Originally Posted by Glocksanity
Looking at the performance of gold vs. Berkshire since the start of 2000 shows that the value of gold has increased considerably more than the value of Berkshire Hathaway. In fact, with a gain of 466% since the start of 2000, gold's gain has been nearly four times the return of BKR.A (466% vs 120%).
No wonder the old man hates gold.
So now "tanking" means not a loss or even a real-dollar loss, but underperforming gold?
Where do you teach economics and finance again?
I'm done with this thread. CF and Atlas always bring up decent points. This changing shill argument is sophomoric.