24 votes

The Golden Revolution: How to Prepare for the Coming Global Gold Standard

Note: Purchase this book, or anything at Amazon through links on the DP and benefit the Daily Paul at no cost to you!

Why the gold standard is due for a comeback
A reserve currency can only function as such if there is a general consensus that it provides a stable store of value. Without this trust, money, no matter what form it takes, will be abandoned--either suddenly in a crisis, or gradually over time--in favor of something else. The Golden Revolution looks at how the world is now moving rapidly toward some form of global metallic standard, in which money, at least in official, international transactions, is linked directly to gold.

The practical reality of the transition to the coming global gold standard is going to be substantially different from the global fiat monetary and financial regime of today. It is not just money that is going to change. The nature and business of banking will also be affected, as will finance in general.

  • Incisive and thoughtful, The Golden Revolution is a treatise on the broad effects of the current and future monetary structure
  • Looks at why the world is headed inexorably back towards a metallic money standard
  • Explores what the transition period might look like, including some historical examples of both orderly and disorderly transitions
  • Examines how the world of banking, finance, and investment, including asset valuation and portfolio management techniques, will work under a future gold standard and which industries, countries and markets are likely to benefit and which are likely to suffer

Full of advice on how investors can profit and protect themselves during this critical time of change, the book knows that those who are prepared will prosper, while those who aren't stand to lose.

get it now

Comment viewing options

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

How to prepare for the Gold Standard

How to prepare for the Gold Standard :

1. buy silver COINS** as much as you can

-- or, equivalently, TILL you can -- NOW !

2. loop and repeat

(**and/or bars, with more precaution)


"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

What I like and don't like about this idea.

I would like to have a currency backed by gold, silver, other precious metals, and several commodities, at a 1 to 1 ratio with no fractional reserves. If we back a currency by only gold, then those who own the gold wins, and as individuals, we will never own more gold than those who have for hundreds of years, (Rothschilds, etc.) As individuals we can own enough gold to secure our freedom, liberty, and security though. As a nation we might be able to acquire more gold. I do know there are some native American tribes sitting on mountains of gold that have yet to be unearthed.

I would not like to have global currency, even if it met the above criteria. Invariably, the same globalist bankers would own/control it. So we End the FED and bring in what? Who would issue this global currency? The IMF, which has the same owners as the FED.

Would it not be better to initiate a precious metals/commodities standard here with U.S. Notes (not Federal Reserve Notes), and allow our currency to compete freely on the open market with those currencies of other nations? That's what I would like to see one day. People around the world would choose our currency over the Euro.

Interesting topic.

ThisI would like to have a


I would like to have a currency backed by gold, silver, other precious metals and several commodities at a 1 to 1 ratio with no fractional reserves.

is fiat.

(You recommend several things to back the currency, but why use more than one backing? How would that work and what would several backings do except equalize them, making them one backing?)

Fiat: an authoritative application; by decree.

The dynamic of fiat is what is outside the individual controlling the individual. Indirect control is when a thing other than the individual assigns values to what the individual does or would do. Additionally, the outside-to-inside relationship produces collectivism, which is antithetical to individualism. A human collectivized is a human reduced to subhuman status, a number.

I'm wrestling with this issue, currency. How can the USA restore its sovereignty: How does the USA route out outside influence to restore its currency (the dollar) for itself or to establish a sovereign currency, NOT a currency people worldwide use because that use doesn't necessarily require government but that use is one world governance which would operate on small governments worldwide (but) whose operations would facilitate one-ness/streamlined-ness worldwide and apply law to do so. The infrastructure of that governance: electronics.

Kelldor, thanks for your comment. It provided me food for thought. I hope to hear from you here. Talk with you later.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Hi A-B--B-A; Thx for the

Hi A-B--B-A; Thx for the reply. You asked:

"(You recommend several things to back the currency, but why use more than one backing? How would that work and what would several backings do except equalize them, making them one backing?)"

As I understand it, by using a basket of commodities, if any one single commodity takes a dump, like lets say the price for oil crashes hard because some new giant reserve was found, then the currency as a whole would barely fluctuate, and remain very stable. If we back our currency by 1 single commodity, like gold, and some foreign power releases mass amounts of new gold on to the open market to cause a destabilization of our Dollar, they could.

Ron has talked about this some before, the idea is not mine or anything. Hope that answers your question. Take care :)

Gold standard is just Rothschild slavery in disguise!!

The fact that the Rothschilds rule the world's economic system with their massive trillions worth of gold certainly will not benefit us if we go back to just the gold standard. I mean, William McKinley established the gold standard in 1900 but that didn't do anything because the Rothschilds have had control of the price of gold for two centuries now and they have even manipulated its price to profit from the its ups and downs. Their total amount of money in gold is secret because when Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild died in 1812, he left in his will that the family's financial records be kept secret from the public eye. Only competing currencies will benefit us, not the gold standard.

Competing currencies is a

Competing currencies is a good idea. I like the idea of it. At what time would you want it: Would you want to jump to it at the first opportunity or would you want to insulate the USA from foreign financial influence to re-establish its financial sovereignty, which means to re-establish its economy, which is you and I the individual re-establishing ourselves -- then as a country we meld into competing currencies? I can see pitfalls in the latter use of implementing competing currencies. Somehow, the Rothschild influence has to routed out of our country before monetary changes are made. I don't know how competing currencies could be implemented to prevent Rothschild establishments in the USA and outside the USA from starting currencies in the USA, which is very worrisome, so worrisome that those currencies would be illusions: They'd be tied into one source: Rothschild.

But, yes, gold is Rothschild currency. That people don't understand gold is R currency after enough studying of history and economics is something I'm perplexed about. It's not co-incidence commercials touting gold and silver pervade air waves. There is nothing natural for us, the commoners, to all of a sudden, in the past five years, just want to buy and, worse, horde gold and silver. Still so many freedom professing people overlook the obvious. That our minds and our activity is on gold and silver is evidence our acquisition of them is contrived, that the want for these metals were pushed in front of us. Compounding the attack on the obvious is that freedom professing people DON'T EVEN MENTION that the people who buy it today are better off than those who buy it tomorrow!! That purchase, however, isn't relative to gold's and silver's price fluctuation, which I think will have to decrease devastatingly so so that most people in the USA and what other countries are controlled by Rothschild buy and use those metals. So little logic is used on the DP at times that I get frustrated and down. Oh, well. I gotta keep focused on truth, letting no name, reputation and prestige influence me. Logic is friend and foe to anyone and everyone.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

wolfe's picture

Keep hammering away...

Even people that don't seem to get it now, will, in time. As long as you consistently teach the message, you will reach more than you realize.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

I agree: teach the message

I agree: teach the message consistently.

When I have time, I'm going to write an essay consisting of the points I made above, elsewhere and ones I've yet come up with. I probably won't include opponents' statements and arguments because, I think, the reader can evaluate my work and my opponent's or opponents' work without opportunity to fixate on statement-against-statement relationships. This omission should provide clear contrast.

From what I've noticed in debate, when a debator in his argument includes statements of his opponent, the reader loses focus, concentrating on the projected parts -- the statement against statement -- of an argument so much that his concentration is at the expense of the other parts, the connection among all parts and what they comprise, the argument, the whole. I've also noticed when a debator cites his opposition, he surrounds that citation with histrionics and appeal to authority or weaves those qualities throughout his argument up to the citation and after that citation to a degree less than he did before it. This surrounding or weaving leads the reader to accept him, not his argument, a personal attachment (which is a trick) rather than a intellectual attachment. There is ancillary benefit to the debator who performs this tactic: He garners vociferous support, which demands his opposition generate more argument. In numerals, the result of that sequence is +1 (him) to -1 (opposition), which can be seen as 2 (him) to 0 (opposition).

