Normally, I don’t follow political coverage in financial publications.
But this week, I found Jim McTague’s column — he writes the political coverage for Barron’s — rather fascinating. He looks at the financial holdings of Ron Paul via congressional financial disclosures:
“Gold-mining stocks, where Paul has the bulk of his money, have also hit pay dirt, albeit rising at a slower pace. Gold is up about 28% this year, through Thursday, to $1,823.80 a troy ounce, and 106.8% since 2009. In the same periods, the NYSE ARCA Gold Miners Index is down 2.9% and up 78.6%. The S&P 500 is down 9.3% and up 26.3%.
In his most recent financial disclosure, which covers the year 2010, Paul had $1.6 million to $3.5 million in gold- mining stocks. He also has a stake in three bear-market funds—and has for many years.
In all, Ron Paul’s portfolio amounts to a super bearish bet against the U.S. economy. If the country had defaulted on its debt earlier this month, he likely would have made a bundle. The congressman voted against House Speaker John Boehner’s plan to lift the nation’s $14.3 trillion spending cap.”
Pot of Gold: Ron Paul’s Top 10 Holdings
|Goldcorp / GG||19.13%||17.00%||$500,001 – $1,000,000|
|Barrick Gold / ABX||12.24||15.49||$250,001 – $500,000|
|Newmont Mining C Stock / NEM||1.12||12.02||$250,001 – $500,000|
|Agnico Eagle Mines / AEM||1.13||5.88||$100,001 – $250,000|
|AngloGold Ashanti / AU||2.02||19.33||$100,001 – $250,000|
|IAM Gold / IAG||3.69||52.07||$100,001 – $250,000|
|Mag Silver / MVG||39.97||9.75||$50,001 – $100,000|
|Pan American Silver / PAAS||22.72||4.71||$50,001 – $100,000|
|Silver Wheaton / SLW||74.51||49.54||$50,001 – $100,000|
|Virginia Mines / VGMNF.OTC||28.05||31.11||$15,001 – $50,000|
|*All returns are as of 8/18/11; three-year returns are annualized.
Sources: Bloomberg; OpenSecrets.org
Note that the inverse funds are not designed for long term positioning, and suffer from slippage and drift from the underlying index.
Candidate of Doom and Gloom
Barron’s AUGUST 20, 2011
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.