On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 19:46:24 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 06/08/2011 5:18 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 15:24:31 -0600,
wrote:

On 06/08/2011 11:22 AM, wrote:

Well, you don't need to get any more stupid. Greg is promoting it as
better than cash. So, why would he sell them for cash? What's it going
to get him? He can't eat the silver.

It is over the long term. It isn't over the short term.

Imagine if you spent $1000 on gold in 1933 at $20 an ounce. Today that
50 ounces would be worth at least $83,000.

But your $1000 in fiat paper would still only be $1000.

Cash is a rapidly depreciating asset due to bank and government fraud.

A thousand dollars at today's prices would have been worth about
$16,000 in 1933 when you factor in the inflation.

Funny, after taxes on interest that is often below inflation, your not
going to find a money lending instrument that can beat gold over the
long haul. Gold was $20 an ounce at the beginning of 1933 and $35 an
ounce at the end of 1933 alone. Today it is 1666, over 83 times in
currency value. No bank account or CD/GIC beat that.

In the other hand the Dow was trading in the low 50s so if you bought
a good portfolio of stocks you would be doing real well. If you didn't
have too much GM.

Depends, GM would be good if you sold out say 35 years ago and bought
IBM or Cisco.

Not funny you're stupid. It's pathetic.