I don't have the time now and I probably won't have it for a while to write this essay. I wish things for me were better. If they were, I'd write this essay soon. Thanks for encouragement, wolfe. Talk with you later.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

So if gold isn't the answer...

what is? Lots of gold-bashing in here, but no viable alternatives proposed.

I don't play, I commission the league.

wolfe's picture

Then you aren't actually reading...

First alternative: Competition.
Second alternative: Competition.
repeat etc etc...

Silver would likely be the winner... But who knows, maybe bitcoin, or something else, maybe even gold (highly unlikely) but the point is to avoid ***FIAT*** money which means mandated by law, and enforced monopoly. "Fiat" has nothing to do with underlying currency supports.

Even an enforced silver standard would be bad.

And while we are at it, underlying support isn't the root cause. Fractional reserve banking is.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

Who would the gold standard

Who would the gold standard benefit? The globalist elite. They've been hoarding all of the gold now that for a few decades most people of the general population consider it completely worthless. They have all the money now, and on a gold standard, they will still have all of the money.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

Your argument holds no water

Even if they held all the gold they still have to pay for their luxury cars, fancy palaces, expensive jewelry and that's how their gold flows out of their pockets. Yes, they might be holding all the gold initially, and have a lot of purchasing power in the beginning, but the fact is, that resouce is limited, and they will run out of it if they make poor business decisions, which they will. Unlike the current fiat, which they can just keep printing until the end of time.

No one is looking at this per

No one is looking at this per capita. The individual elite people have more gold per capita than other single person in the world. It's a no-brainer that a handful of people don't literally own more gold than the rest of the world or banks combined. The point is that they have been hoarding gold, land, and other assets. Any new currency that comes along is going to be something biometric, anyway, so unless you are one of those elite [who make their own rules] your metals will be worthless outside of some underground economy, anyway. Going to a gold standard doesn't automatically mean anything good for the people. The people in control will still just be able to change the rate the currency is pegged to the metal at will. A digital currency even backed by gold is still going to be abused by the elite. They make their own rules.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

reedr3v's picture

Perhaps you wear cultural blinkers?

Although most Americans foolishly embraced the paper standard and meekly allowed their gold to be confiscated by a thuggish government, all over the world ordinary people save and value precious metals; India, China and many people who've seen government paper inflated and destroyed for decades or maybe centuries. I've even heard there are vending machines that people can buy gold from in some European countries.

And here, once ordinary people freely traded in real metals -- gold, silver, copper. It does even the elite little good to sit on a pile of gold forever. If it is useful, it gets traded for even more usable goods.

While it's true

that most of the gold is in the hands of the ruling class, I think you're off the mark when you say that most people consider it completely worthless. I for one have never met anyone who thought of gold as worthless, just not as money.

Frankly, I don't care either way, since I stick to straight barter more often than not.

A signature used to be here!

I sense the influence of Bill Still's "The Money Masters"

Once I was affected by some of the false statements in this movie. The truth is that most gold is in the hands of private individuals, not the Elite and not the Central Banks.

Whatever the source of the misconception regarding gold, I would like you to please consider the info in the following comment Do you know who holds most of the gold? and other comments as well.

This information is easily verifiable.


I don't pay much attention to what Bill Still says. :x

While it may be true that percentage wise, private citizens hold more gold in total, the fact remains that any given 'elite' individual/organization has far more access to gold than you or I at a given moment. I probably should've worded my previous post better, though; they don't have "most" of the gold, but they do call the shots (though even that may be beginning to slip...)

For clarity, I'm not taking the "but there isn't enuf gold!!!" stance, I'm taking the "I don't want to use whatever the bankers are using/hoarding/pushing on the plebs" stance.

My concern is if 'they' ever advocated and/or introduced a gold standard as the 'solution' to our current economic woes, rather than allowing the market to decide what is best; otherwise we (as a country) will never learn. Lately I get the feeling that that might be part of the plan to lead us plebs through the vicious cycle yet again.

