Normal
Berkshire is an extreme example, but the point I am trying to explain to against the grain doesn’t rely on Berkshire’s extreme performance, even something as the index or simple as a residential real estate beats gold over time, not because of a price boom, but just the income generation alone.If he could understand the simple point that you could buy a house (or shares, farmland anything), and then use the income each your to purchase gold and end up with more gold than you would have if you just bought gold at the start and you would still own the income asset too, he would understand the strength of income assets vs commodities.however I think he is purposely trying to confuse the issue.
Berkshire is an extreme example, but the point I am trying to explain to against the grain doesn’t rely on Berkshire’s extreme performance, even something as the index or simple as a residential real estate beats gold over time, not because of a price boom, but just the income generation alone.
If he could understand the simple point that you could buy a house (or shares, farmland anything), and then use the income each your to purchase gold and end up with more gold than you would have if you just bought gold at the start and you would still own the income asset too, he would understand the strength of income assets vs commodities.
however I think he is purposely trying to confuse the issue.
Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!
To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.
Already a member? Log in here.
