Overnight Devaulation of $ and Gold/Silver
COINB0Y
Posts: 4,505
I'm starting to get the creeps, boys.
I'm reading more and more that a $ devaluation is the ONLY way to get us out of this mess.
The devaluation of the U.S. dollar means a decline in the purchasing power of the dollar, which leads to a decline in living standard. For example, if the US dollar is devalued by an Act of the Govt., overnight by 40% a million dollars becomes $600,000.00 like that *snap*!
Now, what would they do to us 'smart' folks who have squirreled away Gold and Silver? They can't let us sell our Gold and payoff our mortgage debt with all that funny money.
1.) Will they make a law that says a one ounce Gold Eagle is only worth $50?
2.) Is it better to own a Krug that has no denomination? Or will these be outlawed?
3.) Seems to me it will be 1932 all over again, A.) first confiscate the gold and outlaw private ownership, B.) then devalue the $, overnight.
We are going to be screwed, I feel certain of it.
I'm reading more and more that a $ devaluation is the ONLY way to get us out of this mess.
The devaluation of the U.S. dollar means a decline in the purchasing power of the dollar, which leads to a decline in living standard. For example, if the US dollar is devalued by an Act of the Govt., overnight by 40% a million dollars becomes $600,000.00 like that *snap*!
Now, what would they do to us 'smart' folks who have squirreled away Gold and Silver? They can't let us sell our Gold and payoff our mortgage debt with all that funny money.
1.) Will they make a law that says a one ounce Gold Eagle is only worth $50?
2.) Is it better to own a Krug that has no denomination? Or will these be outlawed?
3.) Seems to me it will be 1932 all over again, A.) first confiscate the gold and outlaw private ownership, B.) then devalue the $, overnight.
We are going to be screwed, I feel certain of it.
0
Comments
Is it the US's fault Asian countries have been buying dollars by the
boatload to keep their currencies devalued to make their manufactured
goods more enticing to buyers overseas (USA)? Yes the US govt knows
what it has been up to but it is not alone at fault. The Asian countries
purposely kept buying dollars to grow their economies and now they
are caught in a catch22 of buying more to keep their existing dollars
valuable... If they allowed the exchange rates to become balanced
naturally they would not be in this position. But alas they enjoy the
growth of their economy and have caused this problem on their own.
So their threat to stop buying our debt is rather interesting. They will
lose out as much as we would. Without our dollars they cannot
keep devaluing their currencies and eventually their manufactured
goods would be more expensive for us to buy.
Goods manufactured locally would become more appealing as goods
from outside sources become more expensive if we devalued our
currency. We really could have an export boom.
The real losers could very well be China, Japan, South Korea, Canada, etc... Heck Canada cried foul recently as our dollar dropped
versus theirs! They all depend on us to buy their goods. The last
thing they want is their currencies to become more valuable versus
the dollar.
i guess what i am thinking is who wants a strong dollar and why the
most? also the opposite of that question is interesting. Who benefits
the most from a devalued dollar?
Man... i would have to do a lot of reading to really understand this
topic in more depth. I am just posting some stuff that it made me think of.
<< <i>I'm starting to get the creeps, boys.
I'm reading more and more that a $ devaluation is the ONLY way to get us out of this mess.
The devaluation of the U.S. dollar means a decline in the purchasing power of the dollar, which leads to a decline in living standard. For example, if the US dollar is devalued by an Act of the Govt., overnight by 40% a million dollars becomes $600,000.00 like that *snap*!
Now, what would they do to us 'smart' folks who have squirreled away Gold and Silver? They can't let us sell our Gold and payoff our mortgage debt with all that funny money.
1.) Will they make a law that says a one ounce Gold Eagle is only worth $50?
2.) Is it better to own a Krug that has no denomination? Or will these be outlawed?
3.) Seems to me it will be 1932 all over again, A.) first confiscate the gold and outlaw private ownership, B.) then devalue the $, overnight.
We are going to be screwed, I feel certain of it. >>
Of course we're going to be screwed. We already have been for decades and we assured it at express speed in this last election.
Devaluation of the dollar is something I have been thinking of as a real possibility. You'll have to turn in your old money for the new kind at some rate of exchange like 10 for 1. Of course, mortgages will also be reduced by 90% under that scenario and all products will fall as well, but they will creep up fairly soon.
The sheeple will get the impression that things are good with gas at only 25 cents, of course a 10K annual salary would be considered extremely wealthy. We'll get the shaft at every turn under this scenario. Inflation will eat us alive and I pray for those on fixed incomes now reduced to 10% of previous levels. Prices on goods won't be staying at that 10% level very long.
