Dave Ramsey discusses inflation

[Matt Collins]

The YouTube comments on this video are epic:

[sam1952]

I just wish the caller has said “Dave I’d like to take my savings and invest in gold to try and keep up with inflation.” Dave would have had an epic meltdown with that, lol.

[Krugminator2]

I see absolutely nothing to disagree with in Dave Ramsey's video.

If you have 22k and are in your 20s, inflation isn't something you should be thinking about. If you are over 50 and have significant assets and thinking about a strategy that minimizes the chances of running out of money, giving some very minor weight and having a hedge to an out of control inflation scenario (as well as a deflation scenario) might make sense.

[ClaytonB]

I see absolutely nothing to disagree with in Dave Ramsey's video.

If you have 22k and are in your 20s, inflation isn't something you should be thinking about. If you are over 50 and have significant assets and thinking about a strategy that minimizes the chances of running out of money, giving some very minor weight and having a hedge to an out of control inflation scenario (as well as a deflation scenario) might make sense.

Incorrect.

The US dollar is an unstable currency. It has only been in existence since 1971, and its most recent collapse was in 2008. We have never recovered from that collapse because the Federal Reserve will not stop printing money.

Ramsey is great when he talks about the Bible, and when he gives advice for people who are struggling to get out of debt and get back on their feet. But if you're already on a solid foundation (this kid is doing stellar with $22k in savings at his age!), you need to go beyond Ramsey. The fact that he dismisses central bank money-printing as "conspiracy theory" shows that he is abysmally ignorant of the nature of the US dollar. Age factors nowhere into this equation.

Kiyosaki is kind of Ramsey's nemesis in the (quasi) religious financial advice arena and I don't agree with everything he says, but when it comes to savings and sound money, he's exactly correct:



Ramsey gives a lot of great advice and teaches sound biblical principles about money and I don't want to detract from that. But on this specific topic, he's completely incorrect. Inflation is not "an increase in costs". Inflation is the printing of money by the central bank, aka monetary expansion. This expansion of the money supply -- by dint of the law of supply and demand -- results in a secular rise in all prices. The nominal inflation rate is supposed to be 2-3% but this does not match with the increases in housing costs, food prices, fuel prices and other basic necessities which have been rising at an astronomical rate for years on end. 5% is conservative and some goods and services may be experiencing rates of inflation closer to 10% annually. Compound that out, and that is a wrecking ball that is smashing all cash assets sitting idle, as it is meant to be. Inflation is a universal wealth tax, plain and simple. It is heavily regressive, it punishes people on fixed incomes, and drives the blue-collar working class into the paper markets that they would not otherwise be interested in participating in. In Wall Street, many of them will be stripped of everything they own because they didn't understand investing, and why should they? But not investing is not an option when you are trying to sneak your nest egg past the Inflation Monster to retirement...

[Krugminator2]

Incorrect.

The US dollar is an unstable currency. It has only been in existence since 1971, and its most recent collapse was in 2008. We have never recovered from that collapse because the Federal Reserve will not stop printing money.

Ramsey is great when he talks about the Bible, and when he gives advice for people who are struggling to get out of debt and get back on their feet. But if you're already on a solid foundation (this kid is doing stellar with $22k in savings at his age!), you need to go beyond Ramsey. The fact that he dismisses central bank money-printing as "conspiracy theory" shows that he is abysmally ignorant of the nature of the US dollar. Age factors nowhere into this equation.

Kiyosaki is kind of Ramsey's nemesis in the (quasi) religious financial advice arena and I don't agree with everything he says, but when it comes to savings and sound money, he's exactly correct:



Ramsey gives a lot of great advice and teaches sound biblical principles about money and I don't want to detract from that. But on this specific topic, he's completely incorrect. Inflation is not "an increase in costs". Inflation is the printing of money by the central bank, aka monetary expansion. This expansion of the money supply -- by dint of the law of supply and demand -- results in a secular rise in all prices. The nominal inflation rate is supposed to be 2-3% but this does not match with the increases in housing costs, food prices, fuel prices and other basic necessities which have been rising at an astronomical rate for years on end. 5% is conservative and some goods and services may be experiencing rates of inflation closer to 10% annually. Compound that out, and that is a wrecking ball that is smashing all cash assets sitting idle, as it is meant to be. Inflation is a universal wealth tax, plain and simple. It is heavily regressive, it punishes people on fixed incomes, and drives the blue-collar working class into the paper markets that they would not otherwise be interested in participating in. In Wall Street, many of them will be stripped of everything they own because they didn't understand investing, and why should they? But not investing is not an option when you are trying to sneak your nest egg past the Inflation Monster to retirement...

