8 votes

The Gold Confiscation Myth (Watch! It applies to guns, too!)


Important message about gold that applies to any attempt to confiscate guns, too.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

they'll outlaw "hoarding" and "bartering"....

...since "everyone knows" that only terrorists want to hide their transactions by bartering and "hoard" because they don't trust your government.

And by the way, if you turn in someone you know who may be a hoarder or attempts to barter with you, you get an extra week's ration card and 10% of the assets that were forfeited.

This is how it happened in Russia and Germany and its how it will happen here.

No.7's picture



The individual who refuses to defend his rights when called by his Government, deserves to be a slave, and must be punished as an enemy of his country and friend to her foe. - Andrew Jackson

My Favorite line

"Those criminal bastards"

When Fascism goes to sleep, it checks under the bed for Ron Paul!

Keep in mind

that no one came door-to-door to confiscate gold in '33. Roosevelt issued an Executive Order demanding folks turn it in.


Only approximately 25% of people complied. Those who had their assets in 'safety deposit boxes,' etc., were S.O.L.

Keep your stuff close to you, hidden, buried, whatever, and tell no one.

Guns are a different matter, we've already seen how they will come door-to-door for those.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

not compelling argument

Because no one confiscated it makes it worse. You are a criminal if you have buried gold. You can't spend it!

And... if.. you found people ot trade with, you always have to worry about being turned in, or their business being watched, etc.

So, long and the short, it sounds like this video is a bust, and you really do have to worry about restrictions on currency use.

No one came door-to-door

But the penalty was very compelling...
do you have a source to the 25% stat?

When Fascism goes to sleep, it checks under the bed for Ron Paul!

not only the penalty

But, the market penalty. Can you imagine trying to use gold when it is illegal. It may be worth $10k / ounce, but you aren't going to get anyone on the black market to give you anything near that price.

Any chance you can sum this up for me?

I find it hard to watch videos w/ the voice superimposed over animations.

The one reason I think gold might not be confiscated this time is that, unlike 1933, we're not currently on a gold standard. So if government wants to devalue money, they don't need to pay people $20 for their gold and then only re-sell it for $35 (or whatever the new price was).

That said, there's still a chance that IRAs, 401Ks and even valuables found in safety deposit boxes will be replaced by treasuries.


Correct. Gold was confiscated in the 1930s in order to expand the monetary base where the dollar was theoretically 'gold backed'. The monetary base was doubled between 1933 and 1938. But I imagine they might want to create a new dollar after total devaluation and back it by something like gold or federal land holdings (ie Weimar Germany).

If they want to confiscate gold, what they'll do is slap a MASSIVE tax on its sale, then "offer" to buy it from the public, tax free. The herd will go for this.

I am very, very worried about government taking over 401ks and IRAs under the guise of "pension security", then forcing investment in Treasuries at 3% to prevent a Treasury collapse. Socialist Theresa Ghialarducci has Obama's ear on this one.

How Would It Work?

Clearly, if they ordered all the Trustees to turn over their clients' possessions, which the Trustees are keeping in vaults, storage units, and in file cabinets, and electronically, all over the place (assets such as physical metals, trading cards, artwork, boats, real estate, stocks, bonds, postage stamps, jewelry, mortgage notes, etc.), the trustees will file suit immediately to stop it.

Complying with such an order would clearly put them out of business, and violate their duties to their clients, as well as be a huge expense to deal with--will they be required to assess the values or sell the physical assets?--can they? Real estate and mortgage loans recorded with local counties would be especially interesting to turn over: how would the transfer work?

Even if your IRA is in electronically traded stocks, the conversion to Treasuries would probably bring objections from all the firms traded in the stock market: they don't want their shares forcefully sold!

The moment I see that new income taxes will be imposed on the sale of gold in my IRA, I'm not going to sell mine, I'm going to instruct my trustee to send it to me, because the tax advantage is the only reason to have it in the IRA. If they impose a federal sales tax on gold, then I imagine gold will be sold in other countries, rather than in the U.S. Any such desperate move (sales or income tax) might reduce the value, as an investment, in the U.S., but I imagine would only raise its value in the rest of the world, because it's a red flag indicating desperation.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/


If your asset is in a vault, set up by one's IRA trustee, I'm sure it's possible to change trustees and notify the vault, and it must also be possible to inform the vault that the trustee is no longer in charge of your asset--and that they should deal with you, directly.

The latter would trigger the loss of your income tax exempt status on a Roth IRA, but might still be worth doing just to have the asset under one's control. Additionally, if the asset is in a foreign vault, the foreign vault will be better able to use local laws to maintain their reputation for trustworthiness, and refuse any mandates issued in the U.S., but even domestic vaults will likely be governed by state laws, and their clients will be telling them which side of the bread has butter.

Anything the government orders will only work if people voluntarily comply. We do outnumber them.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

i suppose

I suppose the gov would give you until the end of the tax year, then, if you did not convert it to a Treasury pension fund, the IRS would slap you with a 20% penalty. You can take delivery, but you will pay the piper on April 15 making it not worth it.

I have zero faith Americans will resist. The gov will wait for a market crash, then everyone in mutual funds will beg for this.

OR they'll outlaw "hoarding" and "bartering"....

...because "everyone knows" that only terrorists want to hide their transactions by bartering and "hoard" because they don't trust your government.

Oh and by the way, if you turn in someone you know who may be a hoarder or attempts to barter with you, you get an extra week's ration card and 10% of the assets that were forfeited.

This is how it will happen, just as it happened in Russia and Germany.

wrong argument

kevin - first off, yes the govt has been able to devalue money in that way... but that is just a shell game, and the reality is when it is discovered, and when they have to count on printing more and more, then the game does in fact end. so you can't say they can just keep devaluing forever. look at emerging markets that do this and you iwll see prices do in fact rise with the increase in monetary production.

Next, the govt didn't take gold to resell it so i don't know what you are trying to say there.

They took it to keep citizens from using it on the black market as an alternative. Big difference in why it would be done. It would absolutely be done again in that way.

summarize please

the video is too annoying to stick through for 7 minutes. especially when the first 2 are incorrect and simply opinion.

gold was in fact illegal. the president does in fact make law. their argument looks silly when faced with the fact only congress can declare war... and when was the last eimt they did that? so, the president hasn't taken us to war?

and the courts haven't confiscated property?

this video link should be removed imho.