| Author |
 Replies: 53 / Views: 3,831 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
830 Posts |
Don't forget the backing could be by some huge stash of unverified, unaudited, pile of gold that just makes the wizard of oz look real.  Edited by GoThunder
08/25/2012 9:37 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
You mean like the current gold stash lol
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1143 Posts |
I'm offering free storage at my house...complete with guard dog. Seriously the idea has almost no chance of happening. Anything considered being backed by the dollar would immediately inflate in price benefiting only those who help prior to this. These ideas show up during election season and disappear just as fast. But I do wish our dollar was backed by something besides faith.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
830 Posts |
Quote:
Seriously the idea has almost no chance of happening. Yeah I agree, the professional bureaucrats are too addicted to spending more than we have and printing money. Edited by GoThunder
08/26/2012 10:17 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
Another way to look at all this is to realize that while TPTB do not want a gold or silver standard backing our money because of the crimp that puts in their fiat games. Well, too bad for them. Once this fiat game completely collapses, what then? Surely they do not think that we would allow them to reset the game and do it all over again? No, of course not as that would be shear lunacy. Perhaps we will have a PM backed money standard but only after the alternative to it has thoroughly proved itself to be unworkable, collapsed, and died.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
A total or almost total collapse is probably the only way it happens. At the current time the damage it would do to jobs and killing our trade is probably more counter productive then it would help with reigning in spending. In theory it wouldnt stop spending as they could just keep upping the price of gold.
Really the only and best solution seems to be for people to vote in representatives that wont just vote for every spending bill to try and buy votes and vote out those that do so that the message is sent that we want fiscal responsibility. No one is opposed to debt spending in cases of emergency or crisis such as the days after 9-11 or helping out New Orleans after Katrina. But theres plenty of fat that can be trimmed from the budget and needs to be trimmed to have a chance.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
There are been a lot of great discussion on this topic! I have a couple of comments. First, I think a return to the gold standard would be possible under hyperinflation. Since abandoning the gold standard, we've experienced much higher rates of inflation. If this gets out of hand, I could see a push for a return to gold. I posted a video in another thread that, at the end, mentions inflation and lack of the gold standard. https://goccf.com/t/127860Second, economies are now global and intertwined. For the US to put itself back on the gold standard would basically result in a global economy based on gold. Such a transition would have huge impacts internationally, not just domestically. Edited by Drsandman2
08/26/2012 6:17 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
491 Posts |
Forget about a US Gold Standard.
This is put in the media to support a Singular World currency on the Gold Standard, allowing people to reflect and debate the issue.
How about a Supra-national entity, similar to the BIS, that contractually is responsible for each countries auditing of Sovereign Gold reserves. IF a singular currency were to arrive that would be the defacto currency that all nations would use to conduct trade and each country would have to have their currency pegged against it, (ie. through reserves).
Then the need for a country to go to a gold standard would be moot as the Supra-national entity would audit the gold instead of countries to value the currencies, somewhat more trustworthy. No country would have a need to revalue its currency but the standard for reserves would be set by said entity. The banking industry would need a certain amount of reserves for transfer to purchases/receivers of goods/bonds etc. and this would help to facilitate a higher international need for the metal to be priced at a set amount.
That being said no country would be on a gold standard if there was one International Banking Organization responsible for a World trade Currency on a Gold backed system. Many countries around the world would support such an idea as it would likely seem to be independent of any One country for trade, thus seeming to be a less restrictive and less politically sensitive system.
OF course a set price and weight of measure of the gold bars would need to be set to provide a standard but as we have seen and heard, the Chinese are melting bars down to 1 kilo units, most likely ahead of policy decisions that they expect will occur in the future.
