Bratnia

LT/KK sought to borrow in order to reduce taxes and looked to install confidence in the UK to perhaps double or even treble the 1% that pay a third of the tax take. The Tories threw them out to instead instate Sunak (more of a one vote election) - who has borrowed to fund tax (National Insurance) cuts alongside punishing the 1% that pay a third of the tax take towards leaving the UK (so far with considerable success) - which leaves the remainder having to pay 50% more in taxes just to fill that hole. If Labour get in with a dictatorial majority then the majority poor will pressure him as to where the public purse should be loaded from and spent. Difficult to see how the Pound might relatively strengthen, would be more inclined to decline (gold up).

On the one hand you have Sunak/Hunt who in having raised taxes to the highest since the end of WW2 are suggesting they'll reduce taxes. And Sunak has borrowed to burn (UK Gilt redemption costs are now near £4 TRILLION). Borrowed to fund the likes of giving some £2500/month to stay at home during Covid, not others (so totally wasted). On the other you have Labour, who more usually take the well stocked Treasury and blow it all. Either way it seems to me that the Pound will relatively decline, which typically equates to gold being more expensive in terms of Pounds. Up to the election often capital flights, major investors dislike uncertainties/risks. However given the incompetence of the Tories that might be viewed as a risk that's likely being eliminated, so as ever prices of stocks, gold, whatever are typically leveled to where there's a 50/50 chance of a rise/fall. a.k.a. nobody knows nothing. The trick is to average in and average out over time, as the broad average tends to be good enough.

Useless (or maybe not) trivia of the day, longer term and gold has bettered stocks (total returns) in around 40% of years. Often if one is down the other will be up, but there are cases of both being down, or up. For regular income, such as monthly paying off credit cards selling some of whatever is up at the time is a form of partial rebalancing. I'm content to assume equal probabilities of stock or gold having been the best asset in a years time, but based on historic outcomes 60/40 better fitted the broader average outcomes. However within that you might have a decade of just one of the two having been the consistent best.

My main focus was on FT250, bought in at that time anticipating a / and my asset allocation has me buy a equal amount of gold at the same time, so instead got a \\ attempted timing outcome. No matter, life's full of /\ \/ // \\, all washes.

Yep, near perfectly timed the pre Sunak/GE announcement drop.

I match a equal amount in stock value (so also bought £80K of VMIG) alongside some cash for both, so time/averaging tends to see things work out OK (stocks down, gold up or vice-versa) ... so more a chicken than brave Sale proceeds from selling down US$/US stocks that have become relatively overweighted and distorted by the Magnificent Seven.

Bought £80K worth of gold at around 2:30pm this afternoon, waltzed off, heard about the GE call on the car radio around a hour later and thought that would be good for gold ... only to see now that the £80K gold value is down by around £750. Swings and roundabouts. Often seems that way - prices drop after you buy, rise after you sell, but a few years down the line is forgotten, all averages out.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999). Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933). Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains. So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements. Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

Britannia floor is £100/oz (less than that and spend it as a legal tender coin for £100 value).

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

Italian news feed are reporting "No more Raisi, he burn in heli"

Anyone else buying? Short term stock gain a little over £18K, closing that out and adding a £1K ... to buy 10 Britannia's i.e. writing off the short term gain is like having bought 10 ounces with a legal tender value of £1000 (£100/coin) for £100 each

Some say buy the dip (defined as to plunge briefly). Sitting in gold waiting to buy Pounds however and its more a case of a continual slide, so just buying Pounds at the times and to the minimum amounts I absolutely have to.

Some hold bitcoins or suchlike, which I know relatively little about. Personally I hold McG's. McG's are my pet name and are simple enough, you open a "ewallet" such as a 212 or ii brokerage account and buy McG's, which for a British investor might be a 50/50 split of VMIG (a FTSE250 (MidCap) stock index accumulation fund) and Gold (which you may instead prefer to hold via gold coins/whatever). You'll have a regular cheque/bank account linked into that ewallet (brokerage account) and be able to transfer/exchange between (to/from) McG's and Pounds in order to pay for things in Pounds. More often I'll pay for things using my credit card and then at the end of the month sell enough McG's to pay off the credit card bill. If the gold value is higher than the stock value then sell some gold, otherwise sell some stock value (if saving then add new savings to the one that is the least value at the time). Unlike Pounds that tend to buy less over time, with McG's they tend to buy more over time. Broadly prices of 'stuff' (priced in Pounds) has tended to decline at around a 6%/year rate (slope). More inflation (higher prices) in Pounds can mean stuff becoming cheaper more quickly in McG's - perhaps something to celebrate.

