[quote=scaredycat]I tend to look at performance over the long haul, like from say, 1500 B.C. up to today. gold has done well for something with “no intrinsic value”.
you can’t run your car on cash. [/quote]
Scaredy: Perfect. Let’s look at gold going back that far (or farther). Use either the Sumerians or the Egyptians as a point of reference (and, yes, there are trading records dating that far back). Now, compare gold to, say, livestock or agricultural holdings. How does gold perform?
Historically speaking, gold has never shown intrinsic value. It’s worth is derived from whatever value is assigned to it. The Spaniards or Elizabethan English may have placed great value in gold, but less as a store of value and more as a means to finance the various wars and commercial enterprises they had going. There are points in history where salt, spices and certain hardwoods had more value than gold.
You’re buying into the notion that gold (or silver) will have intrinsic value if the paper currency collapses. Well, I have news for you. Prior to 1971, the paper currency’s value was tied to existing gold reserves. Do you think that prior to 1971 there were no boom and bust cycles? Or inflationary and deflationary cycles?
Yours are specious arguments and not supported by fact or history.
