Paper Money VS Gold Coin

[rightwinger]

If the paper monetary system were to collapse, gold would also be worthless.

Only bartered items would have any value.

I'm with RW, gold is shiny but it serves no real purpose.

How would gold be worthless? You could use the gold to buy other things that you need.

Would you trade food or water for gold?

I wouldn't......thats why I hoard guns

Economic collapse....nobody wants gold

 

[hvactec]

why are china and india buying so much of it over the past year and there dumping the funny money for the shiny metal hmmmmmm

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If the paper monetary system were to collapse, gold would also be worthless.

Only bartered items would have any value.

I'm with RW, gold is shiny but it serves no real purpose.

How would gold be worthless? You could use the gold to buy other things that you need.

Would you trade food or water for gold?

I wouldn't......thats why I hoard guns

Economic collapse....nobody wants gold

Then how do you think gold became a monetary commodity in the first place?

 

[blu]

That value in the natural relm is kind of spooky, as it is easily manipulable. Also, economic activity is tied to the location where you find the stuff, and how hard it is to find.

Between 1848 and 1903, while there were gold strikes in Austrialia and the US, none of them were all that impressive, compared with what happened in CA. And the CA gold strike really wasn't such a much. So from the period 1861-1903 the world suffered declining prices all over, because the amount of gold found from year to year wasn't enough to maintain price levels. Some years they found a lot, and there was inflation. Some years were very dry, and prices crashed, and those who had loans out suffered.
After 1903 the english discovered the cyanide process to get gold from ore. This made the gold fields in South Africa and Russia not only workable, but it made them the biggest producers. So from 1903 onward, the gold supply was determined by the internal politics of these two countries.

So do you want the US money supply to be determined by a conference between South Africa and Russia?

Think about it for a moment.

holy crap you are stupid.

1) the pre-nixon/vietnam gold standard worked and actually kept our fiat system in check. dips/gains in the price of gold didn't matter because dollars had a fixed gold-to-dollar ratio and the rest of the country based their currency on it. re-implementing hte pre-nixon standard would have prevented all the printing that happned in the last few years.

2) the money supply is now determined by goldman sachs and people in the middle east who own the oil wells. I would rather return to the pre-nixon gold standard and put our currency back where it should be and keep the international bankers out of any say over it.

 

[blu]

If the paper monetary system were to collapse, gold would also be worthless.

Only bartered items would have any value.

I'm with RW, gold is shiny but it serves no real purpose.

How would gold be worthless? You could use the gold to buy other things that you need.

Would you trade food or water for gold?

I wouldn't......thats why I hoard guns

Economic collapse....nobody wants gold

how long does gold last? how long do guns last when you can't get equipment to clean it or reload

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

That value in the natural relm is kind of spooky, as it is easily manipulable. Also, economic activity is tied to the location where you find the stuff, and how hard it is to find.

Between 1848 and 1903, while there were gold strikes in Austrialia and the US, none of them were all that impressive, compared with what happened in CA. And the CA gold strike really wasn't such a much. So from the period 1861-1903 the world suffered declining prices all over, because the amount of gold found from year to year wasn't enough to maintain price levels. Some years they found a lot, and there was inflation. Some years were very dry, and prices crashed, and those who had loans out suffered.
After 1903 the english discovered the cyanide process to get gold from ore. This made the gold fields in South Africa and Russia not only workable, but it made them the biggest producers. So from 1903 onward, the gold supply was determined by the internal politics of these two countries.

So do you want the US money supply to be determined by a conference between South Africa and Russia?

Think about it for a moment.

holy crap you are stupid.

1) the pre-nixon/vietnam gold standard worked and actually kept our fiat system in check. dips/gains in the price of gold didn't matter because dollars had a fixed gold-to-dollar ratio and the rest of the country based their currency on it. re-implementing hte pre-nixon standard would have prevented all the printing that happned in the last few years.

2) the money supply is now determined by goldman sachs and people in the middle east who own the oil wells. I would rather return to the pre-nixon gold standard and put our currency back where it should be and keep the international bankers out of any say over it.

I wouldn't advocate a return to the pre-Nixon "gold standard," which was actually just a gold-exchange standard. I'd say we need to return to a 100% gold standard.