What are the main differences between the Pro, Investor and Mini-Pro? To me it looks like the Mini-Pro is the same as the Pro but where it just uses your phone for input/display instead of being on-board. The Investor seems to be just a midway sized unit between those two? Last time I looked months back and everywhere was out of stock, however prompted by your post I now see that https://trustimetrix.com/ have stock.

Weekend global fear factor, park in gold until Monday morning?

Flog all of the gold to China before releasing a fusion reactor breakthrough - unlimited cheap energy - that can be used to manufacture inexpensive gold More seriously - China forbids the export of gold and given 123 times more paper gold than physical gold those holding physical get to define how those paper claims might be settled. Progressive eastward migration of physical delivery of gold against paper gold relatively strengthens the east. Weaponised, where a simple gold-rush trigger that has many seeking physical deliver against paper-gold contracts could collapse the entire financial systems. More so if combined with EMP physical weapon that cripples electronics. China is also exiting support of the US Dollar in favour of a gold/alternative international trade settlement currency given that the US weaponised the dollar (applied sanctions against Russian international trade settlement transactions).

At £15 per hair cut, I'd still rather save the £30 and cut my own

Stick with gold and combine that with stocks, rebalance periodically the two back to 50/50 (whatever) weightings. Gold/silver ratio looks good on charts for potential rebalance benefits, but in practice doesn't tend to be as rewarding as stock/gold. Hindsight and the lows/highs of gold/silver ... easy. Timing those in practice is highly variable, you're inclined to miss out on continued gains as the gold/silver ratio further widens after you'd opted to swap between the two.

Perhaps 50, but assuming that biotech will extend life by 15 years every decade Looking forward to the joy of when he'll start receiving the state pension at age 106

There's been a explosion of manufacturing buildings development across America, fundamentally its seeking to repatriate much of what is presently sourced from China. As part of that high tariffs against Chinese imported stuff will help kick start such domestic production. America is turning Japanese where instead of relying upon others (foreign) purchasing of its Treasury's its central bank will print/buy those bonds. Same as per Japan when large debts are held internally then they're not really a issue, they're just a internal money redistribution political matter. Deglobalisation. Where capitalism is just used by around 25% of the global population, 75% who might instead align with Russia/China, and barriers between the two - until such time that that large majority without capitalism recognise that they live a relatively poor/low-quality life (but where the Russia/China governance imprisons them into that). Yes many are starting to realise the benefits that including gold in a portfolio provides and particularly in reflection of more recent world events. Rising demand for gold is a upside price pressure factor. US debt expansion is within 'normal' limits in percentages/exponential terms, and with increased domestic manufacturing stocks might also be expected to do well. Fundamentally things are OK, just continue to buy/hold a combination/blend of both stocks and gold.

In Pounds, if stocks halved and gold gained 150% from 2024 start levels (to £4000/oz) then the stock/gold ratio would have risen to historic highest high levels. At the articles level of predicted gold price it would be valueless to most, social collapse where bullets, ammo, water, food, soap would be more highly valued.

Wouldn't gain any traction, are just read out as part of declaration and ... forgotten. As our abstentions just ignored. All votes are logged. When you initially arrive the first person checks your ID and then passes a number to the next person so your numbered ID is associated with the numbered ballot paper you are allocated. After the election the ballots are bagged and stored, supposedly securely, but all too easy for those details to be data input into the state 'security systems' alongside all of the other profiling/records that are logged/recorded (movements/geolocation, financial transactions, calls, internet activities etc.). As are postal votes not checked to ensure they were cast freely by each individual, some communities process such votes. A pretense of a democracy but in name only.

Given a certainty of either Blue Labour or Red Labour I suspect many wont vote and some will instead opt for the Slovak style. Already many are opting to leave politics in consideration of the risks to their families/themselves. Personally I wouldn't vote for anyone dumb enough to stand - primarily they're just in it for themselves (all of the business bribes etc.). Standard practice that they near all double up the MP's salary via 'expenses'.

Red (more extremist) Labour seem to have a better prospect of entering number 10 than the existing Blue Labour. Fundamentally flawed. When votes were restricted Britain was strong. Once voting was opened up to all so the majority poorer (on benefits etc.) get to define where the public purse is loaded from and spent and where opening up migration floodgates is more inclined to swell that majority. Putin considers it to be invading via the back-door, mostly unopposed conquest.