This is purely speculation on my part but from my research the dialog seems to be pointing in this direction.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
This is purely speculation on my part but from my research the dialog seems to be pointing in this direction. For all our sakes I truly hope not. Havent we learned that global currencies are a terrible idea from the Euro |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1723 Posts |
Quote:
For all our sakes I truly hope not. Havent we learned that global currencies are a terrible idea from the Euro Im not an economic expert but I agree with basebal on this one. There are is a great world economic benefit to having a global currency but the personal views, opinions, decisions and religions of defferent countries would create so many problems for it to work...imho. every countries landscape, business, manufacturing, agricultural, population, lifestyles and standards are all different. The question is can there be a system where every country has a chance to thrive and not just rich countries that can afford gold reap the benefits of a gold standard. Both options seem to be losers in my books. A gold standard back in the day worked great but the way our western society economies and financial system have been created and adopted by the world, its hard to see it work in today's condition. However, there needs to be a way for each country to create wealth for their citizens but keep the printing presses in check. Few other suggestions have been a global currency that the world uses to deal with and help each other out which is backed by gold and a domestic currency that each individual country uses. I dunno...just throwing my thoughts out there. Cheers! |
|
Valued Member
Canada
491 Posts |
@basebal21 Gold is the only global currency used throughout the world on a personal and international currency exchange. This type of International currency would only legitimize and standardize that price throughout the world.
As far as the Euro goes we all know its function was to standardize european economies and its cultures. A collectivist economy in the end will outperform any individual stand alone economy by doctrine. The Roman empire proved that standardizing currencies allowed for less confusion and an ease in trade that was never seen before, even with the differences in language merchants would still be able to set prices with roman trade units. Roman currency was the "GO TO" world currency of its era.
Roman currency survived well past its empire as units of exchange.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
The problem is though the roman empire was all controlled by rome. A standard currency is not. If the whole wrold adapoted one leader and the same rules for everything it works. If countries operate independently it doesn't. As for romes trades outsifde the empire it wasn't really free trade more appeasement. You traded by romes rules or they just took over your country and took what they wanted anyway. Not really the free market we have now.
As we've seen with the euro the whole currency and continent has literally been brought down by 2 or 3 countries that couldn't manage their money. Spain is collasping from trying to help out bail outs and now greece is thretening to just break off then listen to what needs to be done. Fewer countries are surviving with it than are being hurt by it. The only thing that's saved it at all is the strength and decisions of germany being able to bail them out for the time.
Gold is used by everyone but if you have a global gold standard than you've created two different currencies. Countries that can stockpile it will have real strong currencies while countries that can't or don't produce gold will have hyper inflated curriencies by the realitively small stock compaired to their currency.
Edited by basebal21
08/26/2012 8:04 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1723 Posts |
Quote:
Gold is used by everyone but if you have a global gold standard than you've created two different currencies. Countries that can stockpile it will have real strong currencies while countries that can't or don't produce gold will have hyper inflated currencies by the realitively small stock compared to their currency. That's what I'm saying..... doesn't that create a new problem for countries with strong currencies to sell products when the could be bought by cheaper competitors? Another currency devaluation? So what, if you don't want your dollar to be worth so much you just sell your gold? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Not really. This is what I meant by saying that we are in a global economy, so if the US were to base their currency on gold... it would force world currencies to adjust likewise. Why?
Because, if for example, 1 oz of gold = $1000 US, and $1000 US = $800 Euros, then $800 Euros = 1 oz of Gold. We are on an open global market where currencies can quickly be traded for another.
Edited by Drsandman2
08/26/2012 9:05 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
491 Posts |
There is a fallacy of thinking that a strong currency is bad for trade, this isn't true. An example is with the Swiss pegging their franc last year to the French Euro. The amount of people coming to their country to make the big bucks was a huge issue and the prices for goods sky rocketed. Since the EURO nations cannot stop free flow of workers through their countries too many people moving into Siwtzerland forced inflation up from lack of goods and places to rent or buy. It had nothing to do with their manufacturing base and the price of its products. There has been a effort to debase currencies relative ot one another for a reason, and look at who the people are that say manufacturing costs need to come down are. Corporations, media pundits, senators, legislators. Why is this view pushed so hard? Why is there Literally no discussion about strengthning currencies?
Sure the trading of currencies at a relative value needs to be addressed, economies with good balance sheets would likely sell gold when their economies are strong and the weaker economies could buy gold to support any bonds (debt) that they might wish to issue for economic benefit (ie. infrastructure development).
As for a World trading currency, what is the problem with having 1 more currency in the mix? How many are there now? The WTO settles trade disputes throughout the world, having a similar force in regards to a world currency would likely be set up the same. International support would have to be met before such a thing would or could happen and the issue is being discussed and argued as we speak. What will not be allowed is another IMF, the USA will NOT be allowed to have veto rights or be able to force its own people into the lead descion making process by proxy.
|
| |
Replies: 53 / Views: 3,831 |
First Page
Posted 08/25/2012 9:45 pm
