Ron Paul: Is there gold in Ft. Knox?

derryb

Introduces Bill to make them prove it

What do you think the price wold do if the vaults are empty?

mrearlygold

There's plenty of ignorant replies in the same thread on the other forum.

The ignorance is amazing.

derryb

PMs in the Coin Forum?

BigMoneyLewis

All the Ft. Knox gold was moved to underground London back when Nixon was president .
Taking the U.S off the gold standard and taking possesion of all our gold was another step
in the Rothschild's plan to control the U.S (economy) much like the Federal reserve act was also
part of the plan.
It's all Part of a little thing most people refer to as the "New World Order"
Once you control the money, you control the people.
Globalization is right around the corner unless the general population wakes up and grows a backbone.
Let's unite and legalize the constitution !
Lets take this country back from the politicians and the higher ups that control the politicians strings.
The country belongs to the people, not the politicians (they work for us).
The politicians are simply our employees . When they screw up, give 'em the big boot.


Lewis

EagleEye

bestmr

I say he should try and break in to see if there is some in there.

Bear

For 10 dollars, I will send you the formula for turning

gold and silver into lead.

Justacommeman

<< <i>There's plenty of ignorant replies in the same thread on the other forum.

The ignorance is amazing. >>



I resisted even opening that thread until now. I hated to even post to it...........I feel dirty. MJ

PerryHall

<< <i>PMs in the Coin Forum? >>



Agree. That thread should have been started here and not in the coin forum.

SeaEagleCoins

<< <i>

<< <i>There's plenty of ignorant replies in the same thread on the other forum.

The ignorance is amazing. >>



I resisted even opening that thread until now. I hated to even post to it...........I feel dirty. MJ >>




Since this forum is where "that" thread belongs... here is my post to "that" thread just posted this morning...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know if there is a gold reserve or not...

I don't know if gold will always be considered valuable by society (or some members of society)... even though it has been considered such through most, if not all, of recorded history...

I don't know why people insist on believing information being provided through the media or from politicians (with their own agenda) or so-called experts... or believe so-called "independant" agencies staffed by people they have never met who might just be blowing smoke to feed their own personal agenda...

I don't know why folks are so flat out naive...

I am not picking sides in this horse race... just amazed at how self assured folks can be when they have no direct way of confirming what they vehemently believe in


I don't really even know why coins are considered valuable... other than a bunch of folks agreeing that they are... and that's the real bottom line IMHO... value is not pre-determined... it is an agreement based on trust... and as fragile or strong as the trust that binds any relationship or relationships...


And last but not least... I don't know why this thread is on the US Coin Forum rather than the PM Forum...


one more thing... I don't know why I wrote all this... I guess I just felt like it...

roadrunner

Yeah, I feel dirty too for opening it but I wanted to respond to an issue brought up:

Some say that: "even if we did 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."

Unfortunately that's correct....such an audit would not be good enough in today's gold world. I'm not a conspiracy person. But I do know that the IMF condones and expects double couting of central bank gold transactions, and most if not all CB's do it. If I lease gold to you, we both count it on our books as an asset, even if the chance of it ever being returned to me is zero. If I do a swap, the same thing occurs. Anyone looking superficially at the physical gold has no clue who actually owns it. At the FED bank in NY numerous nations have gold stored there under US security. Therefore, without a detailed accounting of the proper books, there's no way to do a correct and proper 100% audit. Shouldn't a 100% "independent audit include a minor thing like ownership considering the abundance of swaps and leases in the gold business? If you or I were told do a 100% complete audit of the financial condition of a major bank like JPMorgan would you consider it necessary to request access to their off-balance sheet assets/liabilities (such as derivatives) to determine their true financial condition? So why in the gold world would we neglect the "trivial" issue of who has the legal title to the gold that is leased/swapped to assess the financial condition of that entity? When you go to inspect a car advertised for sale do you just "inventory" the car's physical condition and appearance or do you also look at who actually owns the darn thing so you can pay the correct person...and not someone who doesn't have clear title to ownership? Or course in reality, no auditor gets to see JPM's otc derivatives book and neither does anyone auditing US gold stocks/holdings get to see the gold swap and lease book....at least not the uncooked book.

roadrunner

1jester

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>There's plenty of ignorant replies in the same thread on the other forum.

The ignorance is amazing. >>



I resisted even opening that thread until now. I hated to even post to it...........I feel dirty. MJ >>




Since this forum is where "that" thread belongs... here is my post to "that" thread just posted this morning...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know if there is a gold reserve or not...

I don't know if gold will always be considered valuable by society (or some members of society)... even though it has been considered such through most, if not all, of recorded history...

