To: Toddsterpatriot; Leisler
I'd rather have $20 worth of stocks and their reinvested dividends over the last 100 years.
Funny thing is, none of us get to invest for 100 years. We have to invest during our productive years, and make the best choices depending on what's going on at a macro level - like the fed printing the dollar into oblivion.
Gold has kicked the $hit out of stocks for the past 10 years (and totally bitch slapped finance stocks like BAC). It's gonna be a 15-20 year bull run when it's all said and done. Is that "long term" enough for ya? I'll bet you've actually bought some gold by now but aren't telling anyone.
LOL
56 posted on
04/08/2011 10:15:18 PM PDT by
dollarbull
(why are paperbugs so bad at history?)
To: dollarbull
The whole gold vs stocks thing is kind of lame. Under any circumstance, it’s insane not to have both in a well-rounded portfolio.
Gold is super-hot right now because we have monetary hyperinflation being masked by economic deflation; If we do a Greenspan-Reagan maneuver to pull out of this death spiral, you’ll see a spike in unemployment and interest rates... but then somehow, but a crash in gold. But then your stocks will start taking off, and if you rebalance your portfolio frequently, you’ll have taken your profits from gold already.
59 posted on
04/08/2011 11:52:50 PM PDT by
dangus
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson