Gold-backed money: good common sense, or the next trap by the Financial Elite?

[Dennis Leahy]

(Unless you work in the upper echelon of one of the major international banks), we can probably agree that "debt money" - money created from 'thin air', as debt - is very bad. We can probably also agree that we the people (of any country) don't want private central banks. However, there is confusion over whether money should be backed by gold (the "gold standard.")

Bill Still has explored the issue more than just about anyone, and in his movie (The Secret of Oz) and in his latest book (No More National Debt) he clearly states several HUGE reasons NOT to back money with gold:

1.) (From an Americentric viewpoint), the USA does not own enough gold to back the US dollar with gold. Period. End of story - what else needs to be said? Where in the hell would we get trillions of dollars worth of gold - without going further in debt!

2.) The stability of the value of a dollar (halting or keeping a tight reign on inflation/deflation) is almost entirely based on the quantity of money in the system. ("Print" more dollars, and automatically drop the value of the dollar.) If money is backed by gold, then another big factor can create inflationary and deflationary cycles: the rise and fall of the value of the backing commodity.

Gold is a commodity mostly owned and controlled by the filthy rich of planet Earth. The ultra-rich don't own a pile of derivatives or other worthless paper. They use the paper, temporarily, when it has value, to quickly purchase land, properties (commercial, residential, farms and farmland, etc.) and real goods. Gold is still considered as real goods, and they have plenty of it. In fact, they have most of it.

The richest of the rich can afford to lose trillions of dollars in financial gambits - as long as they win in the end. If you play chess, you understand that it can be a very powerful move to sacrifice your queen (the most powerful and versatile chess piece), as long as you win the match.

Consider the true story of the Hunt brothers, especially Bunky Hunt, and how they manipulated the price of silver. The ultra rich can manipulate the price/value of gold. In doing so, if a country's currency is tied to gold, the value of the currency fluctuates with the precious commodity (gold.) This is completely unacceptable - even insane - for the average citizen to support. Citizens must do everything in our power to get to a place where international bankers AND the Financial Elite that own massive amounts of precious metals cannot harm society by manipulating the value of our currency.

As Bill Still states, we will not be free from the manipulation of international bankers until we
1.) get rid of private central banking (in the US, end the Federal Reserve)
2.) have the nation issue its own currency (no allowing private bankers to issue our money)
3.) the nation should never borrow any money (no borrowing from international bankers, or involving foreign countries to buy or sell US debt)
4.) the money must not be backed by commodity, but rather by "faith and trust"

#4 sounds weird to us, because the current US government is not trustworthy (nor will it be after the next election, or the next.) So, yes, we do still require a paradigm shift in governance in addition to the paradigm shift in monetary policy (see The Reset Button: http://www.ResetButton2012.org)

One step further than Bill Still's proposals would be to completely outlaw private banks, and instead, all banks in the US would be State banks (see the Bank of North Dakota for a shining example.)

Here is a LiveLeaks article (What Alex Jones and Ron Paul don't want you to know) that tries to expose Alex Jones and Ron Paul as NWO shills, but I include the article because of the implications of the 1976 Lewis Lehrman book, Money and the Coming World Order: The Creation of International Monetary Order, and its insistence that this monetary order is to be gold-based.

In the 'alternative' community, we have Ben Fulford and lately "Drake" promoting gold-backed money. More "NWO shills", or just people who mistakenly think that part of monetary reform should be backing paper with metal?

The most sane approach I have seen (for the US) is the Monetary Reform Act, but I would like to see one major provision changed: we do NOT need to "pay back" the debt "owed" to the Federal Reserve bankers. We do need to pay the part of the debt purchased by countries (primarily China), but it appears that at least 40% of the debt is "owed" to the same goddamned banks that deliberately caused all the hell. I would not give them a dime. If possible, I'd go after their assets, and use those to pay off China.

Going even one step further, I think we should declare war on the international bankers (or formally recognize that they declared war on us and join the battle.) I'd sieze every asset they have, land, businesses, gold, estates, rolls of toilet paper - all of it. They have given us hundreds of years of hell, and have stolen nearly everything on the planet. Time to get it back. (but I digress.)

I do think people are easily fooled by the ruse to take the flying leap to gold-backed currency. If it happens, the international bankers and world's wealthiest oligarchs will be smiling.

Dennis

[ceetee9]

Personally, I've never understood why people think that any monetary system backed by anything that can be easily manipulated, controlled and hoarded (not by the masses, but by the elite)--be it gold, silver, diamonds, or whatever--makes any sense. When the SHTF, see how much those kinds of things will be worth. Food, water, shelter, weapons, tools and knowledge on how to survive will be about all there will be of any real value and worth.

