Texas Launches Gold-Backed Bank

[amrchaos]

I guess no one has yet to realize that the gold market is more or less an economic game when gold is not used to manufacture goods?

 

[SwimExpert]

Trillions of worthless paper and fabric.

Tell you what, if you think all that paper and fabric is worthless, inbox me and I'll give you my address. You can ship it to me and clear out some space in your house. It's the least I can do to help out a fellow American.

 

[SwimExpert]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

 

[bripat9643]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When fiat money loses its value, it's because the money supply is increasing. When gold backed money loses it's value, it's because the money supply has decreased.

Gold backed money almost never loses its value. The dollar was worth more at the end of the 19th century than it was worth at the beginning.

Gold backed money almost never loses its value.

It would have lost about 2/3rds of its value between 1980 and 1999.
And over 1/3rd since September 2011.

Ah, that is part of the risk in dealing with commodities. A booming economy with a strenghten dollar lowers the price of minerals and resources.

That is why when you see gold start dipping with god economic indicators, you sell that joker immediately. You road the upswing of the roller coaster, get off and look for something else that is going up! No need to ride that bad boy down.

It is called playing the markets, and if the Bank stays in gold and don't over exchange the gold notes, there is controlled lost(yes, the bank loses money)

That is why when you see gold start dipping with god economic indicators, you sell that joker immediately.

And when your currency is backed by that joker?????

If we are talking about the Bank, you 'could' exchange it for currency, but why? Better to redeem the notes and hold gold until the bottom falls out, and then buy gold with the currency gained at early sell point.

In other words, for the bank, sell notes for currency. when gold turns , redeem notes for gold some currency(stipulation--notes only redeem gold, but letting lose currency at the beginning will encourage desperate holders of notes to agree) . shift that balance to only gold as gold prices drop--hold currency. Then when the bottom of gold prices is met, use half of currency to buy more gold cheaply. The Bank survives because it did not note all its gld, and still hold currency.

For the gold note holder, either sell when it first dip, or hold onto for several years as in when gold prices return to the level you bought it. Any other action is lost.

Only one getting burned here is the seller of gold notes during the time of low gold prices.--Well, not the bank since it gains currency to buy gold within order to print more gold notes. They made out like bandits and re-fertilizing the ground for profits..

Now if the gold market just crash--The bank should happily redeem all notes for gold--or, the gold note holder has to sit on his butt and pray the market recovers or face lost.

If we are talking about the Bank, you 'could' exchange it for currency, but why? Better to redeem the notes and hold gold until the bottom falls out, and then buy gold with the currency gained at early sell point.

Ummmm....the idea behind a gold standard is fixed exchange value.
So you exchange your notes at x dollars per ounce. The "bottom falls out" and you exchange your gold back at the same x dollars per ounce. What did you accomplish?

 

[Contumacious]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The current world monetary system assigns no special role to gold; indeed, the Federal Reserve is not obliged to tie the dollar to anything. It can print as much or as little money as it deems appropriate. There are powerful advantages to such an unconstrained system. Above all, the Fed is free to respond to actual or threatened recessions by pumping in money. To take only one example, that flexibility is the reason the stock market crash of 1987—which started out every bit as frightening as that of 1929—did not cause a slump in the real economy.

While a freely floating national money has advantages, however, it also has risks. For one thing, it can create uncertainties for international traders and investors. Over the past five years, the dollar has been worth as much as 120 yen and as little as 80. The costs of this volatility are hard to measure (partly because sophisticated financial markets allow businesses to hedge much of that risk), but they must be significant. Furthermore, a system that leaves monetary managers free to do good also leaves them free to be irresponsible—and, in some countries, they have been quick to take the opportunity.[18]

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

If you want to put all your money in a gold-standard system, then go right ahead, but without printing money that a gold-standard undermines, we wouldn't have had a great recession, but instead a great depression. It is also an anti-free market measure, as unlike today where you can choose between gold and cash, the emphasis is on relying on gold to back a currency.

HUH?

WTF?


POST AGAIN WHEN YOU ARE SOBER.

