FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


An unusual (recession-proof) investment.






So, what do you think of my investment idea? Should I do it?
O.o Why didn't I think of it before?
14%
 14%  [ 1 ]
... Could work ... at least you won't loose money.
28%
 28%  [ 2 ]
Idiot! That could never work... you forgot ________
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
WooHoo! Guns! *bang* ... Uh oh... somebody call an ambulance!
57%
 57%  [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 7

ocalhoun
I've been looking for an investment that can weather any economic storm, and I think I may have finally found it.

Guns.

I know, I know, "what, guns, an investment?" It sounds like salesman talk, but it actually makes sense when you look at it.

Guns have been rising in value a lot lately, and the great thing is that the worse things get, the more valuable the guns will be. (The worse shape the world gets in, the more people who will want guns.) Nearly everything else would decrease in value if society collapses, but not this, a collapse would cause the gun prices to skyrocket. And if things don't get any worse, they'll still hold their value well, so I won't loose any money.

Another nice thing about them is that they are intrinsically useful. A gun can increase in value and be used at the same time. Things like gold, on the other hand, are useless until you sell them.

So, what do you think of my idea of firearms (and ammunition) as a rainy-day savings fund?

They certainly beat gold, which has actually been going down in value recently, and is useless while you have it.
They also beat a stash of cash, which is also useless until you spend it, and is very vulnerable to inflation.
A bank account has all the problems of cash, and it could be lost in a serious banking crisis.
An investment in stocks or bonds, domestic or international, could also easily loose value in an economic crash.
deanhills
I could not find a category to vote for! The idea is a good one, except, instead of guns I would try and find the companies manufacturing guns that are available on the stock exchange and invest in them. That would then avoid any problems of having to look after guns, as of course having guns is an enormous responsibility. You need to be able to use them if necessary, therefore morally have made a decision to kill someone if necessary, or be killed. The guns have to be always under lock and key according to certain rules and regulations, factoring in cost as well. They also need to be cleaned regularly. Sort of hard work, and if one adds more guns, even harder work. If you are a gun collector however, and love guns, this may be a good hobby to have, however for convenience, safety and ease I would tend to research companies who manufacture guns and try and find a couple of them and then buy stock in them. Smile
lagoon
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked
deanhills
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked
So would it be more moral to buy stock in tobacco companies, than armament companies? What moral factors do you think need to be considered here?
Dean_The_Great
I don't see morals as an issue. But I'm not sure I entirely understand. The idea is that you stockpile guns and ammunition, then they will rise in value. Then what? To whom are you going to sell these guns?

If you're thinking pawn shops, they wouldn't give you the rate you deserve, and if your thinking private sales, there are a lot of laws standing in your way, are there not?
deanhills
Dean_The_Great wrote:
I don't see morals as an issue. But I'm not sure I entirely understand. The idea is that you stockpile guns and ammunition, then they will rise in value. Then what? To whom are you going to sell these guns?
I was just thinking. Wouldn't the guns become outdated perhaps, and loose their value, unless they are perhaps antique ones?
MYP415
I would take raw commodities over guns- gold, silver, copper, oil, natural gas, etc. Over the short term you may see dips, but the reality is there things will never lose their value in the long run. Also, as currencies inflate, more people place more value on commodities.

Guns can depreciate in value as particular models become obsolete. Having guns as an investment in protection is another story though.
deanhills
MYP415 wrote:
I would take raw commodities over guns- gold, silver, copper, oil, natural gas, etc. Over the short term you may see dips, but the reality is there things will never lose their value in the long run. Also, as currencies inflate, more people place more value on commodities.

Guns can depreciate in value as particular models become obsolete. Having guns as an investment in protection is another story though.
How would you invest in raw commodities? Would you purchase gold for example, or invest in stocks in gold? Which of the commodities do you think are the best for right now to invest in? Smile
pll
The thing is that you will need tons of licenses to be able to own those guns.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Dean_The_Great wrote:
I don't see morals as an issue. But I'm not sure I entirely understand. The idea is that you stockpile guns and ammunition, then they will rise in value. Then what? To whom are you going to sell these guns?
I was just thinking. Wouldn't the guns become outdated perhaps, and loose their value, unless they are perhaps antique ones?

Not particularly... Given wise choices.
The latest and greatest semi-auto pistol... not the best investment, it'll be surpassed sooner or later.

An antique? Won't rise in value as much in a worst-case scenario, and will be depreciated when fired.

