Outside of oil, gas and gold are "corrupt" deals with authoritarian governments even worthwhile anymore from a purely financial perspective? If I'm not mistaken most major commodities prices have fallen since the 90s. I guess that also means that becoming a high income country through commodities (like Argentina in the early 20th century or the Gulf monarchies and Botswana today) will become less likely.
Copper is in relatively stable countries like Chile and Australia. Don't know what they use silver and platinum for other than flexing. Perhaps you can shame people into not buying jewellery instead of not flying on planes. I think I can get the men on board with such a plan.
Just to add, these firms are "in the moving business, not the storage business" so it can be lucrative to make a deal for any commodity if they believe they can sell it for a higher price somewhere else. It's somewhat similar to market makers on the stock market. Any particular stock may go up or down over the long run but the successful market makers on average are able to quickly buy a stock from one person and sell it to another for a slightly higher price. As I understand it though, some of the larger firms like Glencore have entered the business of owning actual mines or farms in the case of Cargil.
I'm claiming that commodity traders won't make money. I'm just saying it might not be worthwhile to meddle with corrupt (often authoritarian) developing countries to get the goods as they say.
Outside of oil, gas and gold are "corrupt" deals with authoritarian governments even worthwhile anymore from a purely financial perspective? If I'm not mistaken most major commodities prices have fallen since the 90s. I guess that also means that becoming a high income country through commodities (like Argentina in the early 20th century or the Gulf monarchies and Botswana today) will become less likely.
Good question! And I have your answer
Copper: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/copper
Platinum: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/platinum
Silver: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/silver
All of these are higher than they were in the 90s.
However in terms of tradeable dollars, none of these compare to oil or gas.
Global silver trade is $30B while oil is over $1.5T
https://oec.world/en/profile/hs/silver
Diamonds are $120B
https://oec.world/en/profile/hs/diamonds
Plus lab grown diamonds should takeover eventually.
Copper is in relatively stable countries like Chile and Australia. Don't know what they use silver and platinum for other than flexing. Perhaps you can shame people into not buying jewellery instead of not flying on planes. I think I can get the men on board with such a plan.
Just to add, these firms are "in the moving business, not the storage business" so it can be lucrative to make a deal for any commodity if they believe they can sell it for a higher price somewhere else. It's somewhat similar to market makers on the stock market. Any particular stock may go up or down over the long run but the successful market makers on average are able to quickly buy a stock from one person and sell it to another for a slightly higher price. As I understand it though, some of the larger firms like Glencore have entered the business of owning actual mines or farms in the case of Cargil.
I'm claiming that commodity traders won't make money. I'm just saying it might not be worthwhile to meddle with corrupt (often authoritarian) developing countries to get the goods as they say.
*I'm NOT claiming