 

[hipeter924]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The current world monetary system assigns no special role to gold; indeed, the Federal Reserve is not obliged to tie the dollar to anything. It can print as much or as little money as it deems appropriate. There are powerful advantages to such an unconstrained system. Above all, the Fed is free to respond to actual or threatened recessions by pumping in money. To take only one example, that flexibility is the reason the stock market crash of 1987—which started out every bit as frightening as that of 1929—did not cause a slump in the real economy.

While a freely floating national money has advantages, however, it also has risks. For one thing, it can create uncertainties for international traders and investors. Over the past five years, the dollar has been worth as much as 120 yen and as little as 80. The costs of this volatility are hard to measure (partly because sophisticated financial markets allow businesses to hedge much of that risk), but they must be significant. Furthermore, a system that leaves monetary managers free to do good also leaves them free to be irresponsible—and, in some countries, they have been quick to take the opportunity.[18]

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

If you want to put all your money in a gold-standard system, then go right ahead, but without printing money that a gold-standard undermines, we wouldn't have had a great recession, but instead a great depression. It is also an anti-free market measure, as unlike today where you can choose between gold and cash, the emphasis is on relying on gold to back a currency.

HUH?

WTF?


POST AGAIN WHEN YOU ARE SOBER.

Post again, when you read the Wikipedia article, as it is all in there.

 

[Contumacious]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The current world monetary system assigns no special role to gold; indeed, the Federal Reserve is not obliged to tie the dollar to anything. It can print as much or as little money as it deems appropriate. There are powerful advantages to such an unconstrained system. Above all, the Fed is free to respond to actual or threatened recessions by pumping in money. To take only one example, that flexibility is the reason the stock market crash of 1987—which started out every bit as frightening as that of 1929—did not cause a slump in the real economy.

While a freely floating national money has advantages, however, it also has risks. For one thing, it can create uncertainties for international traders and investors. Over the past five years, the dollar has been worth as much as 120 yen and as little as 80. The costs of this volatility are hard to measure (partly because sophisticated financial markets allow businesses to hedge much of that risk), but they must be significant. Furthermore, a system that leaves monetary managers free to do good also leaves them free to be irresponsible—and, in some countries, they have been quick to take the opportunity.[18]

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

If you want to put all your money in a gold-standard system, then go right ahead, but without printing money that a gold-standard undermines, we wouldn't have had a great recession, but instead a great depression. It is also an anti-free market measure, as unlike today where you can choose between gold and cash, the emphasis is on relying on gold to back a currency.

HUH?

WTF?


POST AGAIN WHEN YOU ARE SOBER.

Post again, when you read the Wikipedia article, as it is all in there.

DINGLE BERRY, SIR


HOW MANY DEPRESSIONS OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE ENACTMENT OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD WHICH WERE CAUSED BY THE MARKETPLACE PLACE AS OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT ACTION.


DON'T COME BACK WITH BULLSHIT.

I AM LOOKING FOR DEPRESSIONS OR RECESSIONS WHICH WERE NOT NOT NOT CAUSED BY GOVERNMENT ACTION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



.

 

[SwimExpert]

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

I know very well what I'm talking about. Keynesian thinking has nothing to do with it. We're talking the gold standard and fundamental concepts of what constitutes money. You are attributing characteristics to a gold standard system which do not actually represent a gold standard system. You imagine them to be happy consequences of a gold standard system, when in fact you are expressing a lack of understanding of the entire subject. Instead, you are espousing a romanticized belief [hope] that a gold standard will provide a certain benefit; a benefit that is not possible.

Listen, I share your concerns about the inherent weaknesses and disadvantages of a fiat system. And I appreciate the advantages of a gold standard system. We don't disagree that there are advantages to a gold system and weaknesses to a fiat system. The problem is that you don't actually know the whole story. You've collected a pound of crumbs, but you don't understand how to bake a loaf of bread.

 

[danielpalos]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

 

[Contumacious]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

NO, FASCISM DID.

NASA - THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STOLE PRIVATE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE FLIGHT.


.

 

[Skylar]

Federal reserve notes have lost 95% of their value since 1914.

When fiat money loses its value, it's because the money supply is increasing. When gold backed money loses it's value, it's because the money supply has decreased.

Gold backed money almost never loses its value. The dollar was worth more at the end of the 19th century than it was worth at the beginning.

Gold backed money almost never loses its value.

It would have lost about 2/3rds of its value between 1980 and 1999.
And over 1/3rd since September 2011.