The best thing is an old classic. Proven, time-tested, and valued based on its capabilities, not for sentimental reasons.
My choice was actually an AK-47.
They're relatively cheap now, but should go up in value soon. Ammo is cheap(er) for it, parts and accessories are widely available, and it has a great reputation (therefore, good resale value). It's also a great gun to have by your side in a REAL worst-case scenario; powerful and extremely reliable.

pll wrote:
The thing is that you will need tons of licenses to be able to own those guns.

The state of South Dakota doesn't require any license to buy or own guns... just a background check at the time of purchase.
The only things that require licenses are the sale of guns and carrying them concealed.
Even fully automatic guns don't require any kind of license.

Dean_The_Great wrote:
I don't see morals as an issue. But I'm not sure I entirely understand. The idea is that you stockpile guns and ammunition, then they will rise in value. Then what? To whom are you going to sell these guns?

If you're thinking pawn shops, they wouldn't give you the rate you deserve, and if your thinking private sales, there are a lot of laws standing in your way, are there not?


In the extreme worst-case scenario; black market, just giving it to anybody who will give me money (or suitable trade goods) for it.
To just cash in on the investment in normal circumstances; private party-to-party sale. This can be accomplished easily, using an internet sales site. You have to transfer the gun through a licensed FFL gun dealer to sell it, which costs around $20- to the customer, not the seller.

The real choice investment is ammo. It has always been going up in price lately, and doesn't require any government supervision to buy or sell.
The 7.62mm ammo for the AK-47 should go up in value nicely if any major war erupts in countries that use AK-47's, or similar rifles.
.223 M-16 ammo will be a great investment once the USA is out of Afghanistan, and the price goes back down. Then, you just have to wait for the next US war, and watch the price of .223 rocket up with increased demand, just like it did with the start of the Afghanistan war.
.50 ammo is also a good potential investment, following the same trends as .223, because the US military uses that round in a variety of sniper rifles and machine guns.
Ball-point ammo would always be a better investment than hollow-point, because hollow-point is illegal to use in many military applications; solid (armor piercing) bullets compete more directly with military supply and demand.

The reason I chose an AK for an investment is Obama's promise of an assault rifle ban, which should cause the price of AK-47's in America to skyrocket, because all supplies of new ones will vanish. Ammunition will be a short-term only investment until most major wars die down for a while. Then, after the price goes down, it would be a great time to buy ammo, on the speculation that it will go up in price next time a war starts.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
The reason I chose an AK for an investment is Obama's promise of an assault rifle ban,
I just can't visualize that ever happening. That goes just so deep into the American psyche, it probably will result in a civil war if Obama should get that far, but no, I can't see congress putting something like that through. Can you?
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
The reason I chose an AK for an investment is Obama's promise of an assault rifle ban,
I just can't visualize that ever happening. That goes just so deep into the American psyche, it probably will result in a civil war if Obama should get that far, but no, I can't see congress putting something like that through. Can you?

Rolling Eyes
A temporary ban already went into effect once, and has since expired!
Obama promised to make that temporary ban permanent in his campaign.
mk12327
deanhills wrote:
I could not find a category to vote for! The idea is a good one, except, instead of guns I would try and find the companies manufacturing guns that are available on the stock exchange and invest in them. That would then avoid any problems of having to look after guns, as of course having guns is an enormous responsibility. You need to be able to use them if necessary, therefore morally have made a decision to kill someone if necessary, or be killed. The guns have to be always under lock and key according to certain rules and regulations, factoring in cost as well. They also need to be cleaned regularly. Sort of hard work, and if one adds more guns, even harder work. If you are a gun collector however, and love guns, this may be a good hobby to have, however for convenience, safety and ease I would tend to research companies who manufacture guns and try and find a couple of them and then buy stock in them. Smile


This topic is pretty interesting. Never in my mind does it occur to me that buying of arms and ammunition could be an investment. But I think I'll concur with deanhills that buying the shares of armament companies would be a better investment then buying, storing and selling the physical goods. It is the same as investment in other areas such as precious metals and commodities. Most of the time, people invest in terms of certificates of ownership - they do not physically keep the goods they invest. It saves alot of trouble and in fact reduce the capital to invest by eliminating operational, maintanence, and logistics costs.

