Isn’t it just inflation. As time passes there is more fiat in circulation, which means fiat is worth less, which means you need more fiat to buy the same amount of gold.
Gold was absolutely flat between 2012 and 2022:
* https://www.apmex.com/gold-price
but USD money supply was increasing during that decade:
* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL
See also flatness of gold prices from 1982 to 2002 with an increasing money supply. An older article:
> Sure, there were periods when gold was rising in tandem with the money supply, e.g. in the 1970s and 2000s. However, the yellow metal was in a bear market during the 1980s, 1990s and since 2011, despite the rising money supply (as indicated by the orange rectangles). The price of gold has fallen since 2011 by more than one-third, while the monetary base has increased by half and the M2 supply has risen by more than 25 percent.
* https://www.goldpriceforecast.com/explanations/gold-money-su...
There is little correlation between the two.
Hmm, even the kerning on my browser makes them look fairly similar.
F-I-A-T versus F-L-A-T
Hope this helps!
I did not. The data I linked to shows that there is no historical, long-term correlation between M2 and gold prices.
The gold price drastic increase and USD worst decline is to be be expected, and it's mainly due to the end of petrodollar agreement discussed on HN last year [1]. Somehow the Nasdaq news link is dead now but the Firstpost news is a similar one [2]. The top comment is a golden example of denial (pardon the pun), "This is itself inconsequential" [3]. This can be another Dropbox comment moment of HN. The comment also predicted that "Things will keep running as today probably for the next 20 years", and here we are in just after a year.
The negative effect to USD due to the end of petrodollar is imminent and the writing is on the wall for the gold price to increase sharply when there is no more petrodollar.
[1] U.S.-Saudi petrodollar pact ends after 50 years (325 comments):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40673567
[2] What was the US-Saudi petrodollar deal that lapsed after 50 years?
https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/what-was-the-us-saudi-p...
[3] U.S.-Saudi petrodollar pact ends after 50 years (top comment):
Note well: This is my impression. I have not tested this hypothesis against historical data.
So inflation has almost nothing to do with the current price of gold and the grandparent post’s speculation about the futures market running hot is far more likely. The price of gold isn’t attached to the dollar and hasn’t been for over 50 years.
A quick sanity check of my own house would show that it would cost something like 75 ounces of gold. It was built in the 70’s and originally sold for 45,000, or well over 250 ounces of gold in gold prices from around then. Doesn’t seem right…
It fluctuates a fair bit but starts and ends at ~150oz/house
And the US https://www.longtermtrends.net/real-estate-gold-ratio/
But how can you untangle an objective production price from the fiat / economy it's produced out of?
If that were the case, you'd expect scarce but still produced assets (e.g. housing) to have both increased in price (due to fiat inflation) and decreased in price (due to production technology efficiencies).
Which one dominates to what degree likely depends on the asset.
This isn’t always true. For one thing, the amount of fiat in ‘circulation’ isn’t just a matter of “count up all the bills printed”, but is affected by how much leverage exists in the world and many other things.
Second, even how much a fiat dollar is worth is also a factor of how much productivity there is in the world. To understand what I mean, let’s imagine a super simple economy with only fiat dollars and wheat. Every dollar is only used to buy wheat.
Say there is $1000 in bills and 1000 pounds of wheat. Each dollar is worth 1 pound of wheat. Then, we print an extra $1000 in bills; that would be inflation, and now you can only buy 1/2 pound of wheat for a dollar. That is what people imagine when we talk about printing more money causes inflation.
But what if new technology gains means we are able to produce 4000 pounds of wheat for the same amount of work; now, each $1 can buy 2 pounds of wheat. Even though we printed more money, the economy grew even faster than we printed extra money, so we didn’t get inflation and instead prices went down.
Inflation is always (generally) about the ratio between currency production and economic output growth. You can’t just look at one side of the equation.
Massive inflation has reduced the value of all currencies, giving the illusion that everything has gone up in price. Well everything except for salaries that is.