10 votes

Need help with a Gold Standard issue (UPDATED)

anyone with a little more experience care to comment on the condemnations of a gold standard in favor of greenbacks presented in the documentary "The Money Masters?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9wYu1SR1Wk&feature=related

This three and a half hour doc is too thorough for me to condense effectively here, if you haven't seen it, it is an excellent watch, but also presents compelling evidence for why a gold standard is a dangerous solution, thoughts?

UPDATE: Guys, this thread is almost 2 months old, it has died twice and been revived now a third time, if you're going to comment, please directly answer these questions, how is having the FED better than having greenbacks IN THE CASE where we have competing currencies. Also, how do you get out from under the debt when the US has no gold assets that havent been placed as collateral on the DEBT? How is the debt-based money preferable to greenbacks? Who is going to trade gold for FRNs when they are no longer the only legal tender(and as a result no long the world's reserve currency?) When the Petrodollar is dissolved(very soon) what will the severly devalued dollar do to the elderly and the poor who are unable to turn their subsistence living into gold? When you give answers to these questions we can consider this issue closed. I get tired of people railing aginst the greenback yet never once listing why they approve of continued FED action in its place.

For the record, at this point my belief is to print greenbacks to replace FRN's while simultaneously instituting competeing currencies, which will force greenbacks to be more stable long term or die, but we can close the FED very soon if we go this route, i see no end to the FED otherwise until we can pay the debt we owe them..



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

well actually frns are way

well actually frns are way worse than a greenback, as we owe interest and the debt itself. im honestly quite open to the idea and thats why i started this post because ive been very concerned about gold for the same reasons you are. if we were starting anew, it would be easy for me to want gold as the standard, but since the table is already set, i am very wary as its controlled by the few as well, i mean what else would you do but buy up the gold if you were the Rothschild or the central banks, though they have to be careful about showing their hand by holding to much gold, and there have been very suspicious gold trades at suspicious times to keep the price down.
where it gets dirty, as always, is in the details though. so would this bank be the treasury under your system, are the people elected or selected, and what would you use as the basis for how much is the right amount of greenbacks and how do you keep the value stable?

edit: also, what do you do with all the money that exists due to fractional reserve, how do you keep from destroying our credit based society, and do you keep legal tender laws and taxation of gold?(i suppose you might have answered that last one already but if you wouldn't mind clarifing it will keep me from arguing something you didn't say.)

what do you do with all the money that exists

"what do you do with all the money that exists due to fractional reserve"...

They instantaneously by law get converted into the new US currency. You do not have to change the appearance of the note... it automatically becomes the property of the US government on behalf of the people. The only public debt that does not get canceled is the debt held by foreigners ... that gets repaid with the new US dollar backed by the American people. The money itself stays the same but the ownership changes hands from the owners of the Fed to the American people.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

Okay, you convert the FRNs

Okay, you convert the FRNs into new US currency, what have you accomplished by doing that? You say that we cancel all public debt that does not belong to foreigners…that’s certainly seems like a suggestion for defrauding all those Americans who hold U.S. Debt in their portfolios, that hold U.S. Savings Bonds and other government debt instruments that they were hoping for a return on at some point in the future. Thus, your proposal is to steal $9.8 trillion from the American People themselves, certainly sounds like a solution to me and on top of that you proposal foreigners get the line-share of the benefits under your new proposed system of Sovereign Currency? That is, after all, what you are saying isn’t it? Yep, it certainly sounds like you have really thought this one out!

I suggest you go back to the drawing board, in fact, I would suggest you first find out just how the whole system currently works, because once you do I think you will be forced to change a great deal of your current thinking on the process that you propose as a solution.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Why Have Any Legally Enforced Definition of Money?

I think the issue is not whether we have a paper money standard or a gold standard. The issue is why have any legally enforced standard at all. If gold is allowed to be money but turns out not to serve well as money then it won't be used as money. The point is, the same should apply to paper as money. Many people, including me, think paper serves very poorly as money and would prefer to use gold and silver but are prevented from doing so.

Instead of trying to convince someone that we should have a gold standard, make the argument that in a free society people should be able to use whatever they want to use as money, including gold and silver. Personally I don't know how anyone can look at current sovereign debt levels - levels that cannot be repaid other than by printing money out of thin air thereby devaluing the money already held by the people - and think that paper serves as a good form of money. Nevertheless, for those who prefer paper over gold or some other commodity backed money - fine, let them keep their paper. I would strongly recommend against it - but in the final analysis that's their decision to make. I hope this is of some help to the discussion taking place here.

