam, but just some solid info, imo.

By: monkeytrots in 6TH POPE | Recommend this post (0)
Tue, 29 Oct 24 9:20 PM | 10 view(s)
Boardmark this board | 6th Edition Pope Board 		Msg. 59955 of 60008
(This msg. is a reply to 59949 by De_Composed)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Excellent reply, DE. You make a solid case for your gold preference. I still think silver is a better investment (which you obviously invest in with your continuous bidding on sterling at good prices in auctions).

True on gold in circuit boards - BUT only on the 'contacts' because of it's excellent anti-oxidant properties, and in microscopic amounts - extremely thin plating due to improvements in the past 3 decades in electroplating methods. Silver is FAR more prevalent in electronics today than gold - due to it's conductivity.
Solar Panels being just one of many examples. Older circuit boards (early-late 80's) are worth 'scavenging' for their gold content - newer ones, it costs more to salvage than the value of gold one can extract.

During 'hard times' the 'trade value' of gold falls dramatically because of it's limited usefulness, but silver maintains it's value better in hard times.

I would rather hoard copper for hard times than gold. It is easily workable and reusable , and is absolutely essential to so many practical applications. Everyone needs wire, even in hard times. That is the definition of real value for trading purposes, even when 'currencies *real or fiat* collapse. Oil is good, but it is difficult to store, more bulky, and degrades with age. (The oil industry is the largest consumer or anti-bacterials in the world - read 'expensive to store'.)




Avatar

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: DE, this un's fur you, my friend - not a slam, but just some solid info, imo.
By: De_Composed in 6TH POPE
Tue, 29 Oct 24 8:50 PM 		Msg. 59949 of 60008

mt:

Re: “Gold... Compared to SILVER (or platinum, or ...) gold has far fewer critical commercial uses.”First, there is nothing in your post that could possibly be construed as a "slam." Thanks for the concern, but I'd have to be a damned liberal to find it offensive.

Second, I am pro gold AND pro silver. While I think gold is the better investment today, I might be wrong. Silver is up 780% since I first began recommending it on Raging Bull. Gold is up 850% over that same period. Pretty darned close! Closer than I'd have expected, in fact, given that I've always leant more in gold's direction.

I became biased against silver way back around 2004, when I had a penny stock named Golden Phoenix with operations primarily in Nevada. It had a shareholder meeting in Reno which I attended, and I jumped at the chance to go on a tour of its main mine. At the conclusion, I saw some of its product - both gold and silver bricks. And that's what did it. I learned what your article notes, that most silver comes as a byproduct of other mining. The simple fact is that silver is common. It's easily found, easily mined, and cheap. This is why there are very few mines devoted to silver.

If demand for silver were ever to rise spectacularly, I am convinced that many mines would abruptly open and cap its rising price.

Your article mentions that silver is a better conductor than gold. And it's 1% the price of gold. Why, then, do you suppose that gold continues to be used on circuit boards? It's because silver oxidizes and corrodes very easily while gold does not. In many cases, the fact that silver is a better conductor isn't what most matters. It's that silver isn't durable.

Finally, the article observes that there are far fewer commercial uses for gold than for silver. Believe it or not, that is an argument for GOLD - if you are trying to insure against monetary failure. The fact is that gold's value is remarkably stable, whether you look back decades or centuries. Silver's value, on the other hand, gyrates madly as industrial demand for it waxes and wanes. An important requirement for money is that it not do that. Money's value should be stable, encouraging those who hold it to have confidence in it.

But, on the other hand, there's the point that Zimbler brings up: How is anyone going to buy a hamburger with a gold coin? Silver is better, but even that isn't terribly practical. If the world ever returns to a precious metal based monetary standard, I assume the answer will be the same as ever: Bank notes that come in denominations ranging from 1 t oz Au all the way down to .00001 t oz Au. Then the world will become dependent on paper... and printing presses, and the cheating will start anew. U.S. currency has failed five or six times for this reason, has it not?

« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next