Comments on: Gold and Economic Freedom, Reinterpreted for the 21st Century

By: Dan H

Dan H — Wed, 25 May 2011 06:31:08 +0000

Depositors control the banks under a gold system and have no need for government intervention. If a depositor believes that any bank is creating more paper than the bank has gold, cash out your paper or account for your gold. No regulation is needed. Banks will controll themselves or cease to exist. Since most banks would be locally owned, it will be obvious to any depositor when and if a bank is creating too much paper or loans in the community.

By: How to Disprove the Alleged Gold/Silver Price Suppression Schemes | The Underground Investor

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:01:50 +0000

[...] Gold Sales v. the Alchemy of Gold Futures – What’s the Impact on Gold Prices? Feb 18, 2010 Gold and Economic Freedom, Reinterpreted for the 21st Century, May 8, 2009 Bankers and Economists Say Gold is a Bubble. Here’s Why You Should Ignore Them., Dec 28, 2009 [...]

By: Gold is NOT the Ultimate Asset Bubble | The Underground Investor

Gold is NOT the Ultimate Asset Bubble | The Underground Investor — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:37:36 +0000

[...] perhaps it’s an apropos time to revisit a couple of articles I penned. One titled “Gold and Economic Freedom, Reinterpreted for the 21st Century” that is six months old; the other titled “JS Kim Uncovers Four Parallel Markets for [...]

By: TimH

TimH — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:49:51 +0000

JS, thank you for advancing this discussion. Fundamentally, as long as people choose to store value in paper/electronic money, they will be subject to its re- or de-valuation. Grid living – i.e. mortgage, utility bills, supermarket food – puts folks at the mercy of exchanging money for the “stuff” required to live and survive. Unfortunately, it is difficult to store the “stuff required for life” very long – i.e. food and water – so we need to be in an economy that encourages cultivation and conservation. Another potential promising trend is “networking money” i.e. something like ebay credits or other “community currencies”. Technically, we as the “middle class” could “vote the financial elites off the island” if we chose to interact economically with a “community currency” for the bulk of our transactions. We can bankrupt the primary dollar holders by reducing our demand for dollars by switching to a “community currency” that allows us to trade goods and services without the use of USDs. I believe another major “gamechanger” is community solar power grids. If we decentralize electricity generation through co-op power grids (similar to rural co-op water systems), then we retain electricity effeciency without the need for money if the use is measured in “community currency”. These are a few ideas I submit for discussion. (NOTE: I’ve been a conspirator theorist since I first understood the federal reserve system and what occurred at Bretton Woods. I used to distribute the “Spotlight” newspaper before it was shut down by the Clintonistas. Advancing the ideas of the Von Mises theories is also beneficial. Additionally, I recommend President Clinton favorite book “Tragedy and Hope” by Carroll Quigley – a history of the twentieth century.)

By: JS

JS — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:02:35 +0000

Thanks for the posts. Yes, a gold standard that is still controlled by govt’s or the financial oligarchs would be less than a perfect system but still it is a better system than the one we have today. Actually, if banks printed more money than they had gold, then banks would have to strengthen currency not devalue it to stop a run on their gold, so citizens would benefit from even a pseudo-gold standard.

The best system would be a new system backed by gold/silver and one in which a board independent of any bankers and independent of gov’t would oversee the new monetary system with terms perhaps limited to 2 years. I have no doubt that even board members would not be resistant to corruption but replacing them every two years would not allow corruption to dwell. I know that there are probably better solutions out there, but the process to find a better solution begins with open debate.

By: Fayce

Fayce — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:32:30 +0000

Food for thoughts from Byron Dale (about the Gold standard):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E0UPBtmTb0

By: Fayce

Fayce — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:12:27 +0000

There are lots of debate around the Gold standard and how better it is but I am not convinced that this is the best system, like described in this article. It is surely better than pure fiat money controlled by central and commercial banks, the latter making interests from money created out of thin air (out of debt we should say).

The problem in the gold system that you describe here is that banks can still inflate the money supply by printing more money than their gold holdings. If they can do that, you perfectly know that they WILL! It will be again fiat money, which means that there will be more gold claims (i.e dollars) than real gold. So people won’t be able to demand gold in return for their dollars (unless the banks can’t lend your money), like you said, because there are not enough gold in the banks. If this is happening (and it will because it’s possible), then the only alternative like you said is to devaluate the currency, which means that we (the citizens) are scre*ed again because our savings will be devaluated again because of their mistakes, so it is not acceptable.

As long as banks have the possibility to create fiat money, they will, and that is the real issue for me, whether some part is backed by gold or not. The temptation to create and make money (by charging interests) out of thin air is too big to resist…Why work when you can money doing nothing?