ETsgGU mrirdtxpujlk

there was inflation when there was aclltuay significant deflation between 1980 and 2001, and then went back to grossly understating inflation again between 2001 and 2008.Most people who claim that the CPI is rigged claim that it understates the actual amount of inflation (many claim that the real number is as much as two times higher), but if that's true it only makes the period between 1980 and 2001 an even greater exception to the supposedly infallible correlation between gold and inflation as this would mean that the nominal price of gold fell by more than two thirds while the rest of prices quadrupled.The reason I spend so much time on this point is that it's such a serious flaw in his argument. Anyone who attempts to predict where the price of gold is headed ought to explain the price history; although he does admit that gold can be overvalued and undervalued in his treatment of cycles, I didn't find any systematic treatment of gold's actual price history. Furthermore, as I mentioned earlier, people reading this book can at times get the impression that precious metals can't go down or that they're always good proxies for inflation when in reality neither is the case.Another serious error in the book is his claim that gold and silver are good investments during deflation. If gold reliably goes up in price during a period of inflation, it would go down in price during a period of deflation for exactly the same reason. Thus, either gold isn't a good hedge against inflation or it's a bad investment during a period of deflation; in either case, the book is wrong.With that said, while I believe this is a serious omission that reduces the strength of his argument, I don't think this means we have to throw out his entire case for buying gold and silver. I believe you can still make a good case for buying gold and silver.One final error: his claims that the price of gold is being manipulated by central banks and the derivatives market is essentially creating a phantom supply of precious metals (in other words, more gold and silver are sold on the derivatives market than aclltuay exist). I'm not sure if he's correct on this point (I'm still researching that to see if it's true); however, if he is correct, it would seem to undermine a substantial part of his argument. If central banks have substantially manipulated the price of gold and silver in the past, they can continue to do so in the future, especially given that he argues that they have already engaged in price manipulation for a long time. So, why does this refute his argument? If central banks can dramatically manipulate the price of precious metals whenever they feel like it, there is never any guarantee that the price of precious metals has anything to do with its actual fundamentals. Thus, good fundamentals alone could never guarantee a good ROI in other words, you could never know if gold or silver were going to be good investments because you could never know how central banks were going to manipulate the price.In spite of several very serious errors and omissions, this book is worthwhile reading overall, especially in the how part, but don't uncritically accept all his claims.