However, we could easily argue that why not set up an independent platform for investment of arms and ammunition in terms of certificates of ownership, as in the case of precious metals and commodities.
bigt
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked


I don't see any moral question here. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
deanhills
bigt wrote:
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked


I don't see any moral question here. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
Totally agreed. Also guns can't be moral or immoral. Only people can be moral or immoral. Furthermore, I don't believe the right to defend oneself is immoral. With regard to this thread gun collections can also not be considered immoral. And Ocalhoun has made a good argument for how that could turn into something of value as collector items. One probably would have to know a lot about guns however, and keep up with trends and values of guns as collector items, as one would with coin collections. Know who the buyers and sellers are and find someone good that you can trust would give you a good deals both ways.
chiragpatnaik
deanhills wrote:
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked
So would it be more moral to buy stock in tobacco companies, than armament companies? What moral factors do you think need to be considered here?


No. Also liquor companies. It's a question of what can you live with. If you can live with it. More power to you. If not, don't buy.
deanhills
chiragpatnaik wrote:
deanhills wrote:
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked
So would it be more moral to buy stock in tobacco companies, than armament companies? What moral factors do you think need to be considered here?


No. Also liquor companies. It's a question of what can you live with. If you can live with it. More power to you. If not, don't buy.
OK, I get it thanks. However what would your ethical considerations be against buying armament manufacturing company shares vs buying tobacco shares?
ocalhoun
chiragpatnaik wrote:
deanhills wrote:
lagoon wrote:
Haven't you looked at the moral factors? Shocked
So would it be more moral to buy stock in tobacco companies, than armament companies? What moral factors do you think need to be considered here?


No. Also liquor companies. It's a question of what can you live with. If you can live with it. More power to you. If not, don't buy.


If I bought black-market guns, supporting dealers who also supply criminals, then yes, there might be a moral problem.

Supporting normal, legal gun dealers though, there's no problem with that. The vast majority of guns sold legally will never be involved in any kind of violence.
And, if your goal is to rid the world of violence, you should start with the motivation of violence, not the means.
mk12327
ocalhoun wrote:
And, if your goal is to rid the world of violence, you should start with the motivation of violence, not the means.


I especially like this line. People are so "creative" that no matter how hard you try to remove the means in which they could do something, these people will still come out with new ways to do it. Eg. Even if you force armament companies to close down, they could still get their weapons through black market or home-made equipments. The problem is that if they are motivated to do something, prevention through the lack of medium does not purge the roots of the evil.
Ghost Rider103
ocalhoun wrote:
The reason I chose an AK for an investment is Obama's promise of an assault rifle ban, which should cause the price of AK-47's in America to skyrocket, because all supplies of new ones will vanish. Ammunition will be a short-term only investment until most major wars die down for a while. Then, after the price goes down, it would be a great time to buy ammo, on the speculation that it will go up in price next time a war starts.


Don't you remember what happened 10 years or so back when they banned M4's and M16's in California? You had to bring your rifle in, if you didn't, they would come to your house and arrest you.

You had to register your rifle when you bought it in California, so even if you were just going to try and lay low and not turn it in, they had you on file so they already knew whether you owned one or not.

So if you buy an Ak-47 and they end up banning it, then it's useless. Even if you don't register it. You'd never be able to use it without huge risk of getting caught. Plus you would never be able to sell it. Legally.

I think it's a good idea, but not at the moment. With Obama wanting to ban assault rifles, you are actually putting yourself at risk of a big loss of money. If he ends up banning them, you'll never be able to sell them and you will be forced to turn them over. Unless you are going to keep them, which of course would be illegal.

I would do it after Obama tries to ban them. That way you know whether or not you'll be able to resell them.
ocalhoun
Ghost Rider103 wrote:

Don't you remember what happened 10 years or so back when they banned M4's and M16's in California? You had to bring your rifle in, if you didn't, they would come to your house and arrest you.

What rifle? Oh, that one. Lost it a long time ago, fell into Sheridan lake in a boating accident. No, there was no accident report, the boat just rolled over, and we rolled it back upright, but the rifle fell to the bottom of the lake.
Quote:

You had to register your rifle when you bought it in California, so even if you were just going to try and lay low and not turn it in, they had you on file so they already knew whether you owned one or not.