BTW, too many Krugs will get you arrested. That's a violation of the Patriot Act.
I don't see any cap put on the prices of precious metals. That could end mining and end industry as well as future technologies. This new anti-matter laser requires a good sized amount of gold right there, but an anti-matter propulsion system is one amazing advance. I don't see technology being stopped. There are those who want to put us back to the 5th Century, but Americans aren't going to go for it. That's what divides the world right now, but who knows what our leaders really have in mind for us?
There will be no confiscation of gold, that won't fly this time around. Remember the US Mint has been selling those for years to us. Then I'd expect inflation, severe inflation for the next several years, even if there is no devaluation of the US Dollar. I think of the devaluation as a way of paying off the US debt, that would be the quickest way for our dear "rulers" to claim that they have saved us. Sadly, many of the sheeple would initially fall for it.
Actually, this would turn out very well for the small % of people who do hold precious metals, but it would be disastrous for the nation as a whole.
There isn't going to be any easy way our of this and we, today, are going to be the ones to bear the brunt of it.
Such things could lead to wars and that may be what the world comes to. Much like after WWII, the economies of the world would once again begin to churn.
It's not a pretty picture no mattter how you paint it, we will survive, but we're in for a rough ride however it turns out. I may be completely wrong and other things are done instead, regardless, we are in for a rough future. The notion of raising taxes on those who provide the most jobs is pure insanity, but then that may be the plan and there is very little we can do. The reduction of the US to a third world nation may take some time, but who knows? That may be the underlying plan all along.
Rambling thoughts off - for now anyway.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Deadhorse, some great points.
Thinking thru it, gets you spinning..no matter what..
It just creeps me out when I read the history of overnight devaluations.
If you are holding Gold and Silver and Debt the day before a devaluation happens, you make out like a bandit. That is unless the Govt. steps in (2) days before the devaluation and forcibly makes you sell all of your Gold to them.
Lets take it further in detail. Imagine an overnight devaluation of 100%. Your PM holds the original valuation it had from the Day before.
For example, $730 in Paper $ buys 1 ounce of Gold the day before, right? The next day it takes $1,460 in Paper $ to buy that same 1 ounce of Gold.
Your Mortgage balance yesterday was $146K, today your Mortgage Balance is still $146K
However, your 200 Ounces of Gold that was worth $146K yesterday, fetches you $292K today. This allows you to take 100 of the 200 Ounces of Gold and convert it into paper $ to pay off that $146K House loan.
Sounds Great!?
ONLY if the Government does NOT forcibly make you sell all of your Gold at $146K, first, BEFORE that devaluation is made.
Just like FDR did.
Yikes , I just saw this Article in another Post talking about the same topic!
think about that, he'd rather be dead than deal with what i have ahead of me. awesome.
i'm thinking about getting a giant bucket of popcorn and moving far far away, enough already
SAD
When the bank runs happened where people wanted to trade their paper money for gold there was not enough gold to give out because the govt had printed far more paper money than they had physical gold to back it.
The way the govt chose to get out of the situation was to make it illegal to own gold and no longer force payment in gold if requested for the paper notes.
Today is a different situation as the govt can print all the money they want without having any gold for backing.
<< <i>had a guy in his early 70's come into the shop just the other day, looking to buy 90%.. i've known him for awhile now and he's always full of such insight, i just love talking to him... an old college professor. he said something this particular visit that kind of made me jealous, but in a bad way.. he said he's glad he's closer to the end of his life than in my position.. early 30's.
think about that, he'd rather be dead than deal with what i have ahead of me. awesome.
i'm thinking about getting a giant bucket of popcorn and moving far far away, enough already
SAD >>
that was insightful? the amount of opportunities coming up here
in the next few years should have you excited as all heck! when
there is blood in the streets that is when fortunes are made.
too many people see the glass as half full lately. very negative.
oh well. i will worry about myself.
Remember, when gold confiscation ocurred under FDR, the gov't paid $22.50 (?) for each $20 gold piece, and most people thought that was a steal. Even if you hold gold that gets taken, you will most certainly come out better than if you hadn't owned any gold. My understanding is that collectibles at that time were also exempt.
IMO, confiscation is highly unlikely.
<< <i>that was insightful? the amount of opportunities coming up here
in the next few years should have you excited as all heck! when
there is blood in the streets that is when fortunes are made. >>
i'd rather be in a 3rd world fishing for my dinner than blasting holes in burglars on a daily basis
<< <i>IMO, confiscation is highly unlikely. >>
it'll never happen. it aint the 30's anymore.. go ahead and try to take my gold and my guns against my will. see where that gets ya. multiply that by 300,000,000. instant 'civil' war.