Basically, that concern only kicks in when I hear/see people (not so much on here, more the Fox types) talk about how it's the government's job to return us to a gold standard, which causes me to tear out chunks of my ever-thinning hair. Guess there are still many out there who seem to think that competing currencies would be bad (too sloppy, the money wouldn't have a uniform denomination, too cumbersome, et cetera). Sigh.

Personally, I don't use much gold, silver, FRNs or any other mediums of exchange too often; I usually just barter or, occasionally, work out some sort of labor situation.

A signature used to be here!

Crazy Gold Bugs

There are way too many shills for the gold standard out in the wild.

Most are quick to tout the positives of the gold standard, but too often they overlook or paper-over the shortcomings.

Please explain what happens to our money supply and the value of the US Dollar when we go to the gold standard? Consider that our gold reserves do not amount to M1+M2+M3 (not to mention the over 220 trillion [with a T] of derivative exposure the top 10 banks have), so the USD must devalue or the money supply must contract to maintain equilibrium.

What about people who cannot afford to hedge to gold?

Could the problem possibly be that money is debt? Could the solution be a return to Lincoln's greenbacks? Or could the solution be using another resource to back currency?

Seriously, I see this Gold Standard talk and I instantly go to look behind the curtain to see who will benefit the most from this. It's definitely not the wizard of oz, and one of the people kind of looks like Glenn Beck.

How are those gold-plated tungsten bars working out for you?

Pride and greed hold us all back, to the benefit of the few and detriment of the whole.

The amount of gold in

The amount of gold in existence is irrelevant. We could easily trade with miniscule fractions of ounces if necessary. In the best case scenario you'd stop referring to dollars entirely and prices would be displayed in ounces of gold (or silver).

Lincoln's greenbacks share a problem similar to the federal reserve note: it's fiat and can easily be inifnitely multiplied at the press of a button. One of the reasons why a precious metal is so good as money is that it takes a lot of work to make it appear. It's impossible for a government hellbent on spending to cheat gold.

Two's a Company, Three or More is Better Company

I'm happy to see I'm not alone and that my company is growing. :)

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Central Banks Will steal from you regardless!

Central Banks will either steal currency from you or they will steal the value there of.

Talk of a "Gold Standard" is very worrisome to me for this reason. Think of the transition. Take all the currency in circulation and divide the amount of gold reserves into it. Some say that that amounts to about 1/56,000 of an ounce per dollar, unless you're talking about GLD multiple accounting (x100). Still it's a very high multiple - fraudulently of not.

The point is that currently, if you have $1,800 in the bank (or in your mattress) you can buy an ounce of gold, or an ounce of gold will buy you $1,800. But when the revaluation occurs, it will take $56,000 to buy an ounce of gold, or and ounce of gold will buy you $56,000.

It could occur that the FED turns around an destroys massive amounts of currency. This will lower the $/Oz ratio, but wages will decline substantially and work will dwindle as people save their money because there's so little of it. This isn't necessarily all bad, but will be really really tough for a good while.

The final variable, that I can see as being important, is how the value of gold will fluctuate. Will it take more gold to buy a loaf of bread tomorrow than it does today, or less? I think more. And this means a further devaluation of the currency even after the "revaluation." This means just more hurt and more wealth for those who hold actual physical gold.

A fiat gold standard is just the next step towards impoverishing the population. look what happened to people's wealth in the 1870's when the US discontinued silver coins in favor of gold.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Johnny on the Spot

Great points and solid theorizing, Johny-Boy.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

wolfe's picture

Gold makes for...

a poor, easily manipulated currency controlled by the same interests that control the fiat systems.

Easily cornered, easily used against us. Beware of anyone bearing false gods. Anything is fiat if it is mandated by law, with no competition.

Real competition is likely to result in silver as the winner, but regardless, whatever resulted from the competition is likely to better than what we have now (and better than gold).

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

Why do you think silver is a

Why do you think silver is a better currency than gold?

My money's on Bitcoin, or if those turns out to be broken, something in that vein. Supply mathematically predictable and limited. Mining costs equivalent for everyone. Easily and cheaply transferred, and cheaply and safely stored. And anonymous enough to make confiscating them hard.

wolfe's picture

Silver has two unique qualities.