Ron Miller

thanks for your comments,

thanks for your comments, however, i think we're all in agreement that competing currencies is the way togo, we're more or less arguing over how to get there, and what path to take, some, myself included are of the opinion that we should replace FRNs with a debt-free currency and at the same time legalize competition, others find that idea distasteful for one reason or another.

Good for you, establish your

Good for you, establish your own currency! We who agree with Ron Paul don't wanna stop you. Du you wanna stop us?

I think it's a very bad idea to "back" a currency with gold. Much better is it to use gold as money directly, without any other "currency" as an unnecessary middleman.

umm no, had you read all my

umm no, had you read all my coments on my thread here you would see that i advocate competing currencies, most everyone here does, we're discussion how to transition.. but i doubt many people want to carry gold bars in their pocket. Makes it hard to by cars and houses don't you think? I would like to be able to possess and hold gold, but i don't want to directly hand over gold to buy a pack of smokes. I would like a personal gold acount that can be spot traded at point of sale for whatever currency that person desires via a card(optimally). I think you're missing that we are discussing the fact that the FED can call that debt in if it wants to, and thats why you see me advocate a debt-free currency to replace the FRN while repealing legal tender and abolishing taxes on gold.

debt?

I would like a personal gold acount that can be spot traded at point of sale for whatever currency that person desires via a card(optimally).

I would actually like something like that, except with the additional ability to have other assets besides gold. (See here for why.) Though I supposed that's really only needed for savings and not for day-to-day purchases. But then, gold is only needed for savings. Fiat is OK for day-to-day-purchases. (It's better to just get rid of fiat though, so PM-account credit/debit cards, here we come.)

I think you're missing that we are discussing the fact that the FED can call that debt in if it wants to, and thats why you see me advocate a debt-free currency to replace the FRN

Huh? If you put gold in a bank and don't maintain ownership of said gold, then there is a debt -- the bank owes you. I don't see how defining a debt as a debt is a problem. (Or were you saying gold itself would be considered a debt?)

There could be "allocated" and "unallocated" banks/accounts, just as there are for existing commercial gold vaults. In an "allocated" account you could retain clear ownership even while the bank has possession. But if you are sticking gold coins into a purely "allocated" account you could only spend whole gold coins (at best) -- they aren't going to chop coins up into bits for you. Unallocated has lower fees and could come in both full-reserve and fractional-reserve flavors. With unallocated though, even with full-reserve, ownership gets dicey if the bank goes bust -- e.g., if they owe back taxes or rent or lost a lot of money in their hedge-fund side-business the gold could end up going to people besides the bank's former account holders.

So "unallocated" may be OK for day-to-day spending money, but maybe not for your retirement nest-egg.

while repealing legal tender and abolishing taxes on gold.

Not just taxes on gold -- get rid of all taxes on all precious metals. Silver and platinum are also taxed under the same federal "collectors" tax that hits gold. Also, they (and other potential PM currencies such as ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, indium) are also subject to state and local sales taxes in most states. I think it would be best to get rid of all taxes on all uniform coins and bullion, regardless of what they are made of and regardless of who minted them. Do the same for paper currencies "to be fair". (But that gets trickier because I don't think you want everything [e.g., cars] whose ownership is represented by a piece of paper [title] to then be treated as tax free. I think you would have to specify that the only two kinds of paper that are tax-free are paper that is unredeemable for anything, and paper that is redeemable for tax-free bullion/coins.)

I would actually like

I would actually like something like that, except with the additional ability to have other assets besides gold.
no argument there, though i suppose we'll end up like Dungeons & Dragons if we're not careful lol 'that will be four platinum pieces and 35 gold pieces.. thank you!'

Huh? If you put gold in a bank and don't maintain ownership of said gold, then there is a debt -- the bank owes you. I don't see how defining a debt as a debt is a problem.
i was actually referring to the national debt(17T) and the fact that the FED can call that debt in i believe.... 'margin call'...? is that the right term?

Part III (too long to copy/paste)
i am concerned about the fractional reserve system in general, that is really the power behind the fed, not the simple printing. and the spot-trading at point of sale would take care of divisions of a gold piece(or whatever-piece).