Civil War is a term that has come to me on many levels lately.
I know that there are Texas elected officials who have met and talked of secession privately. Yes, I am personal friends with a State Congressman.
Who knows where this is going, but a very bad move or a poorly thought out power move could result in some very unexpected consequences.
Few know that Texas has the 5th largest air force in the world as well as several large military bases.
There are over 300 million registered guns here. Many figure that amounts to only about a third of the total.
We have a different mindset down here and everything we need for self-sufficiency. We've long been tired of sending DC nearly twice what we get back annually.
I have no idea where all this is going, but a certain non-existent birth certificate thrown into all this financial upheaval could lead to places that no one knows or could even imagine.
We do have the right to secede and to print our own money if we so chose.
I'm not supporting this notion, nor a civil war, but I really don't think those on the Left and Right Coasts as well as those in DC have any sort of understanding of the extreme emotions that run strong in large parts of the country. I think Alaska would vote to leave at the drop of a hat.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Maybe all of this is to bring about a new order, ie; A One World Government with the Central Banks pulling the strings in the background.
We all become serfs overnight indebted to the UN or some form of it.
Now I'm going to have nightmares.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
My Adolph A. Weinman signature
<< <i>Whelp, I am wide awake and as a former resident of Austin, I will come home and defend the mother land when ya' all declare independence. >>
And us Yankees will just give you back to Mexico .......
I would offer that the registered total is a mere 10% or20% of the guns here in Texas. Think of all the guns that have been handed down or were purchased before all this registration stuff. One of our favorite passtimes in rural Texas when I was young was to go to a field and haul a dead car out there and get all your buddies to bring their guns and some beer and then shoot up the car; a super black hawk will really trash an engine block.
Succede...It wouldn't suprise me if some folk start that up again, like in the 70's. Trouble with that scenario is that we are so attached to the fed sugartit for all our welfare/healthcare/highway/educatioin costs that people would never let them do it. Sounds nice in theory but the economic realities of it make it a no go.
Regarding the OP, it seems that those that are already in position with their homes, cars, guns, gold, cash, are going to do quite well, regardless of how the economic worm turns. Those that are hanging onto big debt, that don't have their education completed, that have no skills or a house are really going to be toast because they will be totally dependent on handouts and good will just to stay alive. This will likely result in riots and blood in the streets and some really rough times. There are just so many people that think they have a right to entitlements and it's all going to come crashing down and probably in less than a couple of years because that public money is simply not going to be there. This is a good time to start working on plan B if folk haven't gotten to that yet, kind of like planning for a little place away from the urban area.
On a more serious note, confiscation just wouldn't work. You have seen the comments about gun owners. "You can have my gold and guns when you pry them from my cold dead hands" X100 million. The government will not confiscate gold jewelry. Can you imagine the uproar of a hormonal irrational soccer mom if you tried to take her wedding ring? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Just take your gold eagles, put them in a bezel, hang them on a chain and say your religion requires you to wear gold. I live in Dearborn, MI where many of my neighbors of Arabic descent wear many ounces of gold every day. I will just do the same thing and blend in with the locals. Why do you think they wear so much gold? It's because the governments and banks in their ancestral lands were poorly run and corrupt. Sound familiar?
The free market decides what it converts into gold or Euros or scrap iron.
Last Summer the free market said that it was convertible into Euros at the rate of $1.60 US per Euro. Today it is about $1.25 per Euro.
The U.S. Treasury did not set either rate. It can influence future conversion rates by printing more dollars, but it cannot tell the world what it must then take those dollars at.
TD
by Larry Edelson 11-13-08
If you think this weekend’s G-20 meetings in Washington are only about designing short-term fixes to the financial system and regulatory reforms for banks, hedge funds, brokers, mortgage companies and investment banks … think again.
Behind the scenes, a far more fundamental fix is being discussed — the possible revaluation of gold and the birth of an entirely new monetary system.
I’ve been studying this issue in great depth, all my life. And given the speed at which the financial crisis is unfolding, I would be very surprised if what I’m about to tell you now is not on the G-20 table this weekend.
Furthermore, I believe the end result will make my $2,270 price target for gold look conservative, to say the least. You’ll see why in a minute.
First, the G-20’s motive for a new monetary system: It’s driven by and based upon this very simple proposition …
“If we can’t print money fast enough to fend off another deflationary Great Depression, then let’s change the value of the money.”
I call it … The G-20 may propose devaluing all currencies, including the U.S. dollar and the euro.
“The G-20’s Secret Debt Solution”
It would be a strategy designed to ease the burden of ALL debts — by simultaneously devaluing ALL currencies … and re-inflating ALL asset prices.
That’s what central banks and governments around the world are going to start talking about this weekend — a new financial order that includes new monetary units that helps to wipe clean the world’s debt ledgers.
It won’t be an easy deal to broker, since the U.S. is the world’s largest debtor. But remember: Debts are now going bad all over the world. So everyone would benefit.
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke … Treasury Secretary Paulson … President Bush … President-elect Obama … former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker … Warren Buffett … and central bankers and politicians all over the world agree a new monetary system is needed.
So they’ll start hashing out the details to get the new financial architecture deployed as quickly as possible.
If you think I’m crazy or propagating some kind of conspiracy theory, then consider the historical precedent …
To end the Great Depression in 1933 Franklin Roosevelt devalued the dollar via Executive Order #6102, confiscating gold and raising its price 69.3%, effectively kick starting asset reflation.
Only this time, it won’t be just the U.S. that devalues its currency. The world is too interconnected. Instead, the world’s leading countries will propose a simultaneous and universal currency devaluation.
This time, they will NOT confiscate gold. There would be riots all over the globe if they even mentioned the “C” word.
But they don’t have to confiscate gold. Here’s one scenario …
They cease all gold sales and instead, raise the current official central bank price of gold from its booked value of $42.22 an ounce — to a price that monetizes a large enough portion of the world’s outstanding debts.
That way, just like in 1933, the debts become a fraction of re-inflated asset prices (led higher by the gold price).
And this time, instead of staying with the dollar as a reserve currency, the G-20 issues three new monetary units of exchange, each with equal reserve status.
The three currencies will essentially be a new dollar, new euro, and a new pan-Asian currency. (The Chinese yuan may survive as a fourth currency, but it will be linked to a basket of the three new currencies.)
The new fiat monetary units would be worth less than the old ones. For instance, it could take 10 new units of money to buy 1 old dollar or euro.
New names would be given to the new currencies to help rid the world of the ghost of a system that failed. Additional regulations and programs would be designed and implemented to ease the transition to a new monetary system.
The IMF would be at the center of the new monetary system.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) would implement the new financial system in conjunction with central banks and governments around the world.
Keep in mind that the IMF is already set up to handle the transition, and has had contingency plans allowing for it since the institution was formed in 1944.
Included in the design and transition to a new monetary system …
A. A new fixed-rate currency regime. Immediately upon upping the price of gold and introducing the new currencies, a new fixed exchange rate system would be re-introduced. The floating exchange rate system would be tossed into the dust bin along with the old currencies.
This would kill any speculation about further devaluations in the currency markets, and drastically reduce market volatility.
B. To sell the program to savers and protect them from the currency devaluation, compensatory measures would be enacted. For instance, a one-time windfall tax-free deposit could be issued by governments directly to citizens’ accounts, or, to employer-sponsored pensions, to IRAs, or Social Security accounts.
Income taxes may subsequently be raised to pay for the give-away, or a nominal global type of sales tax could be enacted to help pay for the new system and the compensatory measures.
C. Additional programs would be designed to protect lenders and creditors. Lenders stand a much higher chance of getting paid off under the new monetary system — but with a currency whose purchasing power would now be a fraction of what it was when the loans were originated.
So programs would have to be designed to help lenders offset the inflationary costs of their devalued loans, probably via the tax code.
Naturally, all this is a bit more complicated than I’ve spelled out above. But that gives you a big-picture outline of what the plan could look like. And I think major changes like these are going to be set in motion at this weekend’s G-20 meetings in Washington.
Would they work?
Yes. They would help avoid a repeat of the deflationary Great Depression. But don’t expect even a new monetary system to put the U.S. or the global economy back on track toward the high rates of real growth that we’ve seen over the last several years. That’s simply not going to happen. Not for a while.
Instead, I’m talking about a massive asset price reflation, negative real economic growth in the U.S. and Europe — but continued real GDP gains in Asia.
The Big Question: What gold price would be legislated to reflate the U.S. and global economy?
I can’t tell you what gold price the G-20 would ultimately agree to. But here’s what they will be looking at …
To monetize 100% of the outstanding public and private sector debt in the U.S., the official government price of gold would have to be raised to about $53,000 per ounce.
To monetize 50%, the price of gold would have to be raised to around $26,500 an ounce.
