Allrighty guys.. >here's some more data to toss into the fray. We're wanting to talk apples and apples, gold maintaining or not.. .blah blah blah... If you take $1 in 1900. It takes $26.80in US dollars (fiat or not) to buy the SAME amount of commodities, in 2015 based on the Consumer Price Index. (Valuation of the same goods).
A 1900 $1 gold coin weighs 1.672 grams of 90% pure gold. At today's spot prices that's $30.60 gram, making the gold coin = $51.16
A 1900 $1 silver coin is worth (at today's spot) $10.68.
WHOA, NELLY! Shouldn't they be the same? Why the difference? Pretty simple answer actually. SUPPLY AND DEMAND. That's it. Plain and simple. Gold might be a good hedge, unless you've bought high and are selling low. But that's the same for pretty much all of it.
Metals do NOT "maintain" unless you're looking at lousy value return. The real price of Gold is much higher than silver. To pretend that the value of the gold is just maintenance, tells you right there, that something is off. $1 of gold and $1 of silver were "equivalent" in 1900. If you believe METAL holds it's value, then a Morgan dollar's worth of silver SHOULD be worth 26.80 based on CPI (consumer Price Index).
And before we get all excited that Gold is so much higher than the CPI's value of $1...
Even if you believe Gold is a GREAT Hedge... consider the fact that $1 invested in the stock market (the top 500) would have yielded $19,800 in return by 2015 ($1000 investment yielded $19.8Million). To suggest that a $50 or even $100 value of gold is a great hedge is just..well... silly. Might as well buy the commodities.
If you believe that, PLEASE bury your money in the ground. I would love to find it in 20 years. It'll be WAY more fun... Speaking of whcih< I still don't have an answer why $0.30 of silver ecites me more than a $2 coin spill. I think it has magic powers...
Skippy