Not just taxes on gold -- get rid of all taxes on all precious metals.
again, no real argument, i just said gold for simplicity.
Do the same for paper currencies "to be fair".
i don't see the need, i assume you're talking about foreign currency exchange? unless you have a reason otherwise i don't mind that staying taxed if it keeps other taxes lower, at this theoretical point other countries will take our gold/whatevermetal so imports wouldn't be a problem, though maybe exports would be... hmm, aren't there concerns of currency manipulation in global markets if there's no transaction tax, or at least mass speculating? this is not my area of expertise...

Nope, no margin calls by Fed

i was actually referring to the national debt(17T) and the fact that the FED can call that debt in i believe.... 'margin call'...? is that the right term??

There is such a thing as a "margin call". But the Fed can not make such a call on US debt. US debt (treasuries = bills, notes, bonds) have maturity dates which are "set in stone" when that debt is issued. No one can require that the US pay off those debts before the given debt's maturity date. All the Fed can do is either sit on that debt until it matures, sell it on the open market, or buy more of it (or a mix of those like it did in "operation twist" where it sold short-term debt and bought long-term debt).

i don't see the need

That's kind of why I put "to be fair" in quotes. I wasn't thinking legalizing non-backed paper currency is necessary because (without government force) it will never be desired by the market. But then again, see next...

i assume you're talking about foreign currency exchange?

I didn't have that in mind, but that should be allowed, should it not? (People may need to deal with and exchange foreign currencies as part of their import/export business. So even if our government is not coercing us to use a given currency, other government's force may mean some of us end up needing to use foreign currency.)

What I mainly had in mind was placating people who think paper currency is the best (thus the quotations around "to be fair").

unless you have a reason otherwise i don't mind that staying taxed if it keeps other taxes lower

Ah, but then you are not really for fairly competing currencies. You want to pick the losers in advance and then tax them -- and "paper lovers" will accuse you of manipulating the system, making paper lose out with your forced taxes.

aren't there concerns of currency manipulation in global markets if there's no transaction tax, or at least mass speculating

No. You hear fake concerns (either fake or idiotic) out of politicians when they are trying to deflect blame for something that happened on their watch (possibly with their help). Taxes only make markets less efficient, not better. (Taxes should never be levied for any other reason than to raise the minimum amount necessary for the government to fulfill its one true role -- defending individual liberty. Anything else is an illegitimate use of force.)

Check out this interview.

On CNBC Money in Motion with Ron Paul. They ask him about the gold standard and he gives the answer he has given for as long as I have been aware of him...probably much longer.

http://ronpaulnews.net/2012/05/ron-paul-on-cnbc.html

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

i saw that, but it doesn't

i saw that, but it doesn't answer the questions i've laid out below, it never does, otherwise i wouldn't be asking them.. RP's plan for monetary policy is a lot like Obama's plan for medicine... now don't get angry, I say that because, both are intermediate steps which cannot survive by themselves, they both are designed to push you to the next step, single-payer system for healthcare, gold standard for money. While in RP's case thats a good thing, there are still very big concerns in feasability as we have NO control over the FED, and there's nothing stopping them from playing with interest rates and calling in the debt and when we can't pay it, they take our gold that we've put up as collateral, and we're all screwed.. or they shrink the money supply before gold can take hold like they've done every other time we've tried to kill the bank, the global banking elite have an incredible amount of control over how much money moves internationally, and it can be turned off wether we like it or not

BTW I didn't vote you down.

Jim Grant will be the Fed Chairman and he will set the agenda for the Fed. The Fed charter ends next year so it can just be allowed to expire.

You seem to forget that the President is the Commander in Chief and if the Fed takes actions that threaten the United States (remember that Dr. Paul correctly labels sanctions an act of war) then he can deploy the military in its defence and even arrest the Fed officials for sedition, insurrection or treason.

The preference that Dr. Paul has is for the People rather than a central authority to be the source of money which is the only just way for money to come into existence. The plan to introduce competing currencies is the transition not to a "gold standard" but to sound money whether it be gold or silver or bitcoin or something else all of which will trade and be priced against each other. I have written another comment below that you can read with my thoughts on how the Federal debt can be paid off.

I can tell I think that you favour the debt free fiat money as at least a transition vehicle. I used to think the same but have since abandoned the idea since I have come to a better understanding of what money is, what its source is and therefore how it MUST come into existence.