Kiyosaki has been wrong about everything the last 10 years. Dooming in 2016 for example https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mar...azy-2016-08-25.

Great article from today about how bad it is not to invest in equities even at high valuations got back 100 years https://compoundadvisors.com/2021/sh...-a-bear-market

More money is lost anticipating inflation and market crashes than actual inflation and market crashes.

If you have 22k just put it in equities and never think about again. No need to bet on gold or bitcoin or land or some fad. Equities always outperform over a lifetime.

[ClaytonB]

Kiyosaki has been wrong about everything the last 10 years. Dooming in 2016 for example https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mar...azy-2016-08-25.

Great article from today about how bad it is not to invest in equities even at high valuations got back 100 years https://compoundadvisors.com/2021/sh...-a-bear-market

Any particular kind of investment is neither inherently good nor bad. However, all investments are distorted by the interference of the State, and this interference is at unprecedented levels and only continues to grow with time. The surest bet anyone can make is that the future will have higher taxes, more regulations, less opportunities for entrepreneurial investment, more stagnation of developing economies, more strangulation of existing companies by central-planning measures, more blockbuster government spending on reckless MIC adventures and doomed social-welfare interventions, etc. etc. So if you seriously want to get rich, invest in the defense industry or start your own business in that space. Profits are absolutely guaranteed no matter what happens to the stock market.

More money is lost anticipating inflation and market crashes than actual inflation and market crashes.

What is money? That's the whole question. Slips of paper that, since 1971, cannot even be exchanged for gold? "Gold isn't money!" Oh really? Somebody should tell the poor, misguided Swiss banking industry, the Islamic banking industry, or even the Bank of England:



"Gold isn't money" is a hoodwink, a sick prank that has been pulled on the gullible masses of the West. It plays nowhere else, no other part of the world is that hopelessly naive, no one else in the world is dumb enough to blindly trust the blatant lies of their ruling class, like we are...

If you have 22k just put it in equities and never think about again. No need to bet on gold or bitcoin or land or some fad. Equities always outperform over a lifetime.

Complete rubbish. Even the mainstream financial advisors wouldn't agree with this...

[Pauls' Revere]

Ramsey gives a lot of great advice and teaches sound biblical principles about money and I don't want to detract from that. But on this specific topic, he's completely incorrect. Inflation is not "an increase in costs". Inflation is the printing of money by the central bank, aka monetary expansion. This expansion of the money supply -- by dint of the law of supply and demand -- results in a secular rise in all prices. The nominal inflation rate is supposed to be 2-3% but this does not match with the increases in housing costs, food prices, fuel prices and other basic necessities which have been rising at an astronomical rate for years on end. 5% is conservative and some goods and services may be experiencing rates of inflation closer to 10% annually. Compound that out, and that is a wrecking ball that is smashing all cash assets sitting idle, as it is meant to be. Inflation is a universal wealth tax, plain and simple. It is heavily regressive, it punishes people on fixed incomes, and drives the blue-collar working class into the paper markets that they would not otherwise be interested in participating in. In Wall Street, many of them will be stripped of everything they own because they didn't understand investing, and why should they? But not investing is not an option when you are trying to sneak your nest egg past the Inflation Monster to retirement...

BOOM!

https://www.finweb.com/taxes/definit...ation-tax.html

Inflation tax is not an actual legal tax paid to a government; instead "inflation tax" refers to the penalty for holding cash at a time of high inflation. When the government prints more money or reduces interest rates, it floods the market with cash, which raises inflation in the long run. If an investor is holding securities, real estate or other assets, the effect of inflation may be negligible. If a person is holding cash, though, this cash is worth less after inflation has risen. The degree of decrease in the value of cash is termed the inflation tax for the way it punishes people who hold assets in cash, which tend to be lower- and middle-class wage earners.

[Okie RP fan]

Ramsey is good for people needing the basics and needing to get their financial footings starting out. In fact, he's great for those scenarios. I'll always recommend him to people starting out on savings, debt reduction, etc. I still listen to him occasionally as well, but I find myself actively disagreeing with him or thinking/knowing he's flat out wrong or he's just being obtuse when he goes off on some of these subjects more and more.

I'm happy to see the comments weren't eating up what he said and there's good skepticism around.

As far as that guy's situation - he's doing fine. He's going to school for something very specific: aerospace engineering. He has $22k in savings and wants to know what to do with it to combat inflation. He's still young, has college to pay for, but wants to reduce some risk. I'd take a portion of that $22k sitting in savings and invest in gold, silver, or some fine art as a hedge against inflation, then probably leave the rest to bank roll for college.

[Matt Collins]

Kiyosaki has been wrong about everything the last 10 years. Dooming in 2016 for example https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mar...azy-2016-08-25.

Yes, but his fundamentals are pretty good, from Rich Dad, Poor Dad.

More money is lost anticipating inflation and market crashes than actual inflation and market crashes.

If you have 22k just put it in equities and never think about again. No need to bet on gold or bitcoin or land or some fad. Equities always outperform over a lifetime.

Yes exactly. Cash flowing real estate may be an exception to this though.

Most people don't understand that when purchasing commodities that is not really investing, it is speculating.

[Krugminator2]

Yes, but his fundamentals are pretty good, from Rich Dad, Poor Dad.

I read it in high school. Had a big impression on me. About to turn 38. Went into sales out of college and haven't had a steady income since working minimum wage at a golf course in high school probably in part because of his philosophy.

Yes exactly. Cash flowing real estate may be an exception to this though.

I left that out purposefully because I have a dislike (probably irrational) toward rentals. But if you buy rentals, cover the overhead with rental income, and constantly leverage to buy more rentals, and get the appreciation on the property that is probably an even better way to make money than stocks because of leverage and it being very tax advantaged. It never interested me and seemed like too much work.

Most people don't understand that when purchasing commodities that is not really investing, it is speculating.

There is nothing wrong with speculation. Gold is a speculative asset where you trade supply and demand. But holding gold as an asset for pure appreciation will underperform equities by thousands of percent over a lifetime.

[sam1952]

Although gold can rise and fall I would not consider gold speculation. It has proven itself over centuries to be a store of wealth. I consider it more of insurance and hopefully an inflation hedge rather than an investment.

[oyarde]

Although gold can rise and fall I would not consider gold speculation. It has proven itself over centuries to be a store of wealth. I consider it more of insurance and hopefully an inflation hedge rather than an investment.

It is real money and wont be zero . The same may not necessarily always be said for a share of 1 800 Flowers or a handful of unbacked FRN's . Real property has its advantages .

[Danke]

Although gold can rise and fall I would not consider gold speculation. It has proven itself over centuries to be a store of wealth. I consider it more of insurance and hopefully an inflation hedge rather than an investment.

up almost 700% in the last 20 years.

[Krugminator2]

up almost 700% in the last 20 years.

Current gold price $1898
Average Gold price in year 2000- $278
1990- $383
1980- $594
1920- 20.67


Gold is up 500% since 2000 vs Spy up 350%
Up 400% since 1990. Vs 2000% on Spy
Up 200% since 1980 vs Spy up 9700%
Up 9000% since 1920 vs Spy up 2,530,211%

[ClaytonB]

There is nothing wrong with speculation. Gold is a speculative asset where you trade supply and demand. But holding gold as an asset for pure appreciation will underperform equities by thousands of percent over a lifetime.

Yes, all investment is speculative, and all speculations are a kind of investment (perhaps good, perhaps bad).

Gold and silver are money. (Full stop). Holding paper "money" is holding nothing at all because the government is on a non-stop binge of money-printing.

The reasons to save money (that is, gold or silver) are (1) uncertainty and (2) liquidity. These are related. The more uncertainty in the market, the more liquid you should want to be. Cash (paper) is more liquid but there is only so much paper you need to keep on hand for that kind of instant liquidity. A few months' worth of household expenses is enough for most purposes. Beyond that, you should store your assets in a durable good that will hold its value (who cares about appreciation when trying to prevent unnecessary losses). While land is a durable good, it is also very illiquid. It might take months or years to recoup the purchase price on a given property. Among all durable goods, gold and silver are the most liquid. This is why you should hold gold and silver.

When there is less uncertainty in the market, you may want to invest. But "investment" need not mean buying paper from Wall Street. In fact, I am on board with Kiyosaki's view that most people should avoid Wall Street like the plague. Unless you're actually in the industry, just stay away.

"So, what should I do with my nest-egg? $500k of gold/silver will still only buy $500k inflation-adjusted worth of goods/services in the future. I am interested in actually increasing my nest-egg above and beyond just keeping up with inflation." Great question! How about buying an actual business? "Yeah, but what about diversification? If I put all my eggs in one basket, I could lose it all!"

As Kiyosaki explains in some of the videos I have watched (I can't give blanket-approval for his content), you are already operating a business whether you choose to think of it that way or not. That business is "Me, Inc." As the CEO of Me, Inc. you can choose to hold paper cash, gold/silver, invest in paper schemes on Wall Street, or just operate a business-as-such. The complexity of business operations on Wall Street is actually far higher than the complexity of operating a Main Street business. Most people with enough cash to invest that they seriously need to worry about the opportunity costs of not investing some of their portfolio should be operating a small business at a scale that is within their capabilities. That is, rather than trying to pretend you have some kind of insight into the global oil markets (odds are, you are doing nothing more than regurgitating opinions you read in online articles... an activity that has absolutely zero value to the market), why not actually turn your efforts to operating a business that you do understand. That could be a burger franchise, a coffee shop, a gas-station, real estate (rentals), commercial real-estate, a used books store, an antique shop, or anything else you care to name.

Are there risks? You bet. This is why I personally follow what I call "the rule of half". I simply will not venture more than half of my assets because I can't imagine losing more than half. It would be soul-crushing. Therefore, the money that is invested is able to be fully invested, meaning, put at real risk. The idea that I could sue my financial advisor if my losses are too great on the stock market is insane. But this is the kind of mindset that many people bring to the table and this is also why they are sheep -- as Gordon Gekko so poetically put it, "sheep get slaughtered."

Investment involves real risk. Once you are sufficiently capitalized, there are lots of local business opportunities out there where the small investor can get started. You're going to have to learn how to understand a balance-sheet (even if you pay someone to prepare it for you), you're going to have to learn the basics of advertising, building a customer base, making your customers happy and getting repeat-business, managing inventory, and so on and so forth. But all of that complexity, added together, is nothing compared to the complexity of what goes on on Wall Street. Everybody "wants a piece of the action" while they sit on their armchair surfing cable TV. That's not how reality works. No matter what illusions we wrap ourselves in, eventually, reality comes crashing through. There is nothing inherently valuable in having saved up a little capital. Market value is created by entrepreneurial activity and all entrepreneurial activity is inherently speculative, and involves risk.

[Matt Collins]

Yes, all investment is speculative, and all speculations are a kind of investment (perhaps good, perhaps bad).

Incorrect.

Buying a commodity and hoping the price will increase is pure speculation. You might win, you might lose. You have no way of knowing.

Contrast that to investment where you put money into something that actually generates revenue. Again, you might win or you might lose, but speculation and investing are fundamentally.

[Matt Collins]

I left that out purposefully because I have a dislike (probably irrational) toward rentals. But if you buy rentals, cover the overhead with rental income, and constantly leverage to buy more rentals, and get the appreciation on the property that is probably an even better way to make money than stocks because of leverage and it being very tax advantaged. It never interested me and seemed like too much work.

Very true... it isn't for everyone.

I want to own rentals (I think). But I may also end up agreeing with you that the workload is too great. I won't know until I try it.

There is nothing wrong with speculation. Gold is a speculative asset where you trade supply and demand. But holding gold as an asset for pure appreciation will underperform equities by thousands of percent over a lifetime.

Speculation should only be done with money one can afford to lose, because it is essentially gambling.

Yes I agree that equities are the best preforming proven investment vehicle over the long term.

[ClaytonB]

Incorrect.

Buying a commodity and hoping the price will increase is pure speculation. You might win, you might lose. You have no way of knowing.

Contrast that to investment where you put money into something that actually generates revenue. Again, you might win or you might lose, but speculation and investing are fundamentally.

Incorrect.

Speculative investments, such as commodity futures, are a form of resource allocation in time and, in fact, form the very backbone of capitalism (that is, the free market). The first tribal fisherman to rub salt on a fresh filet of fish and lay it out in the sun to dry into fish jerky that he could eat later in the week was, poetically speaking, the very first commodity speculator. For all he knew, there might be a glut of fish caught the very next day and his meticulous preparation for future hunger was all for nothing. But for those cases where the best case didn't happen, he was able to have some food on hand to eat, keep his strength, and fish that much better by virtue of proper nutrition and calorie-intake.

Speculation is, obviously, a different kind of investment than running a burger joint or buying shares in ETFs. But so what? Every type of investment is unique, even one stock cannot be directly compared to another and that's the whole point of stock investing!

[Matt Collins]

Wrong.

Speculation and investment are two very different things.

[Pauls' Revere]

Current gold price $1898
Average Gold price in year 2000- $278
1990- $383
1980- $594
1920- 20.67


Gold is up 500% since 2000 vs Spy up 350%
Up 400% since 1990. Vs 2000% on Spy
Up 200% since 1980 vs Spy up 9700%
Up 9000% since 1920 vs Spy up 2,530,211%

Thank you, I hadn't really considered SPY as a great (and simple) way to diversify.

[Pauls' Revere]

Wrong.

Speculation and investment are two very different things.

Yep, Key points from Investopedia:

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...%20the%20other.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
The main difference between speculating and investing is the amount of risk involved.
Investors try to generate a satisfactory return on their capital by taking on an average or below-average amount of risk.
Speculators are seeking to make abnormally high returns from bets that can go one way or the other.
Speculative traders often utilize futures, options, and short selling trading strategies.

So, it's all about the risk management. Which is something else entirely. I only take enough risk so that I can still sleep at night.

[ClaytonB]

Wrong.

Speculation and investment are two very different things.

We can go back and forth like this till Kingdom Come, if you like. Every investment involves the risk that you could lose your principal. Thus, investment is a speculative move. What we call speculation (such as commodity futures) is a specific type of investment that is primarily concerned with the allocation of resources in time. This is the aspect of capitalism that communism is most concerned with wresting from the hands of the common investor and centralizing completely in the hands of the politburo. The many errors of Keynesian theory can be boiled down to this: There is no time-structure of production and all economic phenomena are aggregate phenomena. The denial of the time-structure of production is the most important aspect of the Marxist critique of capitalism. This is why "speculation" is singled out by our central banking and financial regulators as a "special" kind of activity that shouldn't even be considered an investment... "it's just betting!" Bull-hooey, commodities speculation and other forms of speculation are the very backbone of capitalism.

The act of saving capital from which "capitalism" originally gets its name is a form of speculation, that is, resource-allocation in time. This is why the central bank targets savings and continuously erodes the value of cash-assets at rest. Yes, they also profit from this but that isn't even the primary purpose! From the Marxist perspective, it is far more important to condition the population of potential investors (holders of at-rest capital) that they should not bother "speculating" against the market, that is, holding cash. "You're just going to lose money trying to avoid inflation" <-- this is Central Banker Keynesian Propaganda 101.

