The trend is persistent, the rock is much the same as it has ever been. Do you have an alternate thesis to QE for why this is happening or are you happy to write it off as a mystery?
QE didn't start until November 2008 (gold = $814) That stopped by Nobember 2014 (gold = $1232). 51% increase in gold over 6 years, or 7% per year.
That is far lower than the increase in gold in other 6 year periods which didn't have QE.
I wish we would actively foster panning for gold. It's environmentally friendly. It's "blue collar" work that doesn't require a college degree, spiffy resume and do forth and it doesn't take much gold per year to potentially support someone who otherwise might be homeless or flipping burgers (or both).
I do know we have too little well-paid manual labor and too much of a divide between the have and have nots. I know you don't need much more than a gold pan to get started, which can be had for under ten dollars from places like Walmart.
I didn't research the land owenership/public management of rivers angle very much. I do know that it's not illegal in some places to dredge rivers on public land, which is extremely disruptive of the ecosystem.
This is more of less the summary of the research I did into the subject:
https://sandiegohomelesssurvivalguide.blogspot.com/2016/11/h...
There's then the perception that in bad times gold is a "safe bet". Low returns in savings accounts too.
[0]: https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26P_500_Index#Performance
2010, when you say the fed
started printing money
Your argument would have been much more precise and useful if you focussed on the same timeframe as I did: 2010-2020. Mixing it with the time before and what you read in the charts for the future muddled it to a degree that I find it hard to reply.
>The reason why inflation "officially" is lower then what one would expect given the amount of money printed lies in the way it is calculated.
I think comparing over a long period of time makes sense to see if something really fundamentally changed about the value of money lately.
>Your argument would have been much more precise and useful if you focussed on the same timeframe as I did: 2010-2020.
If things were really different over the past decade than any other, you'd expect to find discrepancies when comparing to previous decades. You're the one "muddling" it here in my (poorly educated) opinion.
I must add that you using Bitcoin, an insanely speculative asset, as an example of things becoming more expensive over the past decade didn't really help your point in my mind. It seems to imply that Bitcoin's value is somewhat stable and we can use it as a reference for the value of a dollar. If you used Beanie Baby prices instead we're in the middle of a huge deflation!
Real Estate is not quite as bad as a reference point, but we have to remember that the decade started right at the end of the mortgage crisis so that distorted the prices somewhat (in what direction? I'm not sure).
If things were really different over the
past decade than any other
I said nothing about any other decade.
Maybe the same happened in 2000-2010 or any other decade, maybe not. It is not part of my statement.
House prices in the US (https://dqydj.com/historical-home-prices/)
So 2010-2019 is a 46% increase, or 4.5% per year, so about 50% for 10 years. 2000 to 2010 is 36%, but the charts indicate we're nearing the top of another house price bubble (1998-2007 was an 80% increase over 9 years, or 7.5% increase per year)So I'm not sure your assertions that the increase of these values are due to quantitive easing over the last 10 years holds.