11Mon
Now everyone has their own point of view. If someone refers to Orwell's 1984, then I always like to refer to German history from 1923 to 1955. Nobody buys gold because it glitters so beautifully. Gold also has the advantage that it is currency-independent and therefore still has value even in times of great need. For this reason, I always have a few Krugerrands and American Eagles lying around at home - both in Germany and in the USA - in addition to my euro, dollar and Swiss franc cash holdings. The fact that a government comes along that has driven the cart into the mud through mismanagement and suddenly assumes that I am the source of happiness or that I am exposed to political persecution... that's something you like to hedge against.
••
@Reinecke Thank you for your opinion. However, once again: 1. the storage period at the dealer is 5 years. After that, the documents are destroyed. 2. it is not "my" point of view, but the procedure described here is a fact. 3) I always find it interesting in what context history and the present day are seen. People are still talking about banning gold like in the old days. Honesty on the table: foreign exchange was just as forbidden. There were reasons for that. And reasons that we would find difficult to achieve today. Especially as I very much doubt (this is the only point where I have an "opinion") whether a complete ban could still be implemented in the same way today. 4th point to ponder: Why not such fears in the case of share ownership? Nationalization at the national level works faster and more effectively these days than chasing after gold stocks at Auntie Erna's. Funny, but nobody has any concerns about that. Because people only ever think and argue in a way that fits their own image. 5. the fact is, and my experience in the precious metals trade (for more than a decade) and evaluations of our industry prove this: most people are not talking about a gold ban when it comes to identification, but rather the absurd assumption that the state already has direct access to the information. And this is simply nonsense. I would like to point out that most of my colleagues in the industry are quite pessimistic and doomsayers in terms of trust in the state and other institutions. I personally find this nonsense, but shouldn't this be an indication of the absurdity of the claim of "omnipotence and control by the tax authorities"? These colleagues sometimes work very close to the limits of common sense in terms of regulation. But ok... from 1923 to 1955, they only had these methods. But the world of business and laws has changed since then. The possibilities are more diverse, but people are also generally more responsible. Anyone who still believes in "searches aka 1923 in bars and restaurants to get foreign currency", well then, there you go. I would rather believe in digital money for regulation than in any kind of gold ban. And the experts at Commerzbank can confirm that, as can every single precious metals dealer who has some knowledge of the subject. If purely digital money is introduced, any physical asset can automatically become a substitute currency. Restricting oneself solely to gold is therefore a rather one-sided view.
•
11
•11Mon
@InvestmentPapa You can go on and on here. I like to buy my gold anonymously, just as I only list my small portfolio here. Gold traders are not white knights either. In a country where politicians like to use the word expropriation, I am cautious. If a party comes to power that talks about remigration, then even more so. Gold also protects you politically.
•
11
•@Reinecke Ultimately, it is fascinating to me that you obviously cite the fascist and national capitalist party as an example of the danger of a gold ban (which in fact has a lot of historical evidence to back it up), but that this party is seen as the "guardian of gold" by most argumentators. This is an interesting point of view from you, and I agree with you on one point: Gold is a hedge in political (and economic) situations. But what's the point of having a deliberately small portfolio if it's just a marketplace of puffery? The reality is that the state knows exactly where you own shares and are therefore a co-owner. In this respect, anonymity is only a personal "imaginary security" for you vis-à-vis other people, but in no way a protection against state encroachment.
What I want to ensure here in any case: I am absolutely not against your opinion or believe that you are completely wrong, the discourse on this topic pleases me, but also shows me the supposed weaknesses of the argumentation of many a skeptic, since it only covers a small aspect of "state repression", as far as one wants to speak of such here.
Nevertheless. That's what the exchange is all about, so thank you for that and if the exchange ends here, have a nice weekend! 🤝
What I want to ensure here in any case: I am absolutely not against your opinion or believe that you are completely wrong, the discourse on this topic pleases me, but also shows me the supposed weaknesses of the argumentation of many a skeptic, since it only covers a small aspect of "state repression", as far as one wants to speak of such here.
Nevertheless. That's what the exchange is all about, so thank you for that and if the exchange ends here, have a nice weekend! 🤝
•
11
•11Mon
@InvestmentPapa with the luxury of two passports, I have a grounded view of things. Have a nice weekend.
•
11
•