Investment Advice: Can Gold Go for $2,000?
From today’s UK Telegraph:
Investment advice: Can gold go for $2,000?
You can replace the “gold” with any material object or immaterial service.
You can replace the dollar amount with any other dollar amount.
I remember a headline “Can gold go for $1,000?” from not very long ago. Indeed if you search the web for that string of characters you’ll come up with quite a few articles.
I can recall a time when the world was poised breathlessly on the $400 abyss.
And in my childhood in the Yilgarn Goldfields, 30-ton trucks full of rich ore trundled by the house daily.
Here is a chart of gold prices gleaned from the web.
There obviously was a time when people asked “Can gold go for $200?” and it seems to me that there must have been a time when some prospectors asked “Can gold go for $20?”.
With that in mind, it is fairly easy to predict that there will be a time when people ask “Can gold go for $3,000?” and “Can gold go for $4,000?” and even “Can gold go for $20,000?”.
In other words, the question asked is rather pointless, as the answer will always be YES, regardless of the amount asked, providing that the price is greater than today’s price.
Here’s another question: “Will eggs ever retail for $20 a dozen?”.
Here’s another question: “Will eggs ever retail for €200 a dozen?”.
It is Pointless to “Get Ready for the Big One”
From today’s Toronto Star:
“Canadian and American astronauts say the world needs to prepare for the big one — the asteroid impact that could one day devastate the Earth.”
I think that this is nonsense.
For a united-world-effort to save-the-world, we already have rockets that can boost tons into orbits, and explosive devices that are pretty powerful AND accurate.
But That’s Not the Point
We do not yet have a fixed date for the next close-encounter. It is probably at least 100 years away, maybe more (ask the geologists how frequently an earth-shattering meteorite slams into the earth).
One hundred years from now the technology will be different.
I don’t know what it will be, but it won’t be carbon-hydrogen fuel being burnt explosively out the tail-end of a steel cylinder.
And I am positive that 100 years from now we will have space-vehicles more numerous than earth vehicles (UK motor-cars; US: automobiles).
So any effort geared towards thinking of using today’s technology will be wasted effort.
For “pointless” read “irrational”, and for “irrational” read “insane”.
Or if you prefer “Can you say ‘Government Grant’?”.