To monetize 20% would require a gold price a hair over $10,600 an ounce.
To monetize just 10%, gold would have to be priced just over $5,300 an ounce.
Those figures are just based on the U.S. debt structure and do not factor in global debts gone bad. But since the U.S. is the world’s largest debtor and the epicenter of the crisis, the G-20 will likely base their final decision mostly on the U.S. debt structure.
So how much debt do I think would be monetized via an executive order that raises the official price of gold? What kind of currency devaluation would I expect as a result?
I would not be surprised to see the G-20 monetize at least 20% of the U.S. debt markets. THAT MEANS …
Gold would be priced at over $10,000 an ounce.
Currencies would be devalued by a factor of at least 12 to 1, meaning it would take 12 new dollars or euros to equal 1 old dollar or euro.
The return of the Gold Standard?
“But Larry,” you ask, “how could this be accomplished when we no longer have a gold standard? Further, are you advocating a gold standard?”
If the G-20 monetizes at least 20% of the U.S. debt markets, gold could easily hit $10,000 an ounce.
My answers:
First, you don’t need a gold standard to accomplish a devaluation of currencies and revaluation of the monetary system.
By offering to pay over $10,000 an ounce for gold, central banks can effectively accomplish the same end goal — monetizing and reducing the burden of debts, via inflating asset prices in fiat money terms.
Naturally, hoards of gold investors will cash in their gold. The central banks will pile it up. At the same time, other hoards of investors will not sell their gold, even at $10,000 an ounce. But the actual movement of the gold will not matter. It is the psychological impact and the devaluation of paper currencies that matters.
Second, I do NOT advocate a fully convertible gold standard. Never have. There isn’t enough gold in the world to make currencies convertible into gold. It would end up backfiring, restricting the supply of money and credit.
What should you do to prepare for these possibilities?
It’s obvious: Make sure you own some core gold, as much as 25% of your investable funds.
Also, as I’ve noted in past Money and Markets issues, you will want to own key natural resource stocks, and even select blue-chip stocks that will participate in the reflation scheme.
material in "my opinion". everything i have read from more serious new sources
gave me the impression that the article content below was not even discussed at all.
period. nada. none. that article writer is blowing smoke from his backside.
<< <i>From my understanding gold was made illegal to own in the 1930's because the dollar was supposed to be backed by gold.
When the bank runs happened where people wanted to trade their paper money for gold there was not enough gold to give out because the govt had printed far more paper money than they had physical gold to back it.
The way the govt chose to get out of the situation was to make it illegal to own gold and no longer force payment in gold if requested for the paper notes.
Today is a different situation as the govt can print all the money they want without having any gold for backing. >>
It really doesn't matter what the pre-existing conditions were and why the government confiscated gold, the main thing everyone has to remember is the government DID confiscate Gold at one time.
Happened then, could very well happen again. Forget about the reasons why it occurred in the past.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>coinboy, posting articles like that is not very constructive. that is fruit loop
material in "my opinion". everything i have read from more serious new sources
gave me the impression that the article content below was not even discussed at all.
period. nada. none. that article writer is blowing smoke from his backside. >>
Your "more serious" sources? You mean the financial "experts" who completely failed to predict the housing and stock market collapses? The same genii who have run our economy into the ground and may cause GDII? Why should anybody listen to these self serving idiots who only want you to buy more stock, thereby financially ruining yourself but enriching the "experts"?
It seems like your job, and most of your 10,000+ posts are to ridicule hard asset investors. I sometimes think that you are a paid sock puppet for Goldman Sachs or some other financial firm. You are here EVERY TIME, EVERY POST to bash on any article or opinion that does not align with the criminals of Wall street.
<< <i>
<< <i>coinboy, posting articles like that is not very constructive. that is fruit loop
material in "my opinion". everything i have read from more serious new sources
gave me the impression that the article content below was not even discussed at all.
period. nada. none. that article writer is blowing smoke from his backside. >>
Your "more serious" sources? You mean the financial "experts" who completely failed to predict the housing and stock market collapses? The same genii who have run our economy into the ground and may cause GDII? Why should anybody listen to these self serving idiots who only want you to buy more stock, thereby financially ruining yourself but enriching the "experts"?