I agree Dennis that there needs to be a paradigm shift, but I believe we need something unlike anything we've ever seriously tried before. Something like a contributionist society that makes it all but impossible for anyone to manipulate, control or hoard resources or, at the very least, where it makes no sense to attempt to do so. Unfortunately, there are still far too many people on this planet who still believe they are entitled to more than others and/or believe they need to control others and they will attempt to use whatever sick, twisted and diluted reasoning they can muster to justify why. While the sheep just nod their heads in agreement in the hopes that they won't be the ones led to the slaughter.

[the_vast_mystery]

The Gold fever thing is because sadly, most human beings first response to a failed system (like our current fiat monetary system) is "Go back to doing what we did before!" without even looking at why the current problem is a problem. Gold is shiny jewelry metal and that we should put so much value in it (rather than food, something all humans NEED TO LIVE) is frankly offensive to me. What we need is a resource based economy where we put value first on the physical resources we need to sustain human life, such as arable land, water, food and such.

[risveglio]

I don't know anyone calling for a return to the gold standard, at least not the one we had prior to 1933. I think Bill Still has a lot of confusion when it comes to monetary policy but here is a pretty good response by Bix Weir that refutes most of Bill's arguments.

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/650.cfm

[Robert J. Niewiadomski]

How about backing money with time spent on producing various goods or service to others? Time credits... It is not a new idea....

[the_vast_mystery]

Posted by Robert J. Niewiadomski (here)
How about backing money with time spent on producing various goods or service to others? Time credits... It is not a new idea....

How do you determine whose time is worth what value? In an hour a master carpenter can produce far more than an apprentice for instance.

[realitycorrodes]

I am not an expert. But unless "the Powers that be" can create gold out of thin air, I feel personally using gold as an exchange for goods seems to be alot better than using "valuless paper" created as "money out of thin air/countefeiting". Even if the powers that be own all the gold, with time, when they need to exchange their gold for resources, food, land etc. the gold will eventually become owned by the people who create the resources. Those who create nothing (bankers) will eventually have nothing. When that happens, the powers that be can only do one thing to stay in power, and that is steal back the gold with physical force. I would guess it would be up to the people who create the resources to study up on mind control, hypnosis, etc to protect themselves from "being divided and conquered" in the form of starting bull**** wars with each other for "banker created 'mind controlled illusionary reasons'".

[Robert J. Niewiadomski]

That is an element of competitiveness. It is an analogue of cost. If someone needs less time to produce a carrot, you would prefer to exchange your accumulated time credits for that "cheaper" carrot. You would not also like to produce too many items in advance. The weak point of this idea is the honesty of all the participants and the method to keep records of credits accumulation and exchange... This system can also be easily corrupted...

[the_vast_mystery]

Posted by realitycorrodes (here)
I am not an expert. But unless "the Powers that be" can create gold out of thin air, I feel personally using gold as an exchange for goods seems to be alot better than using "valuless paper" created as "money out of thin air/countefeiting". Even if the powers that be own all the gold, with time, when they need to exchange their gold for resources, food, land etc. the gold will eventually become owned by the people who create the resources. Those who create nothing (bankers) will eventually have nothing. When that happens, the powers that be can only do one thing to stay in power, and that is steal back the gold with physical force. I would guess it would be up to the people who create the resources to study up on mind control, hypnosis, etc to protect themselves from "being divided and conquered" in the form of starting bull**** wars with each other for "banker created 'mind controlled illusionary reasons'".

Gold may be better than fiat money, but whose to say that there is not something far better than gold? Why must it be gold? Just because it's what we did before? Wouldn't something new that was actually created to address the problems we faced with both gold AND fiat currencies be a much better improvement? If we started on Barter, went to gold, then to paper, if we want to go back to gold it'll just go back to paper again eventually given enough time because nobody has ever addressed real reasons why we stopped using gold in the first place. (Even if you accept conspiracies, there ARE valid reasons to not use gold-backed money at a fixed rate of exchange) Namely that it's a scarce resource that does not replenish and therefore fixes the total amount of money that may be created.

Now, this would be fine if the population was static, but it's not. More people inevitably means more money is necessary. But if you attach its purchasing power to a fixed rate of exchange for a finite material then you are stuck in a deflationary spiral as your population goes up. This isn't to say there aren't problems with fiat money either but why, oh why must our first choice be to return to shiny jewelry metals?

[risveglio]

Posted by the_vast_mystery (here)

Posted by realitycorrodes (here)
I am not an expert. But unless "the Powers that be" can create gold out of thin air, I feel personally using gold as an exchange for goods seems to be alot better than using "valuless paper" created as "money out of thin air/countefeiting". Even if the powers that be own all the gold, with time, when they need to exchange their gold for resources, food, land etc. the gold will eventually become owned by the people who create the resources. Those who create nothing (bankers) will eventually have nothing. When that happens, the powers that be can only do one thing to stay in power, and that is steal back the gold with physical force. I would guess it would be up to the people who create the resources to study up on mind control, hypnosis, etc to protect themselves from "being divided and conquered" in the form of starting bull**** wars with each other for "banker created 'mind controlled illusionary reasons'".