Many of the "definitions" of modern finance have been corrupted by more than a century of central bank inflation. The market has no idea which way is up. That's why Kiyosaki rejects all "paper schemes". I think Kiyosaki is right overall that the vast, vast majority of people should just stay away from Wall Street. But people who actually work in that field might have the required expertise to invest despite the inflationary madness. And in a sound money economy, stock investing would be placed back on a rational basis of monetary calculation that would enable investors to invest more broadly, without demand for stocks/paper being artificially pumped by the central bank driving everyone out of holding cash, that is, owning capital...

[Pauls' Revere]

We can go back and forth like this till Kingdom Come, if you like. Every investment involves the risk that you could lose your principal. Thus, investment is a speculative move. What we call speculation (such as commodity futures) is a specific type of investment that is primarily concerned with the allocation of resources in time. This is the aspect of capitalism that communism is most concerned with wresting from the hands of the common investor and centralizing completely in the hands of the politburo. The many errors of Keynesian theory can be boiled down to this: There is no time-structure of production and all economic phenomena are aggregate phenomena. The denial of the time-structure of production is the most important aspect of the Marxist critique of capitalism. This is why "speculation" is singled out by our central banking and financial regulators as a "special" kind of activity that shouldn't even be considered an investment... "it's just betting!" Bull-hooey, commodities speculation and other forms of speculation are the very backbone of capitalism.

The act of saving capital from which "capitalism" originally gets its name is a form of speculation, that is, resource-allocation in time. This is why the central bank targets savings and continuously erodes the value of cash-assets at rest. Yes, they also profit from this but that isn't even the primary purpose! From the Marxist perspective, it is far more important to condition the population of potential investors (holders of at-rest capital) that they should not bother "speculating" against the market, that is, holding cash. "You're just going to lose money trying to avoid inflation" <-- this is Central Banker Keynesian Propaganda 101.

Many of the "definitions" of modern finance have been corrupted by more than a century of central bank inflation. The market has no idea which way is up. That's why Kiyosaki rejects all "paper schemes". I think Kiyosaki is right overall that the vast, vast majority of people should just stay away from Wall Street. But people who actually work in that field might have the required expertise to invest despite the inflationary madness. And in a sound money economy, stock investing would be placed back on a rational basis of monetary calculation that would enable investors to invest more broadly, without demand for stocks/paper being artificially pumped by the central bank driving everyone out of holding cash, that is, owning capital...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ClaytonB again.

[Matt Collins]

[Invisible Man]

This thread prompted me to search up this article that I remember reading a number of years ago and reread it. I think Gary North handles Ramsey pretty well here.
https://www.garynorth.com/public/8447.cfm

He hates gold. No other word better describes his attitude.This is from his website, written by some staffer, but clearly endorsed by Ramsey.

From 1833 to 2001, the compound annual growth rate of gold was only 1.54%. That's pretty rotten. Since September 11, the value of gold has definitely increased. It's looking better right now. But you can't deny nearly two centuries of consistently poor performance.

Notice what he has done. He uses the era of America's gold coin standard, 1833-1933, to show that gold made a poor return. That was the point of the gold standard: stable money, with gold at a fixed price. People owned gold coins, not to get rich, but to keep from getting poor. They bought coins rather than deposit them in a local bank. Gold preserved purchasing power.
Then he included the era of the gold-exchange standard, 1933-71, when the U.S. government sold gold at $35 an ounce to governments and central banks. Again, gold's price was rigged by the U.S. government: fixed. Of course gold's did not rise. Only after 1968 did the system of gold price rigging begin to break down. Only those people who thought the U.S. government would cheat the central bank holders of dollars and abandon the gold standard bought legal gold coins. I was one of them, and I made a lot of money on this assumption.
In 1970, gold was at $40 per ounce. You could legally buy British gold sovereigns for $10. I did. I still own them. I have made 45 to one, before taxes. But Ramsey dismisses all this.
In 1970, he was ten years old. In 1970, I had written multiple articles on gold. Here is one of them. But Ramsey is the expert on gold. Just ask him. Or his staffer.
He stopped at 2001 -- the bottom for gold at $256. That was the year I begged my subscribers to start buying gold.
This man is either intellectually dishonest or just not too bright. He talks a good line -- confident enough to fool the walking wounded.