Guns are only registered in this state if they are class 3 (full-auto, destructive devices, et cetera). They have the records of when I had a background check to buy them, but I could have sold them to a dealer without any record of that transaction. They wouldn't be able to prove I still had them. (They're stored in an obscure storage facility that I pay for in cash.)
If the government got too gestapo-like in hunting down the guns, I would get a large, waterproof container, disassemble the guns, put them in, fill the rest of the container with motor oil (to prevent rust and contamination) and bury it in some forgotten part of the expansive wilderness all around where I live, making sure I can find them again by using GPS coordinates.
Quote:

So if you buy an Ak-47 and they end up banning it, then it's useless. Even if you don't register it. You'd never be able to use it without huge risk of getting caught. Plus you would never be able to sell it. Legally.

If that happens, then I'll adopt the idea of civil disobedience and sell it illegally. (Probably illegally converting it to full-auto first to up the price.) There are plenty of other people in this state who would resent the ban as much as I do, and could be probed for information about where to sell it.
Quote:

I think it's a good idea, but not at the moment. With Obama wanting to ban assault rifles, you are actually putting yourself at risk of a big loss of money. If he ends up banning them, you'll never be able to sell them and you will be forced to turn them over. Unless you are going to keep them, which of course would be illegal.

In the previous ban, which he promised to make permanent, existing weapons would be exempt. It would only ban the manufacture and import of new guns. (Just like the ban on full-auto guns, which has been in effect a long time now; guns made or imported before the ban are still available legally, but they are rare and sought after, so the prices are extremely high.)
Quote:

I would do it after Obama tries to ban them. That way you know whether or not you'll be able to resell them.

But if I wait until then, the prices will have already jumped, which means no profit for me, and it would be more expensive to buy them.
Ghost Rider103
That's why I mentioned the word "legally" in my last post.

Sure you can get away with it, but I personally wouldn't even try.

If you want to buy the rifles now that's your choice and a risk you are going to have to be willing to take if you really want to do it.
ocalhoun
Ghost Rider103 wrote:
That's why I mentioned the word "legally" in my last post.

Yes, but I don't think completely making ownership and sales illegal is likely; after all, he just promised to re-institute the old ban, which only banned manufacture and import.

If he DOES do more... well, that's where my political stances come into play more than simple investing economics. I would consider that an unconstitutional law, to be disobeyed on principle, even if there was no profit in it.
Ophois
Check this out.
The M134 General Electric Minigun. According to the National Firearms Act, it is perfectly legal with a Class 2 Permit, due to the fact that some of these were in use before 1986, when the legislation passed.



There are only about 11 of them on the American market, and most are in private collections. Every now and then, though, one does pop up at a private auction or sale. With a firing rate of about 166 rounds per second, they are a must have for... "hunters".
They tend to set you back about $400,000, and with such a high rate of fire, a full minute of shooting costs about $3,600.
As far as investments go, it's not bad. There aren't many on the market, so their value will continue to go up. And you can always rent them out to movie studios for an action flick or to the Myth Busters for... whatever.
Flakky
If you can live with the guilt then I see no problem with your investment Smile
ocalhoun
Flakky wrote:
If you can live with the guilt then I see no problem with your investment Smile

Why should I feel guilty?
Flakky
ocalhoun wrote:
Flakky wrote:
If you can live with the guilt then I see no problem with your investment Smile

Why should I feel guilty?

Guns are usually intended to kill, supporting guns will be like supporting killing. I think.
ocalhoun
Flakky wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Flakky wrote:
If you can live with the guilt then I see no problem with your investment Smile

Why should I feel guilty?

Guns are usually intended to kill, supporting guns will be like supporting killing. I think.

I do support killing in certain situations...
Flakky
ocalhoun wrote:
Flakky wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Flakky wrote:
If you can live with the guilt then I see no problem with your investment Smile

Why should I feel guilty?

Guns are usually intended to kill, supporting guns will be like supporting killing. I think.

I do support killing in certain situations...
It happens that the ones arming your army also arm the OpFor. But if you think about like that then there shouldn't be a problem Smile
Related topics
Urban Legends About the Iraq War
Oh, the evil that Bush has done to this world...
Tax Cuts create more money than EVER in US history
More front page news NOT on the front page..
Why is the USA in Iraq?
P3 Special Report: 2006 Presidential Budget: Power Grab?
10 Reasons why PC's crash
Is the efficient market hypothesis valid (EMH)?
5 Job Search Tips to Survive a Recession
Recession !!!!
Obama and Dems Hindering Recovery
Banking crisis, recession or credit bubble - LIES?
Obama fulfills his promise to fix the causes of recession!
Thanks Obama for the working class tax cuts
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Economics and Marketing

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.