 

[blu]

That value in the natural relm is kind of spooky, as it is easily manipulable. Also, economic activity is tied to the location where you find the stuff, and how hard it is to find.

Between 1848 and 1903, while there were gold strikes in Austrialia and the US, none of them were all that impressive, compared with what happened in CA. And the CA gold strike really wasn't such a much. So from the period 1861-1903 the world suffered declining prices all over, because the amount of gold found from year to year wasn't enough to maintain price levels. Some years they found a lot, and there was inflation. Some years were very dry, and prices crashed, and those who had loans out suffered.
After 1903 the english discovered the cyanide process to get gold from ore. This made the gold fields in South Africa and Russia not only workable, but it made them the biggest producers. So from 1903 onward, the gold supply was determined by the internal politics of these two countries.

So do you want the US money supply to be determined by a conference between South Africa and Russia?

Think about it for a moment.

holy crap you are stupid.

1) the pre-nixon/vietnam gold standard worked and actually kept our fiat system in check. dips/gains in the price of gold didn't matter because dollars had a fixed gold-to-dollar ratio and the rest of the country based their currency on it. re-implementing hte pre-nixon standard would have prevented all the printing that happned in the last few years.

2) the money supply is now determined by goldman sachs and people in the middle east who own the oil wells. I would rather return to the pre-nixon gold standard and put our currency back where it should be and keep the international bankers out of any say over it.

I wouldn't advocate a return to the pre-Nixon "gold standard," which was actually just a gold-exchange standard. I'd say we need to return to a 100% gold standard.

it would take decades before we could get to that point though without immediately collapsing right after. the pre-nixon system could be implemented quikcly and clamp down on the insane printing thats been done int he past years from happenign again

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Gold is just a very pretty metal. Lots of things have been used as currency. The gold standard of a currency is that you pay your taxes with it. The Chinese used special sea shells. Most european states prior to the time of Columbus used Silver. The names of the currencies prior to Napolean were based on one roman pound of silver. (Pound Sterling, anyone?) The French called is the livres, the Italians, the Lire. Of course, governments cheat. By the time of Napoleon, the British pound represented about 5 oz of silver.
Among other things used as currency have been Pepper (throughout Europe prior to 1400) Gourds (Haiti still refers to its currency by that name) Salt during the roman republic (Hence the term Salary) copper (During the early roman empire and up until Mejii era Japan) and iron bars (The Spartans didn't approve of commerce)

Gold has advantages as a currency. Its supply is stable. This was a good thing up until the 19th century, when economies began growing at rapid rates. If your money supply stays constant and your economy grows 6% (As was common prior to the Depression) then prices sink at a rate of 6%. If you are a producer, this is painful. If you are a producer and you owe money, this can be catastrophic. (Hence the Granger movements here in the US)

Anything can be used as money. If the supply changes a lot, prices change a lot. Governments always like to inflate, because they always owe money.

Right now, we have tons of money supply that the Chinese are sitting on. They get upset, scared or angry, we are in for some serious inflation.

Gold wont' change that fact. In the modern world, debt is money. It is easy to trade electronically, (gold is really very heavy for low value) and gold is more valuable now as an industrial product than as a reserve of value. The price just swings way to much. It has doubled in price recently. Do you want a standard of value that is that volatile?
If the US government reneges on its debts, gold will belong to the guys with the guns. If they want it. The would be more interested in food than shiny rocks though.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Gold is just a very pretty metal. Lots of things have been used as currency. The gold standard of a currency is that you pay your taxes with it. The Chinese used special sea shells. Most european states prior to the time of Columbus used Silver. The names of the currencies prior to Napolean were based on one roman pound of silver. (Pound Sterling, anyone?) The French called is the livres, the Italians, the Lire. Of course, governments cheat. By the time of Napoleon, the British pound represented about 5 oz of silver.
Among other things used as currency have been Pepper (throughout Europe prior to 1400) Gourds (Haiti still refers to its currency by that name) Salt during the roman republic (Hence the term Salary) copper (During the early roman empire and up until Mejii era Japan) and iron bars (The Spartans didn't approve of commerce)

Gold has advantages as a currency. Its supply is stable. This was a good thing up until the 19th century, when economies began growing at rapid rates. If your money supply stays constant and your economy grows 6% (As was common prior to the Depression) then prices sink at a rate of 6%. If you are a producer, this is painful. If you are a producer and you owe money, this can be catastrophic. (Hence the Granger movements here in the US)

Anything can be used as money. If the supply changes a lot, prices change a lot. Governments always like to inflate, because they always owe money.