Gold may be better than fiat money, but whose to say that there is not something far better than gold? Why must it be gold? Just because it's what we did before? Wouldn't something new that was actually created to address the problems we faced with both gold AND fiat currencies be a much better improvement? If we started on Barter, went to gold, then to paper, if we want to go back to gold it'll just go back to paper again eventually given enough time because nobody has ever addressed real reasons why we stopped using gold in the first place. (Even if you accept conspiracies, there ARE valid reasons to not use gold-backed money at a fixed rate of exchange) Namely that it's a scarce resource that does not replenish and therefore fixes the total amount of money that may be created.

Now, this would be fine if the population was static, but it's not. More people inevitably means more money is necessary. But if you attach its purchasing power to a fixed rate of exchange for a finite material then you are stuck in a deflationary spiral as your population goes up. This isn't to say there aren't problems with fiat money either but why, oh why must our first choice be to return to shiny jewelry metals?

As stated in the Bix Weir article, the gold supply is increasing at 2% which is about the same as the population rate so it is untrue to say it does not replenish. The durability of gold is why gold would be used, its pretty hard to destroy and unless someone has figured out alchemy, it can not be created.

[Arrowwind]

Posted by Robert J. Niewiadomski (here)
How about backing money with time spent on producing various goods or service to others? Time credits... It is not a new idea....

Absolutely. the only thing really worth anyting is human work. It is a true resource with true value. The discrepicencies between high wages and low wages needs to be addressed. A tier system of worker payment that is equitable based on education, experience, ability and expected outcome. All 35 or 40 hour work weeks need to be sufficient in payment to support at least 2 people. Why two? So a parent can remain in the home and so that there is sufficient people to work culturally and socially in the community .. and so it should be for McDonald workers, etc. No 35 or 40 hour work week should be so valued that working only one month a year can purchase a mansion and 3 cars. This all sounds kind of socialist doesn't it? But look at what capitolism has done for us. Poverty abounds, welfare, food stamps, excessive wealth, banruptcy, foreclosure, a class system based on income.

Its all a belief system. Why not create a working belief system that is equitabel for all according to their movtivation and ability.

[christian]

It's a good question. To avoid being trapped currency-wise, I see two main points.

1. don't trade with people who act with no good ethical conduct -- let them eat their FIAT-money/gold/what-have-you
2. free-market money -- being flexible and pragmatic and first of all free when choosing a means of exchange

Holding the architects of the current system accountable for their crimes against humanity is still not off the table. Once this is done, they cannot use their capital when they are not allowed to freely roam and ravage on this beautiful planet anymore.

At the end of the day the framework/system is "only" the playing field. What happens on it, is eventually up to the players. I don't wanna be a duck blaming the water for the fact that I don't swim properly.

[ceetee9]

Posted by Robert J. Niewiadomski (here)
How about backing money with time spent on producing various goods or service to others? Time credits... It is not a new idea....

Because time credits can be even more easily manipulated and corrupted than fiat money or gold. The good-ole-boy network will ensure that they have plenty of credits while those they dislike or who are on the low end of the totem poll will be sure to be screwed out of what they earned. As long as there's a system that lends itself to the haves and have nots, there will be plenty of greed, manipulation and control to corrupt the system, IMO.

[the_vast_mystery]

Posted by risveglio (here)
As stated in the Bix Weir article, the gold supply is increasing at 2% which is about the same as the population rate so it is untrue to say it does not replenish. The durability of gold is why gold would be used, its pretty hard to destroy and unless someone has figured out alchemy, it can not be created.

Excuse me? But if it cannot be created then how can the gold supply increase? That kind of sounds contradictory...
If you mean to say it cannot be created outside of nature, then please can you provide me some more detailed information as to what specific natural process allows gold to replenish within the earth?

But furthermore, if the Earth can replenish Gold, why can't a lab? We couldn't make diamonds or pearls for a while, but eventually we got it down. This seems if anything more like a security through obscurity method. Wouldn't it be much more sane to design the money supply around things humans need and can naturally produce like food? That way instead of requiring any sort of central depositories with Fort Knox style security we design the money around the idea that everyone will, in a sense, grow their own?

That seems to be the more rational approach, because just like with computer security I can already hear folks thinking "Huh? You can't duplicate Gold?! We'll just see about that..."

[Paul]

The problem with a gold backed world reserve currency is that it is a world reserve currency.

If the global monetary system is controlled by a few uber-powerful families behind closed doors, it matters not what they claim it is backed by. Well, almost matters not. Saying it is gold backed will enable them to purchase (or confiscate) the remaining gold held in private hands for pieces of paper that they control. But that's a minor detail in the long run.