It seems like your job, and most of your 10,000+ posts are to ridicule hard asset investors. I sometimes think that you are a paid sock puppet for Goldman Sachs or some other financial firm. You are here EVERY TIME, EVERY POST to bash on any article or opinion that does not align with the criminals of Wall street. >>
"The consensus is that the G-20 meeting yielded few concrete answers to the financial crisis that is gripping the world. The G-20 nations did issue a statement basically blaming investors who "sought higher yields without an adequate appreciation of the risks." A couple of directives from the meeting were a call for financial institutions to raise more capital and increase surveillance of financial firm activity. As far as the global recession is concerned, the G-20 basically left it up to the individual central banks to solve the problems."
basically nothing much came out of it. where is an ounce of evidence these people at the meeting
discussed the topic in the article? any at all? did a single person at the meeting make a statement
of such? did a reporter there overhear this in the halls at the meeting from members who were there?
but hey.. if you shout at me hard and long enough it might become true. not.
also please note a few members have already mentioned that going back to the gold
standard or confiscation is unlikely. Yet shouting at me is easier then others because
the clique here dislikes me. boo hoo.
<< <i>coinboy, posting articles like that is not very constructive. >>
i read it
<< <i>It really doesn't matter what the pre-existing conditions were and why the government confiscated gold, the main thing everyone has to remember is the government DID confiscate Gold at one time.
Happened then, could very well happen again. Forget about the reasons why it occurred in the past. >>
yeah we also used to buy and sell human beings
call me crazy but i don't see that ever happening again
they aint confiscating anything these days without a fight and they know it. unless mass rioting is part of the plan... which i guess wouldnt suprise me either
<< <i>
<< <i>coinboy, posting articles like that is not very constructive. >>
i read it >>
what did you learn from it except a few bits of history that was
there to fluff the article out and allow the author to steer away
from using facts about the topic at hand of what happened at
the meeting?
the equivalent is discussing possible alien life on other planets
and then someone posts an area 51 article written by someone.
did that really help the conversation? i do not think so.
a dissenting opinion around here is disliked so much i find it funny.
this place would be an echo chamber without a few key people to
post other opinions. i have a feeling that is exactly what some folks
want.
thanks for the post, coinboy..
Not unlikely because it wouldn't work. Unlikely because the guys making the rules won't allow it unless they get railroaded out of the titular seats of power, i.e., unless the banker are outed, tarred & feathered and thrown into jail to rot.
If a gold standard is ever considered, the conversion rate doesn't matter. If a dollar (or any other currency) was ever "good as gold" and backed by a finite amount of gold in a depository that was audited by a reliable and ***transparent*** auditing process, then commerce would have an honest and firm foundation.
If you can't play accounting games with the books and if you can't create "money for nothin" electronically out of thin air - then you actually have to produce, you actually have to be honest or get thrown into jail, you actually have to make hard choices between priorities in spending and you can't cover your tracks as easily when you conspire to steal money from the public till by inflating the currency.
A gold standard would *force* better accounting practices into place, both in the public sector and the private. That's why it's not popular.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>just because you took nothing from it doesnt mean i didnt, or that nobody else will
thanks for the post, coinboy..
so an attempt at a more serious conversation has once again degraded
to conspiracy theories, doomsday scenarios of guns/water/food,
and PMs will be the only real currency in the "end".
why am i not surprised...
capthenway tries to make a point... but i guess it is more entertaining
to discuss the other topics which gets the blood flowing.
capt, i think it is only possible on a fixed exchange rate which would
have to be the first step for the US to do an official devaluation? Our
govt would then need a major outside currency to keep it that way
so it could buy all sellers of dollars at the fixed and finally the new
devalued exchange rate?
Basically that is what Asian countries did. China for example.
But as i said in my first post I would have to read a lot to freshen up
on this complicated topic.
edited to add: jmski.. my main problem with that article was simply
the fact the author was using the meeting as a tool to get people
to believe behind the scenes secret debate was going on about
the gold standard. To me that was rubbish. It was a propaganda
piece.
I do realize having a gold/silver standard to back a currency is a valid
idea. I just am not sure it is practical.
There are much better authors who write about the gold standard
and why it may be possible then to use a loony lieing to people about
"secrets" he knows nothing about.
Gold is a great store of value and on a relative basis it has out performed the market in the recent past. Holding it is not a bad idea right now with the current turmoil. However, I for one do not see the apocalypse coming, a recession yes, bad one, probably, but check out this thread in 3 years and see where we are then.
Land is still the best thing to own. Population continues to grow and they are not making any more of it. Buy now when prices are low!
I'm having a hard time seeing how that would be an advantage. The price of all other goods and services would nominally double overnight as well. Since there's no linkage between gold and the dollar (as has been pointed out endlessly), wouldn't it be the same thing as saying that your $10,000 car would double in value to $20,000 overnight?
