Retail investors buying silver from silver mining companies doesn't shrink the money supply. It's a net-neutral left pocket right pocket transaction.
I agree with you. In fact, I'd guess that the very best thing to "own" in a truly hyperinflationary bust would be agricultural land, since none of us can eat gold or silver. Self sufficiency would be the absolute key in a doomsday scenario. I'd go so far as to say bartering in precious metals would hold a multitude of risks as well. (i.e. someone spots you using gold coins, be ready for a home invasion). I frown upon these Ivy League economists because they all have an agenda. Olias seems to fawn over their titles (I never see him quote an economist from a large state school).
Isnt this true only if the money used to buy the metals get's put back in the banking system by the new owners?
The miners have bills to pay, in fiat currency. Energy, royalties, employees, equipment & machinery etc. Residual profits are distributed to shareholders, in fiat currency. In essence precious metal investors pay other people to get metal out of the ground for them and lock it up in a vault. The fiat money doesn't disappear. It merely changes hands.
I get that but really the destination of the money is not known in advance is it? The money could still shift across borders, between assets and to different banks potentially leading to concequences similar to those of a bankrun. Mind you I would not be in favour of a global bank run, but I do feel a large part of society in the western world has most of it's assets tied up in the banking system leaving them too vulnerable then the system's safety justifies I would say. Shifting a part of that into alternatives such as precious metals would be in favour of the stability of the overal system I would think and whether such a move would mean the banking system takes a hit or thrives regardless I couldnt care less really.
You time on this ball of mud is also finite but, more importantly, how much time you have left is unknown. The problem with your finite precious metals is that their price can be manipulated by forces beyond your control. If that manipulation puts you underwater for longer than you can stay alive, you lose. Point is, don't go all in on gold, silver or any other investment. Spread it around so you can leave something for your heirs to inherit.
Show me one economist, not just an Ivy, but of any stripe, that is responsible for any of the legislation that's committed over 55% of the GDP to mandatory spending.
This is correct, yet somehow conventional wisdom these last decades have dictated precious metals are an artifact of the prehistoric ages and exposure should be limited to 5% of ones networth maximum. And face it, this 5% endorsement is given with grinding teeth as if someone is asking them to eat their own shit. Anyone who has ever mentioned putting some of his money into physical gold to his banker or financial planner knows what I am talking about here.
Yes, these parasites can't endorse it because it cuts off their steady stream of fees for essentially putting their clients in funds that merely track the S&P 500. It's simply amazing the amount of dead weight that has accumulated in most of these institutions over the past twenty-five years.