First, it is exceptionally abundant and impossible to corner. Google "cornering the silver market" to read about some spectacular failed attempts. It is why when you bring up comparative charts, silver stays very steady without truly gaining or losing any real value. The movements of silver accurately track inflation. As an example, the same amount of silver today buys the same amount of bread that it did 50 or more years ago. It's money, not an investment or speculation. Fun fact... :)

Second, it has industrial applications and legitimate use outside of decoration or money so it will always be needed.

These two factors make it an ideal monetary unit. As far as bitcoin, I've been a software engineer most of my life and all I can say is they have found a way to sell you GUID's... :) (It's an inside joke with my friends about certain types of software). It's worthless and I would never personally use it as money.

But, that's the point, none of us "knows best", the market will decide once the fiat system is killed.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -

Thank you, wolfe. I'm

Thank you, wolfe. I'm relieved to know someone else knows what fiat means. For some reason, its definition is a mystery to most DPers. Those DPers misuse the word fiat again and again. Talk about exhaustive dealing with such people. Can't even get the debate off the ground, let alone advance the debate, if the parties are arguing terms whose definitions clash. Strange as heck that most DPers don't know what fiat means.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

I think due to the changed

I think due to the changed policies of central bank, the gold is at such an unstable condition. Now if the investors are smart enough to sort this difference out, they will be on safer side.

The only reason

The only reason we will be returning to a gold standard is due to the fact that the privately owned central banks have now acquired all the gold through the stroke of a pen, so to speak, and now can control the supply.

The currency will still be debt/usuries in nature with collateral fees and interest.

Luke 3:38
Isaiah 43:3-5

Cyril's picture

Well, the only regret / problem I have with the gold standard

Well, the only regret / problem I have with the gold standard is ...

... gold is practically inaccessible already ! :(


So, I can't find/do better than sticking to silver. Ounce after ounce...

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Daily Paul for World Governance?

Why are there few DPers who understand gold is what anything else is, a thing, and that to use it voluntarily is fine but to coerce someone to use it is wrong? Why does no one else, as far as I'm aware, understand the use of a thing in the past doesn't, again, doesn't, necessitate its use in the present and, especially important, in the future (because doing so would require a mandate, something irrespective circumstances), as in people used X, so people now or later must use X? And why do few DPers understand the person who wants to use gold as money can do so (yes, you can) if the USA has competing currencies?

Why does the majority of DPers' consistency on freedom contain a contradiction, one that is massive, wanting the issue that would cause USA's loss of sovereignty? That issue, currency. Why does almost no one else recognize centralized currency worldwide or currency backing worldwide is the core of world governance?

I say governance, not government, because governance can be without government. I'm very confused why the Daily Paul, a place most of you know I enjoy because I consider its members are a cut above the rest of politics onlookers and doers, is promoting world governance.

Most of us know money is the issue, the issue pertaining to all that is good and bad in our country and on Earth. It, as Ron Paul says, is a half of every transaction, well, excluding transactions whose traders decide to not use a popular currency.

Please, Michael Nystrom, inform me why the DP is promoting the very thing, centralized life, when each of us knows money, currency, the medium of exchange, must be changed in a way that restores our country's sovereignty, not evaporates it thereby pushes the USA into world rules, world regulation, world governance?

Days ago I answered a DPer who said to me, You must not follow Ron Paul because you're against the gold standard. My answer was: You're right! I follow no one. I follow logic. I think. I also told him that although I found Michael's removal of RP's front page photo distasteful, I am on course to reaching agreement with Michael on removing RP's photo; idols in sports or other triviality is one thing, idols on serious issues is another thing. I also said to this DPer that if he understood what I was saying, he would see I was for him, not against him: I want a monetary system that restores our country's sovereignty, therefore its people's dignity.

I know how you feel, Ron: 1 to 434.

And as Ron, I'll continue to stand tall.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton