Silver or copper are better than gold.
Reader comment on: Weiner, Waxman Set Gold Hearing
in response to reader comment: Ownership of gold
Submitted by Lyle (United States), Sep 16, 2010 22:27
They are less overhyped and actually have some uses. Now of course we have seen the effects of a bubble in silver after the Hunt brothers failed corner, as we saw in 1907 on copper.
Anyway if you have to advertise something someone is making a fairly large margin on it, implying there is a high private transfer tax (commission both ways) on the transaction. I suspect with these folks the transfer tax is like that on Jewelery where the purchase back price is like 40% of the retail price. (Not exactly a great investment)
Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.
Submit a comment on this article
Other reader comments on this item
[w/response] [13 words]
|Leslie||Sep 23, 2010 15:59|
|No Surprise [76 words]||T.Donaldson||Sep 23, 2010 10:56|
|Not about gold ownership [45 words]||Veldrin||Sep 20, 2010 14:58|
|Relax [63 words]||Fabian||Sep 17, 2010 17:28|
|Ownership of gold [110 words]||J.Johnson||Sep 16, 2010 17:05|
|↔ Is the glass half full? [8 words]||DonM||Sep 16, 2010 19:48|
|↔ ⇒ Silver or copper are better than gold. [95 words]||Lyle||Sep 16, 2010 22:27|
|↔ profit margin [190 words]||A businessman in the real world||Sep 17, 2010 01:46|
|↔ gold confiscation antidote? [87 words]||SID||Sep 17, 2010 18:27|
|↔ A dress rehearsal? [202 words]||Joe||Sep 20, 2010 16:00|
Comment on this item