Yeah, a currency tied to gold would be wildly unstable. With about 11 times the volatility of the US dollar. Commerce runs on stability. Not on wildly changing value and rampant currency speculation.

Where do you get this "11 times the volatility of the US dollar" horseshit?

The changes in value of gold over the last decade or so years compared to the changes in the value of the dollar. Gold was far, far more volitile. In 2002 gold was about 250 an ounce. Its value vacilated wildly, skyrocketing to more than 1900 dollars by 2012. That's a 760% increase, or a yearly inflation of 76%. The US dollar in the same time period went from a 110 on the real dollar index to an 84.5. A change of about 23%, or approximately 2.3% a year.

Gold's volatility was 33 times higher than the dollar's.

And it gets worse. In 2012, the gold market tanked. With gold plummeting from 1900 in 2012 to about 1100 today. A plunge of 43%, or 14.5% a year. The dollar in the same time period changed went from 84.5 on the real dollar index to 93. A change of about 10%. Or 3.3% a year.

With the volatility of gold being about 4 times that of the dollar.

Gold is simply too unstable to be the basis of a currency. Yearly inflation rates of 76% or deflation rates of 14.5% would make business extraordinarily difficult to conduct. Worse, it would limit the size our economy could grow to the amount of gold we could pull out of the ground. If the mining industry had a bad year, our economy would likewise suffer.

Worse, the 'intrinsic value' argument is based on utility. Its actual commercial or industrial applications. Where as gold's value is largely based on speculation. As mentioned earlier, from 2002 to 2012 gold's prices skyrocketed by 760%. But gold didn't become 760% more lustrious or 760% more conductive. Its value skyrocketed due to speculation.

Because of its *perceived* value. Not its intrinsic value. And if you're going to base a currency on perceived value, fiat currency already does that. Without the degree of volatility or limits to the economy.

 

[Skylar]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

NO, FASCISM DID.

NASA - THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STOLE PRIVATE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE FLIGHT.


.

Taxation isn't theft. And you have no idea what fascism is. Its just a generic pejorative to you, applied like a 5 year old curses. You might as well call someone a 'dum-dum head' for as much meaning as your application of the term has.

 

[Skylar]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The current world monetary system assigns no special role to gold; indeed, the Federal Reserve is not obliged to tie the dollar to anything. It can print as much or as little money as it deems appropriate. There are powerful advantages to such an unconstrained system. Above all, the Fed is free to respond to actual or threatened recessions by pumping in money. To take only one example, that flexibility is the reason the stock market crash of 1987—which started out every bit as frightening as that of 1929—did not cause a slump in the real economy.

While a freely floating national money has advantages, however, it also has risks. For one thing, it can create uncertainties for international traders and investors. Over the past five years, the dollar has been worth as much as 120 yen and as little as 80. The costs of this volatility are hard to measure (partly because sophisticated financial markets allow businesses to hedge much of that risk), but they must be significant. Furthermore, a system that leaves monetary managers free to do good also leaves them free to be irresponsible—and, in some countries, they have been quick to take the opportunity.[18]

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

There's nothing in a gold standard that prevents a government from borrowing money.

 

[bripat9643]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

How did going to the moon benefit the taxpayers?

 

[bripat9643]

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

I know very well what I'm talking about. Keynesian thinking has nothing to do with it. We're talking the gold standard and fundamental concepts of what constitutes money. You are attributing characteristics to a gold standard system which do not actually represent a gold standard system. You imagine them to be happy consequences of a gold standard system, when in fact you are expressing a lack of understanding of the entire subject. Instead, you are espousing a romanticized belief [hope] that a gold standard will provide a certain benefit; a benefit that is not possible.

Listen, I share your concerns about the inherent weaknesses and disadvantages of a fiat system. And I appreciate the advantages of a gold standard system. We don't disagree that there are advantages to a gold system and weaknesses to a fiat system. The problem is that you don't actually know the whole story. You've collected a pound of crumbs, but you don't understand how to bake a loaf of bread.

You have yet to post any evidence to support your claim. Anyone who claims inflation would be worse under a gold standard than under a fiat money system obviously doesn't know jack about economics or the history of money.