Right now, we have tons of money supply that the Chinese are sitting on. They get upset, scared or angry, we are in for some serious inflation.

Gold wont' change that fact. In the modern world, debt is money. It is easy to trade electronically, (gold is really very heavy for low value) and gold is more valuable now as an industrial product than as a reserve of value. The price just swings way to much. It has doubled in price recently. Do you want a standard of value that is that volatile?
If the US government reneges on its debts, gold will belong to the guys with the guns. If they want it. The would be more interested in food than shiny rocks though.

Yes, many things have been used as money in the past, but precious metals have historically been chosen as the best.

It doesn't matter if your money supply remains static. As I've already said that simply means that the currency is worth more in relation to goods on the market. That doesn't hurt producers at all. They'll be getting less money for their goods, but they'll be able to buy more with that money.

And why has the value of gold gone up in dollars? Because the government keeps printing money.

 

[blu]

Gold is just a very pretty metal. Lots of things have been used as currency. The gold standard of a currency is that you pay your taxes with it. The Chinese used special sea shells. Most european states prior to the time of Columbus used Silver. The names of the currencies prior to Napolean were based on one roman pound of silver. (Pound Sterling, anyone?) The French called is the livres, the Italians, the Lire. Of course, governments cheat. By the time of Napoleon, the British pound represented about 5 oz of silver.
Among other things used as currency have been Pepper (throughout Europe prior to 1400) Gourds (Haiti still refers to its currency by that name) Salt during the roman republic (Hence the term Salary) copper (During the early roman empire and up until Mejii era Japan) and iron bars (The Spartans didn't approve of commerce)

Gold has advantages as a currency. Its supply is stable. This was a good thing up until the 19th century, when economies began growing at rapid rates. If your money supply stays constant and your economy grows 6% (As was common prior to the Depression) then prices sink at a rate of 6%. If you are a producer, this is painful. If you are a producer and you owe money, this can be catastrophic. (Hence the Granger movements here in the US)

Anything can be used as money. If the supply changes a lot, prices change a lot. Governments always like to inflate, because they always owe money.

Right now, we have tons of money supply that the Chinese are sitting on. They get upset, scared or angry, we are in for some serious inflation.

Gold wont' change that fact. In the modern world, debt is money. It is easy to trade electronically, (gold is really very heavy for low value) and gold is more valuable now as an industrial product than as a reserve of value. The price just swings way to much. It has doubled in price recently. Do you want a standard of value that is that volatile?
If the US government reneges on its debts, gold will belong to the guys with the guns. If they want it. The would be more interested in food than shiny rocks though.

you really just don't get it. the value is set

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Gold is just a very pretty metal.

<trimmed for brevity>
If the US government reneges on its debts, gold will belong to the guys with the guns. If they want it. The would be more interested in food than shiny rocks though.

you really just don't get it. the value is set

By whom? The guy with the gun. Your shiny rocks or your life. Or better yet, that bag of rice or your life. And that quart bottle of clean water.

Gold's price is determined by how much people are willing to trade for it. When it is used as money, it is because the government takes it in payment of taxes. You take a gold coin to the IRS, they will admire it, but they still want US legal tender. And a gold coin isn't it.
Because gold is shiny, does not tarnish, won't spoil if it gets wet, is easy to combine and divide at low temperatures, is in very short supply it makes a very good currency. Pre Colombian Haiti had so much of the stuff it was valueless. When the Spanish came, they were crazy for it, so the Haitians gave it freely. They didn't use it as money, it was just shiny rocks.

Adam Smith had a remark that when the Mongols came ripping through Europe in the 1200s every where they went, when they were looking for greater conquests, they asked if there were many sheep in the next town. The Spanish asked the same question about Gold. Smith said the Mongols were better economists than the Spanish.

 

[Catbert]

Gold has no more value to God than asphalt, that's why he'll pave the streets of heaven with it. Scripture tells us that in the end times a piece of bread will buy a bag of gold.

