Thread: Buying Gold with my Thai savings?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

"One of the best examples of this negative relationship between stock markets and GDP growth is China. Since 1992, China has outgrown the United States by a whopping 8% per year on average. But, it is the investor who put his money in the US stock market who actually made the best return. While lagging China by a mile in terms of economic progress, US equities outperformed Chinese stocks by roughly 8% per year. More evidence that the relationship between economic growth and equity returns is not a match made in heaven."

Originally Posted by draco888

You stated yield is always positive when that quite clearly not always the case.

yield is a valuation measure for comps, how hard is it to understand ? your holding return will always be different from the yield,

like when you hold a bond, the yield for that bond will be different from your holding period return. It doesn't matter if you bought the bond at par or above par, the yield will go up and down regardless of your initial investment.

Get an education will you, not trading crash courses on exotic instruments.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Chart from the 20s and Hitler

Just proves what an idiot Socal is. No wonder he can't afford to see a doctor

yeah, what a benchmark, socal 2.0 pulled out the same trick in another post

those great minds must think alike

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

You stated yield is always positive when that quite clearly not always the case.

yield is a valuation measure for comps, how hard is it to understand ? your holding return will always be different from the yield,

like when you hold a bond, the yield for that bond will be different from your holding period return. It doesn't matter if you bought the bond at par or above par, the yield will go up and down regardless of your initial investment.

Get an education will you, not trading crash courses on exotic instruments.

Butters, nobody but you mentioned holding return! Did your education not include sticking to the point. Yields are not always positive. Don't know if you have gone this deep in your analysis but property net yields can be negative, it really is rather simple.

The Three Stooges

the missing fourth one is unable to make it out today

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Chart from the 20s and Hitler

Just proves what an idiot Socal is. No wonder he can't afford to see a doctor

yeah, what a benchmark, socal 2.0 pulled out the same trick in another post

those great minds must think alike

Are you on the drink by any chance Butters? What '20's Hitler chart did you hallucinate I pulled out?

He probably thought you and Socal are the same person. You've both fucked in the head.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

He probably thought you and Socal are the same person. You've both fucked in the head.

Maybe, but at least I can read an article and research reports and understand what they are saying, you didn't manage to even correctly interpret the illustration.

Originally Posted by draco888

Butters, nobody but you mentioned holding return!

that's because you confuse those 2 and that needed to be addressed, since you have no clue what a yield is

yields on property are not negative, but holding period return can

yield on a corporate bond is also non-negative but your holding period return can

simple asset valuation principles,

Originally Posted by draco888

Are you on the drink by any chance Butters? What '20's Hitler chart did you hallucinate I pulled out?

you used the Nazi era as some kind of benchmark for Gold, that's another comparable you brought to the table with all those silly charts that Socal 1.0 is putting together

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

Wow you live in a simple world don't you? Did you read that the stock Market leads the real economy by a year or two in the readers digest? Must be true then, after all the economy has always performed after a stock market rally has it not?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

No I learnt it from working with brokers and large fund managers.

I don't really think serving the coffee counts for much though

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

Butters, nobody but you mentioned holding return!

that's because you confuse those 2 and that needed to be addressed, since you have no clue what a yield is

yields on property are not negative, but holding period return can

yield on a corporate bond is also non-negative but your holding period return can

simple asset valuation principles,

Butters, butters, I am not confusing the two, yet again I state nobody but you mentioned holding period return. Nobody.

Why do you think net yield on a property cannot be negative? Interesting if you can explain this. And please do not try to introduce holding period return again.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

Are you on the drink by any chance Butters? What '20's Hitler chart did you hallucinate I pulled out?

you used the Nazi era as some kind of benchmark for Gold, that's another comparable you brought to the table with all those silly charts that Socal 1.0 is putting together

Please try to separate reality from the movies. Why should gold during the Nazi era be a benchmark for anything?

Originally Posted by draco888

Why should gold during the Nazi era be a benchmark for anything?

you indicated that Gold was also very useful during the Nazi era for the refugees, and for that reason Gold should be taken into consideration

but I am sure water and food would have been equally useful,

anyway, more pointless discussion with Socal 1.0 and Socal 2.0, the dumb and dumber of the investment world

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

I see you chose to ignore when forward looking data is used

Originally Posted by waradmiral

That's not a surprise at all. Buying shares after 5 strong years of eco growth would have you buying shares near a peak.

Rather obvious.

You want to be buying shares before the growth starts.

That's just common sense investing.

2009 is a perfect example. Eco tanking, shares hit rock bottom and started to rise expecting an improved eco going fwd.

You buy before the eco turnaround not 5 years after

I see you fail to understand how equities markets work.

Bull markets in stocks typically last 3-5 years.

Why the hell would you buy near the end of one?

For the same reason you want to buy gold at the end of a bull market. You're a follower not a thinker.

Can you please tell me when you think the 33 year bull market in US treasury debt will end. Just give me a guess..

This bull market is older then I am by a few years. Is it older then you are ?