Simply put in economic terms money comes into existence exclusively by the action of Labour on Land. The way it happens today where money is created ex nihilo and is in fact irredeemable debt is the result of a trick by the money lenders on gullible and ignorant politicians with the aid of either mistaken or corrupt political economists. The essence of the mistake was to make Capital a primary factor of production along with Labour and Land.

Capital is a always a secondary factor since money is always the result of the application of Labour to Land. Capital can therefore only come from savings after the product of the application of Labour to Land, whether a good or a service, has been used by the producer or sold in the market with the surplus being saved and made available as Capital. This is not easy to see if one simply observes merely the present situation. It is necessary to return to first principles in order to perceive this truth.

Once the mistake is made of raising Capital to the status of a primary factor, or even an a priori requirement, it is simple to convince anyone that the Capitalist is an indispensable member of society. The introduction at this point in the sequence of events of the art of money lending and fractional reserve banking is a logical step and the money lender or financier assumes the now pre-eminent role of Capitalist.

The seeds of this entire fabrication were planted in the public mind in the nineteenth century and I believe the main culprits, or at least the most successful, were Karl Marx and his friend and collaborator Friedrich Engels who jointly wrote the Communist Manifesto and introduced the concept of central banking.

It is my conviction that socialism and central banking are a symbiosis and this is why socialism has been so assiduously promoted by the central banking class. Without the ability to create money ex nihilo the socialist ideology would wither and die a natural death. Indeed it would never have achieved its success without the active encouragement of what we call the capitalist class. If one believes in ending the Federal Reserve System then it is impossible to be a socialist of any description unless one embraces the notions put about by Bill Still and Ellen Brown for State Banking and debt free fiat currency. Then one is still infected with the collectivist virus and any changes sought in the direction of liberty will never be realised.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

yes yes i get that hard money

yes yes i get that hard money is better, and i understand where value comes from.
you've still not explained to me how FRN's are better than greenbacks as the paper currency in the situation where we have one or several paper and others in metal. Im not a believer in all greenbacks or anything like that. What greenbacks offer that nothing else does is a way out from underneath the FED's thumb. Do you REALLY expect our government to declare treason when the FED operates under authority granted by congress? What do you suppose that does to our ability to borrow money from other central banks? A credit contraction not seen since the great depression would destroy our nation... it is the SAME thing that happened the last two times we killed the bank.
Lets not forget that greenbacks(in LARGE numbers) circulated until 1971, and were equally redeemable. It would be just as easy to mandate that greenback supply be tied to population or to productivity, whatever suits you. That keeps the money supply either stable per capita or in the case where tied to productivity, it would be a representation of the goods in the marketplace which could only expand if we produced additional goods.

So how is paying interest on our debt better than not having interest?

FRNs vs. Greenbacks

I am not an expert on the issuance of Greenbacks but I will use the term in a figurative way to identify fiat "money" that is issued by the US Treasury debt free. In my opinion there is no material difference between FRNs and Greenbacks. To change to Greenbacks would continue the same mess we are in at the moment. The transition will eventually end more quickly if we renounce anything to do with "money" issued by a central authority whether as debt or debt free.

Greenbacks were issued in order to prolong the Civil War. Absent their issuance the war would have ended sooner. Issuing "money" from a central authority by fiat is the way in which governments pay for the Warfare/Welfare State. It is always sure to end badly.

I realise it is difficult to let go of the collective mindset and I understand if you find it impossible at the moment. I followed the same path you are on for many years and it was a gradual realisation that brought me to my present convictions.

There are spiritual and moral influences that come along with the idea of central issuance of "money" created ex nihilo. First, in thinking about and living within is ambit it we come to believe the delusion that there is indeed a free lunch. It is this above all that leads to the moral decay and destruction of society that we have witnessed over the past one hundred years. Then there is the belief that the ultimate source of provision for the needs of humanity and our locus of authority lies outside of ourselves. This belief is fostered and strengthened by the existence of a central authority issuing "money" whether debt free or as debt. These two moral principles are false and when embraced generate destruction. This is a spiritual truth.

Jesus said that "the Kingdom of Heaven is within you" and the apostle Paul taught that "if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either." This latter is based upon the curse laid upon Man in the beginning that: "By the sweat of your brow you will eat food until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you will return.”

