“If You Take Global Pension Funds … They Only Have .4% Of Their Assets That Are Invested In Gold. So Gold Is Far From Being Over-Owned”

Legendary value investor Jean Marie Eveillard – who oversees $50 billion at First Eagle Funds – told King World News today:

In this environment, gold is far from being over-owned. Rachel Benepe, who runs our gold fund here at First Eagle, she was telling me the other day that if you take global pension funds, not just in the US but in the rest of the world as well, they only have .4% of their assets that are invested in gold. So gold is far from being over-owned….

Gold today should be seen as a currency, none of the major currencies being appealing. The are an enormous amount of debt claims throughout the world, which by comparison with gold at $1,800, the entire amount of gold above ground equals ten trillion dollars, including incidentally half of that being in the form of jewelry.

By comparison with the ten trillion dollars of gold in the world, the financial claims are much, much higher, so it is still a case of too much paper, most of it dubious and I believe too little stuff, stuff being gold.

Gold will continue to rise as long as monetary authorities continue to do what they have been doing, which is an automatic reflex in a pure paper system, which is to print more money.

This confirms Jeff Clark’s's theory.

This entry was posted in Business / Economics. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.examiner.com/nonpartisan-in-national/carl-herman Carl Herman

    Try this on for size: whatever is given to the public in corporate media serves TPTB. So, when gold is being promoted as a “good investment,” doesn’t that ring alarms and raise flags?

    Walter Burien suspects that the Big Boys own almost ALL THE GOLD. If that’s the case, are they jacking-up the prices to sell? If what we’re told are all traps, shouldn’t we be looking from that perspective? If so, what do we see?

    I really don’t know about the gold market, but I do know the most efficient currency for the public good is fiat and not linked to anything else. The reason is that what we want is a controlled supply of money. The unnecessary linkage to a commodity is a dangerous variable to the value of money (consider gold’s roller coaster price ride). Moreover, if we want government to create money free of debt, how is government going to pay for the gold to back the currency?

    The easiest and most cost-effective solution is fiat. We use it pay the national debt. We stop banks from creating credit (the Orwellian opposite of money). We create public banks for at-cost credit and/or allow banks to lend deposits (paying the debt will cause investments looking for long-term homes). Public banks could offer 2% mortgages that creates enough profit to end almost our entire tax burden. Fiat currency allows government to be the employer of last resort, creating full employment with infrastructure investment (hard and soft). As we know from history, infrastructure creates more value to the economy than the cost of inputs; so this should provide the triple benefits of full employment, lower prices, and state-of-the-art infrastructure.

    Of course, professional economists can and should do multiple and independent cost-benefit analyses so we have the best ballpark figures in consideration for policy decisions.

    But beware of corporate media Sirens saying “Gold is good.” We know their history.

 

 

Twitter