 

[blu]

Gold has no more value to God than asphalt, that's why he'll pave the streets of heaven with it. Scripture tells us that in the end times a piece of bread will buy a bag of gold.

thanks for the "useful" contribution??

 

[Missourian]

If the paper monetary system were to collapse, gold would also be worthless.

Only bartered items would have any value.

I'm with RW, gold is shiny but it serves no real purpose.

How would gold be worthless? You could use the gold to buy other things that you need.

Would you trade food or water for gold?

I wouldn't......thats why I hoard guns

Economic collapse....nobody wants gold

Trade me something I can use...that is what will have value.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

How would gold be worthless? You could use the gold to buy other things that you need.

Would you trade food or water for gold?

I wouldn't......thats why I hoard guns

Economic collapse....nobody wants gold

Trade me something I can use...that is what will have value.

Yes, but what is gold? A medium of exchange. If you sell water for gold, you can then use the gold to buy something else you have need of.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

paper money belongs to the Fed , a private blank consortium, Gold belongs to the holder.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

That value in the natural relm is kind of spooky, as it is easily manipulable. Also, economic activity is tied to the location where you find the stuff, and how hard it is to find.

Between 1848 and 1903, while there were gold strikes in Austrialia and the US, none of them were all that impressive, compared with what happened in CA. And the CA gold strike really wasn't such a much. So from the period 1861-1903 the world suffered declining prices all over, because the amount of gold found from year to year wasn't enough to maintain price levels. Some years they found a lot, and there was inflation. Some years were very dry, and prices crashed, and those who had loans out suffered.
After 1903 the english discovered the cyanide process to get gold from ore. This made the gold fields in South Africa and Russia not only workable, but it made them the biggest producers. So from 1903 onward, the gold supply was determined by the internal politics of these two countries.

So do you want the US money supply to be determined by a conference between South Africa and Russia?

Think about it for a moment.

Exactly correct. That's the whole reason why the U.S. went off of the gold and silver standards.

 

[blu]

That value in the natural relm is kind of spooky, as it is easily manipulable. Also, economic activity is tied to the location where you find the stuff, and how hard it is to find.

Between 1848 and 1903, while there were gold strikes in Austrialia and the US, none of them were all that impressive, compared with what happened in CA. And the CA gold strike really wasn't such a much. So from the period 1861-1903 the world suffered declining prices all over, because the amount of gold found from year to year wasn't enough to maintain price levels. Some years they found a lot, and there was inflation. Some years were very dry, and prices crashed, and those who had loans out suffered.
After 1903 the english discovered the cyanide process to get gold from ore. This made the gold fields in South Africa and Russia not only workable, but it made them the biggest producers. So from 1903 onward, the gold supply was determined by the internal politics of these two countries.

So do you want the US money supply to be determined by a conference between South Africa and Russia?

Think about it for a moment.

Exactly correct. That's the whole reason why the U.S. went off of the gold and silver standards.

no its not. you obviously don't understand economics either

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Well tell us...you're so fucking smart...speak.

 

[ihopehefails]

What the hell value does gold have? It is just a metal. If it were not for the hoarding and speculation it would be just a decorative metal

The hoarding and speculating that you refer to indicates that there is some value being created within the free interactions of the people. Whether you think it is worth anything or not. You have the right to declare it worthless in your own mind but won't because you know that others think it is value.

Its value exist without the aid of government but the point I was making is that rights in the natural sphere, like the value of gold, also exist in the same way and that is it does not need government to assign them to people.

Why does a decorative metal have value while a viable Government does not?
Other than the fact it is hoarded, gold has no intrinsic value. How would our lives be diferent if gold ceased to exist?

I did not say that none has value but one's value is derived in the private sphere of people's choice while the other one is created in the mind of the people by saying that is is illegal not to accept this fiat money bill. Gold and other precious metals do not need this stamp of approval from the government. Its value exist with or without the government. You can't say the same about fiat money and that was the point I was making.

One's value is based on the free thoughts and desires of the people while the other's value has to forced onto people. Its like saying that papercups are now legal tender. People would trade it because they have to accept it but would they trade papercups without the government's law?