It is Man's effort to escape the curse that gives rise to socialism and its symbiote central banking. This simply brings us into judgement and this is what has been happening in America since 1913/14. This time of bondage has now ended and we are in the midst of the process of release. Those who have been given the authority to enslave us for a time must now let us go. Ron Paul has been used in this process as an analogue of the prophet Jeremiah in one respect and as a type of the Lord Jesus Christ in another.

The past forty two years have been a time of great activity in the spiritual realm as well as in the world and events are now reaching a climax.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

The owners of the Fed hate competition. It’s a “sin.”

The last thing they want to see is an alternative similar looking US fiat currency to compete with the Federal Reserve note that can be printed for nothing by another competing central bank and lent out to other banks at 1% where those other banks can in-turn lend it out by 10 times more than they have on deposit to the public. They would rather compete with a gold backed currency that’s barred from the central bank controlled fractional reserve banking market.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

Okay, how do you know that

Okay, how do you know that the FED would hate seeing an alternative similar-looking US fiat currency to compete with the FRN, the fact is that they didn’t seem to mind it all the way up to the 1960s because U.S. Bank Notes were in circulation through out the period from 1913 all the way up to when they were eventually removed from circulation. Your whole premise lacks a firm foundation. What is very odd about your suggestions is the fact that throughout the various comments you have made there are complete contradictions to your own comments. First, your assumptions are based on something other than the current reality. The FED is no more concerned with that and in fact, if it would rather compete with gold then why did they spend so much time trying to demonetize gold as a circulating currency and make it into simply another commodity. If what you say is true then you most certainly must have some examples to demonstrate the veracity of your claim, but you don’t do you?

The facts speak against what you are trying to claim as true, so perhaps you can give us detailed examples that give you the indication that the FED would rather compete against gold rather than yet another fiat currency, which is, by the way, exactly what it does not with the international fiat currencies around the world. One of the benefits, both to this government and the FED is that there is a competing market of fiat notes around the world an all sorts of means to play that system. Gold money would remove that game, both from this government and the FED, as well as all other Central Banksters.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

indeed, doesn't that make it

indeed, doesn't that make it the better option. at least as the first step toward gold

the first step

is for to to start buying gold in preparation.... with your Federal Reserve notes

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

you can't have physical gold,

you can't have physical gold, so what does that do for you? our govt can't afford to buy gold either, so that doesn't help, all they have to do is corner the gold market, which they can since the same people that own the banks own the gold mining operations, it won't hurt them any to shut them down and let the price of gold skyrocket and put it out of the reach of americans, i honestly do not see a safe way out without cancelling fed notes and replacing them with a greenback equivalent and legalizing competeing currencies, because without greenbacks as a cushion between the banks and the people, they still have all the control because we all still have FRN's. Once you've got greenbacks competing with gold/silver, people will naturally move toward gold but there won't be anything for the banking elite to hold over our heads anymore.

"you can't have physical gold, so what does that do for you?"

Last I checked the American people were still allowed to use FRNs to buy gold... correct me if I'm wrong.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

you're not allowed to possess

you're not allowed to possess more than 100$ in physical gold excluding collectors items per the executive orders of FDR

Wrong

Gold has been legal to own since December 31, 1974. (All gold, all citizens.)

I personally own a lot more than $100 worth of the substance.

The "collectors" thing is just an excuse to tax/suppress non-FRN currencies. There are no requirements that anyone owning gold be a "registered collector" or any thing like that, nor are there any requirements on what form your gold may be in. (I own AGEs, foreign gold coins, and gold bars.)

edit: Beaten to the punch by bytejockey -- and by about 40 minutes! I need to learn to hit refresh and check for new comments before deciding to write my own response.

The limitation on gold ownership in the U.S. was repealed

after President Gerald Ford signed a bill legalizing private ownership of gold coins, bars and certificates by an act of Congress codified in Pub.L. 93-373,which went into effect December 31, 1974.

http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/5000-200.html

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/execut...

thank you both, i stand

thank you both, i stand corrected!

you're not allowed to possess more than 100$ in physical gold

Well somebody better go arrest Ron Paul.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

trust me he doesn't have gold

trust me he doesn't have gold bars lying around his house, he might have certifigates, i said possess for a reason

"he doesn't have gold bars lying around his house"

gold coins too... say eagles?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

collectors items

collectors items

You'll have to convert

the $17 trillion debt into gold as well

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...