<< <i>Gold is never going to be a significant player in economic markets again. The days of a gold standard are over forever. No one is going to confiscate it either. It is just a commodity, nothing more, nothing less. The world has evolved and as was pointed out earlier, currency values are relative and float on a daily (moment to moment) basis.
Gold is a great store of value and on a relative basis it has out performed the market in the recent past. Holding it is not a bad idea right now with the current turmoil. However, I for one do not see the apocalypse coming, a recession yes, bad one, probably, but check out this thread in 3 years and see where we are then.
Land is still the best thing to own. Population continues to grow and they are not making any more of it. Buy now when prices are low! >>
You must be a realtor. Land is plentiful, anyone who has flown cross country will attest to the millions of acres of open land all across this vast country. Landowners will be prime targets for increased taxation under our increasingly socialistic government. Landowners are "rich", don't you know. They are sitting ducks, you can raise property taxes and fees at will. Dont want to pay the taxes? No problem, they will take your property from you. Or you can try to sell, a difficult process that is riddled with fees and commissions.
Gold and cash keep looking better and better.
<< <i>had a guy in his early 70's come into the shop just the other day, looking to buy 90%.. i've known him for awhile now and he's always full of such insight, i just love talking to him... an old college professor. he said something this particular visit that kind of made me jealous, but in a bad way.. he said he's glad he's closer to the end of his life than in my position.. early 30's.
think about that, he'd rather be dead than deal with what i have ahead of me. awesome.
i'm thinking about getting a giant bucket of popcorn and moving far far away, enough already
SAD >>
Awesome? More like pathetic. The coward should be ashamed of himself. I see people like that as part of the problem not as part of the solution.
My icon IS my coin. It is a gem 1949 FBL Franklin.
If you bought at the end of the last major recession, you would be quite well off now, even with the housing bubble bursting. There ARE opportunities now if you do your homework... or you can sit on cash and gold as you recommend.
<< <i>For example, $730 in Paper $ buys 1 ounce of Gold the day before, right? The next day it takes $1,460 in Paper $ to buy that same 1 ounce of Gold.
I'm having a hard time seeing how that would be an advantage. The price of all other goods and services would nominally double overnight as well. Since there's no linkage between gold and the dollar (as has been pointed out endlessly), wouldn't it be the same thing as saying that your $10,000 car would double in value to $20,000 overnight? >>
inflation yes, devaulation no
<< <i>[It really doesn't matter what the pre-existing conditions were and why the government confiscated gold, the main thing everyone has to remember is the government DID confiscate Gold at one time.
Happened then, could very well happen again. Forget about the reasons why it occurred in the past. >>
Actually they didnt confiscate gold to even a small degree. They made it illegale to own and told people to turn it in and did not do any "witchhunt" to find every last gold coin in private hands.
Some people seem to think there were law enforcement searching every house looking for gold back then and that is not how it was.
Making it illeagle to own gold basically meant you could no longer use your gold coins to purchase items or pay bills. So it was in your best interest to go exchange your gold coins for legal money.
Yes the govt could make owning gold illeagle again but what possibly would be the point of doing so?
<< <i>
<< <i>had a guy in his early 70's come into the shop just the other day, looking to buy 90%.. i've known him for awhile now and he's always full of such insight, i just love talking to him... an old college professor. he said something this particular visit that kind of made me jealous, but in a bad way.. he said he's glad he's closer to the end of his life than in my position.. early 30's.
think about that, he'd rather be dead than deal with what i have ahead of me. awesome.
i'm thinking about getting a giant bucket of popcorn and moving far far away, enough already
SAD >>
Awesome? More like pathetic. The coward should be ashamed of himself. I see people like that as part of the problem not as part of the solution. >>
you're aren't very skilled at detecting sarcasm huh
your opinion, the cliche, everything about your post plus zero equals zero
<< <i>clouisejewelers: I work in IT, not selling real estate. I did not recommend buying land you cannot afford and taxes are part of the total cost of ownership. The rest is just a rant against real estate as an asset. Interest rates are low right now and given the current state of the housing market, good buys are available to hold LONG TERM. This is not about flipping property, it is about long term growth.
If you bought at the end of the last major recession, you would be quite well off now, even with the housing bubble bursting. There ARE opportunities now if you do your homework... or you can sit on cash and gold as you recommend. >>
The last recession ended in 2002. Most real estate purchased since then is underwater. Add in all the taxes and insurance paid and it was a terrible investment. I purchased my house in 1997 and my business in 1993. The house is worth about what I paid 11 years ago and the business is worth maybe 30% more. They are both on their way down along with all other real estate. I bought them as a place to live and a place to conduct my business, not as an investment.