And you know what happend the last time this bubble burst ? Gold went from $33 an oz to $850, a 2300% rise. So this $1000 to $2000 gold market is just a side show to the real thing. Its like when gold traded from $35 to $65.

After inflation that's hardly a bull market at all.

And just because a bull market lasts 30 yrs in chang prices doesn't mean the price of goats will rise for 30 years.

You fail to understand how 99.9% of markets work.

But keep punching away spruiking gold for the next 5 years and losing money. It's going to be hilarious.

There, you topped Butterfly and he doesn't profess to have an formal education in markets like you do.

I bought gold at under $850 an oz and I am still ahead on average.

So your answer is to my question is that the 33 year price rise in BONDS is not even a bull market, nor a bubble. So in your mind, bonds will rise forever or at least another 33 years and gold is a bubble because it went up for 12 years. Just the thinking that NASDAQ investors had and real estate investors had. How typical...


Definition of 'Bull Market'

A financial market of a group of securities in which prices are rising or are expected to rise. The term "bull market" is most often used to refer to the stock market, but is applied to anything that is traded, such as bonds, currencies and commodities.

Lets have another look at the PRICE of bonds over 33 years.

Do you have an alternative definition of bull market that you can present us with ?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

"Gold went from $33 an oz to $850, a 2300% rise"

So now you're predicting a 2300% rise hahahaha

Earlier you predicted gold would fall to $100/oz


Fucking hilarious the bs you come up with

If it rises you're right
If it falls you're right



What a douchebag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I said, as I did 2 years ago that if the COMEX defaults, the posted price of gold as we see it will plummet. That does not mean that the physical price of gold is falling, it means that the COMEX defaulted.

I am not sure if this is the default of the COMEX or not. As I said 2 years ago, it will take weeks for the dust to settle. A $100+ down day suggests a default but nobody knows until some times has passed.

The 2300% rise happened the last time the US bond bubble imploded. So far, that bubble has continued, so there is nothing to be seen.(the bubble that you don't even know exists) Arguing about the price of gold in the 60's (pre bond bear market) as it bounced from $35 to $65 meant about as much then as it means about arguing about the current price range now.

If this isn't the default of the COMEX and just a price crash, oohh ahh, poke fun at me all you want. The guys that bought gold at the "lofty" price of $80 were probably laughed at too.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

You stated yield is always positive when that quite clearly not always the case.

It doesn't matter if you bought the bond at par or above par, the yield will go up and down regardless of your initial investment.

Bond yields are inverse of the price, just like a dividend. If you buy a bond that yields 2% and the value of the bond rises (somebody pays more for the bond then you did) the yield for the new buyer is lower.

For example, the bond bubble.

US Bond prices


US bond yields


33 years, bubble ? Nah

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

Why should gold during the Nazi era be a benchmark for anything?

you indicated that Gold was also very useful during the Nazi era for the refugees, and for that reason Gold should be taken into consideration

but I am sure water and food would have been equally useful,

anyway, more pointless discussion with Socal 1.0 and Socal 2.0, the dumb and dumber of the investment world

How does being useful make it a benchmark? Why would food and water be useful for bribing your way out of a country when the regime already control those things?

Yes it is pointless discussion if you can't work these things out.

I notice that you have failed to answer my question why it is impossible to have negative net yield on property.

Originally Posted by draco888

I notice that you have failed to answer my question why it is impossible to have negative net yield on property.

as long as you confuse yield and holding period return, not sure how it is possible to answer that question

a yield is a valuation measure, something based on market price of an asset

the holding period return is based on your cost and income received during a time period, and eventually your sale price

next you are going to ask me if it's possible that a property price is negative, and why I am not answering that question

like I said, dumber than Socal 1.0

Originally Posted by draco888

How does being useful make it a benchmark?

you tell me, it's your benchmark, Gold as an useful asset in time of emergency is always trumped by you nutters

Originally Posted by socal

I bought gold at under $850 an oz and I am still ahead on average.

well done, but that is not what investing smart is all about

you should have sold at $1700 and waited until the right moment to buy again

or tried to find something better to invest in, like Ladyboy fashion, always a best seller

Originally Posted by socal

poke fun at me all you want.

Oh, OK

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

I notice that you have failed to answer my question why it is impossible to have negative net yield on property.

as long as you confuse yield and holding period return, not sure how it is possible to answer that question

a yield is a valuation measure, something based on market price of an asset

the holding period return is based on your cost and income received during a time period, and eventually your sale price

next you are going to ask me if it's possible that a property price is negative, and why I am not answering that question
like I said, dumber than Socal 1.0

Why are you still on about holding period return?
Why can't you say whether it is possible to have a negative net yield?
Negative property price?? Whatever next? Hahaha, classic!

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

How does being useful make it a benchmark?

you tell me, it's your benchmark, Gold as an useful asset in time of emergency is always trumped by you nutters

Who's benchmark and why? Where do you get this stuff from?

As an aside I do know several people from families who have been able to flee various regimes by virtue of the fact that they owned gold. Try using a buttercup paper based insurance policy for that