Now who's to say we didn't transfer ownership of that gold to someone else but are still keeping in in storage for them at any of the US gold depositories?
Yes, that's exactly the problem. You see, even if we did a thorough, independent "audit", and even if we included fancy electronic validation that the bars were really gold, and even if we found every ounce at Fort Knox, it wouldn't be good enough for the conspiracy people. They would then say that there was no proof that the government still owned that gold. Basically, the people who want the audit have a vested interest in disparaging our government and in encouraging gold ownership.
Basically, the people who want the audit have a vested interest in disparaging our government and in encouraging gold ownership.
The converse is equally true, if not more so. The people who don't want the audit have a vested interest in discouraging any accounting of our government's activities and in discouraging gold ownership.
If you question the government, are you now a conspiracy nut case by default? Who is more credible, the government or someone asking for an accounting from the government? It's certainly not just this administration being picked-on, and the requests are not unreasonable.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
The converse is equally true, if not more so. The people who don't want the audit have a vested interest in discouraging any accounting of our government's activities and in discouraging gold ownership.
That's simply not correct. Remember, there is already an annual, independent audit of all Federal Reserve Banks. Here is the link to the 2009 audit for the New York Fed: 2009 Independent Audit of NY Fed Bank
I do think, however, that Ron Paul has a very serious conflict of interest. He owns a couple of million dollars worth of gold mining stocks. He clearly profits if people buy more gold.
Mine is: do the audit, report to the people what is there and who owns it (just in case it's there but has been sold/lent/bartered/etc to some other entity).
I believe not doing it because it would be bad for the country if found missing is like stating you don't want to be woken up if your house is on fire because that would be difficult to deal with. Well, the alternative is worse, much much worse.
Comments
Now who's to say we didn't transfer ownership of that gold to someone else but are still keeping in in storage for them at any of the US gold depositories?
Yes, that's exactly the problem. You see, even if we did a thorough, independent "audit", and even if we included fancy electronic validation that the bars were really gold, and even if we found every ounce at Fort Knox, it wouldn't be good enough for the conspiracy people. They would then say that there was no proof that the government still owned that gold. Basically, the people who want the audit have a vested interest in disparaging our government and in encouraging gold ownership.
The converse is equally true, if not more so. The people who don't want the audit have a vested interest in discouraging any accounting of our government's activities and in discouraging gold ownership.
If you question the government, are you now a conspiracy nut case by default? Who is more credible, the government or someone asking for an accounting from the government? It's certainly not just this administration being picked-on, and the requests are not unreasonable.
I knew it would happen.
That's simply not correct. Remember, there is already an annual, independent audit of all Federal Reserve Banks. Here is the link to the 2009 audit for the New York Fed: 2009 Independent Audit of NY Fed Bank
I do think, however, that Ron Paul has a very serious conflict of interest. He owns a couple of million dollars worth of gold mining stocks. He clearly profits if people buy more gold.
Mine is:
do the audit, report to the people what is there and who owns it (just in case it's there but has been sold/lent/bartered/etc to some other entity).
I believe not doing it because it would be bad for the country if found missing is like stating you don't want to be woken up if your house is on fire because that would be difficult to deal with. Well, the alternative is worse, much much worse.