What's the rule? I have to run everything by YOU, first, before I post?
That comment only makes me want to do it more!
Its good for you to read, it makes your brain smarter and your life richer (not money-wise).
<< <i>The last recession ended in 2002. Most real estate purchased since then is underwater. Add in all the taxes and insurance paid and it was a terrible investment. I purchased my house in 1997 and my business in 1993. The house is worth about what I paid 11 years ago and the business is worth maybe 30% more. They are both on their way down along with all other real estate. I bought them as a place to live and a place to conduct my business, not as an investment. >>
Well, I bought my current house nearly 4 years ago, I put down 65% at the time to keep the mortgage low as a "just in case" scenario. I bought way more house than I needed with the idea that in 10+ years I could sell at a profit and retire early with my investments. That may still be true. Remains to be seen.
Obviously, I am not underwater but you're correct in that the house has lost value, for now at least.
I have to look at it like this; you have to live somewhere, as far as taxes and insurance, well you're paying that with a rental property too, it's just hidden in the lease rate. If this house ends up being an investment, great! Even if I break even, well I have a very nice home for how ever long I live here. Not to mention the tax breaks associated with home ownership. I really have no plans to sell for several years, so I'll just enjoy it for now and be thankful that the mortgage is now less than an upscale apartment or even a mid-class home rental. That wasn't true 4 years ago.
You're right about there being plenty of land. I read something a while back that said you could put the entire world's population in Texas and house them all in 3 bedroom homes on quarter acre lots.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Your Contract states that you owe 10K on the Car. There is no language in the typical contract that takes into account a devaluation.
You owe , 10,000 $1 dollar bills as stated.
That's why back in 1930's they outlawed Contracts that demanded payment in gold coins, rather than paper.
BTW, I thought I just saw something that said its OK, now for demanding payment in Gold?
Lets not do that before the Declaration of Independece is issued.
We will need elbow room to land the aircraft.
<< <i>Hey FC!!
What's the rule? I have to run everything by YOU, first, before I post?
That comment only makes me want to do it more!
Its good for you to read, it makes your brain smarter and your life richer (not money-wise). >>
Nah! He doesn't feel richer unless he can flip it.
"Not money-wise" doesn't seem to be in his vocabulary.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Under these fixed rate systems more and more business is conducted outside the reach of governments and their taxing authority.
Couple an ever decreasing tax base, as more of each nations economies move underground, with all the unfunded social program liabitlies of most western nations, it would spell diaster for the industrialized world.
<< <i>You're right about there being plenty of land. I read something a while back that said you could put the entire world's population in Texas and house them all in 3 bedroom homes on quarter acre lots.
Lets not do that before the Declaration of Independece is issued.
We will need elbow room to land the aircraft. >>
Not too worry.
I suspect we'd show the Feds what border enforcement really is.
A part of me sort of wants to see what such a move would do to the pinheads in DC, just the threat of it alone would get their attention.
When they realized we have the largest US port on the Atlantic side and the vast majority of the refineries, they just might go into a seizure.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>Hey FC!!
What's the rule? I have to run everything by YOU, first, before I post?
That comment only makes me want to do it more!
Its good for you to read, it makes your brain smarter and your life richer (not money-wise). >>
did i say not to post it? of course not. everyone here can post as they
wish.
i am just disappointed you thought it was worth posting. it was bull
crap and you posted it like it was serious reading material that we
could learn something from concerning the main topic it was trying
to discuss.
if you did not take it serious... i have no idea why you posted it then.
Still like stocks, fc?
Added - to be fair, tomorrow could see a bigger move in either direction. That's just the way it is until the blowoff is over. And that could be awhile.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>coinboy, posting articles like that is not very constructive. that is fruit loop
material in "my opinion". everything i have read from more serious new sources
gave me the impression that the article content below was not even discussed at all.
period. nada. none. that article writer is blowing smoke from his backside. >>
a more serious news source
<< <i>For example, $730 in Paper $ buys 1 ounce of Gold the day before, right? The next day it takes $1,460 in Paper $ to buy that same 1 ounce of Gold.
I'm having a hard time seeing how that would be an advantage. The price of all other goods and services would nominally double overnight as well. Since there's no linkage between gold and the dollar (as has been pointed out endlessly), wouldn't it be the same thing as saying that your $10,000 car would double in value to $20,000 overnight? >>
It would be a SERIOUS advantage if your FIXED terms mortgage stayed at its current price while your hard assets doubled, would it not?