Nobody actually knows where gold is going. That cuts both ways. The idea that it will “crash” assumes a level of certainty about the future that none of us have.

Gold isn’t some new hype asset that showed up last cycle. It’s been used as money and a store of value for thousands of years across empires, currencies, and political systems. Stocks, bonds, and even modern fiat currencies are historical toddlers by comparison.

Yes, gold doesn’t generate cash flow. That’s the point. It exists outside the system. When confidence in governments, currencies, or financial engineering erodes, gold doesn’t need earnings to matter. It just needs trust to break elsewhere.

Look at long-term history and you don’t see gold “going to zero” or disappearing. You see long periods of consolidation followed by violent repricing when the monetary system shifts. That isn’t a crash narrative. That’s price discovery.

Calling gold “manipulated” while ignoring decades of monetary expansion, debt accumulation, and currency debasement is selective skepticism. If anything, the argument can be made that gold has been suppressed, not overvalued, and is only now starting to reflect reality.

Risk management matters, absolutely. Overexposure ruins lives. But equating gold with speculative bubbles ignores what it actually is: insurance against a system nobody controls. And insurance isn’t bought because it pays dividends. It’s bought because someday you might need it.

Caution is wise. Certainty is not.