Gold backed currencies worked better when sovereign states and nations independently held and exchanged gold in accordance with generally agreed rules. The power centralisation stopped with those sovereign states and nations.

Clearly, barring a miracle (aka divine or alien intervention), we seem headed to greater centralisation of power on this planet. For this to work best, they would like to get gold out of the hands of us useless eaters, both individuals and any states that thought they could independently operate using gold backed currencies (remember Iran and Libya.)

I anticipate at some point, barring said miracle, I will be faced with the choice of surrendering my gold investments in order to continue to eat.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by the_vast_mystery (here)
Excuse me? But if it cannot be created then how can the gold supply increase? That kind of sounds contradictory...

Perhaps he meant that the supply of above ground, mined and available for exchange, gold increases each year, as more is mined than is lost.

[the_vast_mystery]

That wouldn't change there being a fixed amount of non-replenishable gold in the earth and that therefore we cannot expect to keep mining more forever. I dunno I just keep thinking the problem was when we started wanting our currency to be based around the idea of scarcity rather than abundance. Maybe the problem is that we can't stop counterfeiting or currency hacks, so instead why not design a currency around the idea that everyone should try to make their own? Such as making it tied to the exchange of grain or fruits and vegetables?

[Amzer Zo]

The problem with anything-backed currency is that it's mostly based on some rarefied resource not everyone can get their hands on...

If we ever had a sand-grains backed currency... beaches, deserts and fertile lands would start disappearing and it would be forbiden to rock crush mountains and any kind of rock outcrops.

[Paul]

The elites idea of gold backed currency reminds me of Edward Djerejian's famous phrase "One man, one vote, one time."

Democracy in its various forms works when the ordinary citizen gets to repeatedly vote the bastards out of office. Voting a tyrant into office, when he can cancel future elections, is little more than being "allowed" to sign one's own death warrant ... the death of one's political freedom.

A gold backed (or a banana backed, doesn't matter) world currency (whether the reserve currency, or the common currency of use), where the elite hold all the gold (or bananas) marks the death of economic freedom for individuals and even for states and nations.

[gripreaper]

Any currency system of exchange based on scarcity cannot and will not succeed. At it's basic unit, exchange is vested in the energy of humans and the abundance of energy in the universe. The elite know this, as they don't care about money. The elite extract the most amount of energy out of the most humans, in every conceivable way, and money is just one of them.

To go to an interest free exchange which is not held by a private cartel, would be a step in the right direction, although ultimately, free energy, the replacement of the oil and electric monopolies will set the stage for a new energy paradigm where the context of scarcity no longer exists.

This opens the door for a system which we most likely can't see from here, but it will certainly put the current currency paradigm based on scarcity on it's heels.

[eileenrose]

I have a different issue with currency. I am not educated on telling which monetary system works best. But obviously, our system of fiat money is being used to enslave us.

For instance, I had the feeling the other day for the real reason behind the 600 or so trillion in derivatives.....it is meant to be there to be used to take down banks/empires that don't go along with the Illuminati plans (or they want something from you).

If you are a country/bank and you get out of line, and you arn't educated about derivatives (or don't care), you are easy pickings for these vultures. And they don't want your money, they want your resources. So first they get you to get into derivatives (again,...I know next to zero how derivatives actually work).....

It is such a huge debt...what if they use it like an ax....wielding it around.....sending it to countries (in the forms that they do) and voila....they have you. Because it isn't real....but your assets that you are using to back your purchases of said derivatives (or whatever form they engulf you in) is.

Good way to control countries. Doubt that will willingly give this up (illuminati). And doubt they will ever give up Fiat money that allows them to have derivatives. It is a long rabbit hole.

...just a few thoughts....hard to find the words (didn't like economics in college....)

So you can see why they got rid of gold (if you had gold....and had a standard....no such thing as these derative/huge piles of debt that arn't real).

From wikipedia:

A derivative instrument is a contract between two parties that specifies conditions (especially the dates, resulting values of the underlying variables, and notional amounts) under which payments are to be made between the parties.[1][2]

For further clarification and examples of derivatives, see "Demystifying Financial Derivatives": | url = http://www.cob.ohio-state.edu/fin/fa...e_pubpaper.pdf

Under US law and the laws of most other developed countries, derivatives have special legal exemptions that make them a particularly attractive legal form through which to extend credit.[3] However, the strong creditor protections afforded to derivatives counterparties, in combination with their complexity and lack of transparency, can cause capital markets to underprice credit risk. This can contribute to credit booms, and increase systemic risks.[3] Indeed, the use of derivatives to mask credit risk from third parties while protecting derivative counterparties contributed to the financial crisis of 2008 in the United States.[3][4]