 

[bripat9643]

The meaning of "soared" for a gold standard means the value of gold may have decreased by 20% over a period of a a decade, and then in a few years it returned to its previous value and went even higher.

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

NO, FASCISM DID.

NASA - THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STOLE PRIVATE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE FLIGHT.


.

Taxation isn't theft. And you have no idea what fascism is. Its just a generic pejorative to you, applied like a 5 year old curses. You might as well call someone a 'dum-dum head' for as much meaning as your application of the term has.

Taxation is indistinguishable from theft. Now prove it isn't theft.

 

[bripat9643]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The current world monetary system assigns no special role to gold; indeed, the Federal Reserve is not obliged to tie the dollar to anything. It can print as much or as little money as it deems appropriate. There are powerful advantages to such an unconstrained system. Above all, the Fed is free to respond to actual or threatened recessions by pumping in money. To take only one example, that flexibility is the reason the stock market crash of 1987—which started out every bit as frightening as that of 1929—did not cause a slump in the real economy.

While a freely floating national money has advantages, however, it also has risks. For one thing, it can create uncertainties for international traders and investors. Over the past five years, the dollar has been worth as much as 120 yen and as little as 80. The costs of this volatility are hard to measure (partly because sophisticated financial markets allow businesses to hedge much of that risk), but they must be significant. Furthermore, a system that leaves monetary managers free to do good also leaves them free to be irresponsible—and, in some countries, they have been quick to take the opportunity.[18]

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

There's nothing in a gold standard that prevents a government from borrowing money.

That's true, but it prevents government from stealing your savings via inflation.

 

[Skylar]

No, this simply isn't true.

Listen, you are barking up the wrong tree. You want security in your money. Hey, we all do. The gold standard does not produce that, though. Not the way you imagine it will. Maybe what you need is to learn how to stay ahead of the inflationary game. Learn how to invest properly, learn how to use debt to create wealth, learn how to not use debt where it will consume wealth, ect, etc.

At the end of the day, all you're advocating for is an imagined magical bean that [you hope] will make your finances simpler and easier. Which is really just another way of saying you aren't very good at dealing with your money, and that you blame someone else for it.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Your mind is addled by the Keynesian Voo Doo

Socialism got us to the moon and back, last millennium. The Capitalist right is too lazy without a capital profit motive.

NO, FASCISM DID.

NASA - THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STOLE PRIVATE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE FLIGHT.


.

Taxation isn't theft. And you have no idea what fascism is. Its just a generic pejorative to you, applied like a 5 year old curses. You might as well call someone a 'dum-dum head' for as much meaning as your application of the term has.

Taxation is indistinguishable from theft. Now prove it isn't theft.

Says who?

The founders taxed. Are you saying the founders were thieves?

 

[hipeter924]

If Texas wants to waste its money building up stockpiles of gold, then by all means it can do so.

The Gold Standard has its own problems.

People have short memories if they can't remember the Nixon Shock: Nixon Shock - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Yeah man, the gold standard has problems such as politicians can not maintain a gargantuan welfare/warfare police state.

If you want to put all your money in a gold-standard system, then go right ahead, but without printing money that a gold-standard undermines, we wouldn't have had a great recession, but instead a great depression. It is also an anti-free market measure, as unlike today where you can choose between gold and cash, the emphasis is on relying on gold to back a currency.

HUH?

WTF?


POST AGAIN WHEN YOU ARE SOBER.

Post again, when you read the Wikipedia article, as it is all in there.

DINGLE BERRY, SIR


HOW MANY DEPRESSIONS OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE ENACTMENT OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD WHICH WERE CAUSED BY THE MARKETPLACE PLACE AS OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT ACTION.


DON'T COME BACK WITH BULLSHIT.

I AM LOOKING FOR DEPRESSIONS OR RECESSIONS WHICH WERE NOT NOT NOT CAUSED BY GOVERNMENT ACTION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Please stop with the giant bold text, as it doesn't bring your point across more.

To answer, there were plenty of recessions prior to the Federal Reserve, and the US government defaulted on debt numerous times before it existed.

But that wouldn't fit with your cozy story that the Gold-Standard is somehow better than the current system.

If you are asking for a non-government system then try the Paris Commune, or Anarcho-Syncalist Spain, which didn't have the gold standard or a clear government. Otherwise one has never existed.