While hardly news to regular readers, most of whom have ridden the 80%+ wave in silver in 2010, the following video from Future Money Trends explains some of the key basics about why silver, which is unique in the precious metals basket in that it is also an industrial metal (and has thus sparked much debate over whether or not it, like gold, is "money"), and provides some perspectives on why silver just may one day be more valuable than gold. Some facts: while there are 10 ounces of silver, for every ounce of gold mined, the most of it is not "free flowing" and is locked up in industrial uses; for every $1 in SLV investors still pile $7 in GLD; above ground silver has declined from 10 billion ounces in 1950 to 5-700 million ounces in 2010 (compared to an increase in above ground gold from 1 billion to 7 billion ounces); the gold to silver ratio is at 50x while the average long-term is 15x, industrial demand for silver is up 18% in 2010; and much more. Of course, there is no reason why one has to pick one or the other. Historically both have been tiered stores of value, with the Roman empire going so far as to succumb its silver currency when the going got tough. The simple fact is since global deleveraging will likely continue and since the US government will need to print trillions, most of it monetized by the Fed, the ongoing currency dilution will continue to result in increasing P prices: pretty simple. The only downside case to gold and silver holdings would involve massive asset liquidations a la September 2008, which also would mean that the Fed has lost control, that the US dollar is no longer the reserve currency, and that after the smoke settles, non-fiat currencies will rise again. And that includes both gold and silver.

h/t Daniel