I don't know why people insist on believing information being provided through the media or from politicians (with their own agenda) or so-called experts... or believe so-called "independant" agencies staffed by people they have never met who might just be blowing smoke to feed their own personal agenda...

I don't know why folks are so flat out naive...

I am not picking sides in this horse race... just amazed at how self assured folks can be when they have no direct way of confirming what they vehemently believe in


I don't really even know why coins are considered valuable... other than a bunch of folks agreeing that they are... and that's the real bottom line IMHO... value is not pre-determined... it is an agreement based on trust... and as fragile or strong as the trust that binds any relationship or relationships...


And last but not least... I don't know why this thread is on the US Coin Forum rather than the PM Forum...


one more thing... I don't know why I wrote all this... I guess I just felt like it...


>>



You, sir, don't seem to know very much...

JoesMaName

<< <i>Yeah, I feel dirty too for opening it but I wanted to respond to an issue brought up:

Some say that: "even if we did 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."

Unfortunately that's correct....such an audit would not be good enough in today's gold world. I'm not a conspiracy person. But I do know that the IMF condones and expects double couting of central bank gold transactions, and most if not all CB's do it. If I lease gold to you, we both count it on our books as an asset, even if the chance of it ever being returned to me is zero. If I do a swap, the same thing occurs. Anyone looking superficially at the physical gold has no clue who actually owns it. At the FED bank in NY numerous nations have gold stored there under US security. Therefore, without a detailed accounting of the proper books, there's no way to do a correct and proper 100% audit. Shouldn't a 100% "independent audit include a minor thing like ownership considering the abundance of swaps and leases in the gold business? If you or I were told do a 100% complete audit of the financial condition of a major bank like JPMorgan would you consider it necessary to request access to their off-balance sheet assets/liabilities (such as derivatives) to determine their true financial condition? So why in the gold world would we neglect the "trivial" issue of who has the legal title to the gold that is leased/swapped to assess the financial condition of that entity? When you go to inspect a car advertised for sale do you just "inventory" the car's physical condition and appearance or do you also look at who actually owns the darn thing so you can pay the correct person...and not someone who doesn't have clear title to ownership? Or course in reality, no auditor gets to see JPM's otc derivatives book and neither does anyone auditing US gold stocks/holdings get to see the gold swap and lease book....at least not the uncooked book.

roadrunner >>



So if I understand you correctly: Not only could they have sold all our gold, but if they've done it right, they've sold it multiple times!
And still appear to own it!
Brilliant!

Opps...
Hope we haven't given anyone ideas....

jmski52

Every business has to account for inventory at least once a year for tax purposes. The government should be accountable, and insisting on a gold audit shouldn't make it conspiracy theory fodder.

Those who disparage anyone for asking for an audit should be looked at more closely, not the ones asking for accountability.

Justacommeman

<< <i>Every business has to account for inventory at least once a year for tax purposes. The government should be accountable, and insisting on a gold audit shouldn't make it conspiracy theory fodder.

Those who disparage anyone for asking for an audit should be looked at more closely, not the ones asking for accountability. >>



Nope. According to "the others" the one's asking for the audit are the nut jobs and conspiracy theorists. I think I cracked a rib laughing so hard when someone on the Coin Forum suggested that taxpayers shouldn't be burdened will the bill for the audit. He was serious too

MJ

jmski52

MJ, doesn't it sometimes remind you of living in the "Bizzarro World"?

EagleEye

According to "the others" the one's asking for the audit are the nut jobs and conspiracy theorists.

MJ,

I never said those wanting to audit the reserves were nut jobs, and to be clear, arguing against an audit does not necessarily mean we as a country don't have to watch our assets carefully. It just that you should be able to audit the stocks by checking to see if the seals on the vaults have not been tampered with, not by physically counting bars. The Tungsten conspiracists are the nut jobs.

Justacommeman

<< <i>According to "the others" the one's asking for the audit are the nut jobs and conspiracy theorists.

MJ,

I never said those wanting to audit the reserves were nut jobs, and to be clear, arguing against an audit does not necessarily mean we as a country don't have to watch our assets carefully. It just that you should be able to audit the stocks by checking to see if the seals on the vaults have not been tampered with, not by physically counting bars. The Tungsten conspiracists are the nut jobs. >>



Rick, I believe you were amongst "the others" in your camp but I wasn't singling you out. I do stand my by observation of Camp EyesWideShut regardless..................MJ

roadrunner

Those wanting to do an audit w/o checking what the actual books say are citizens in good standing of Pebbleton, USA.

roadrunner

derryb

All other holdings of the US government are audited by the US comptroller and reported to the taxpayer, physical gold should be no exception (unless of course there is something to hide).

greatnortherncoin

its gone

derryb

<< <i>its gone >>

thatboyaintright

What difference does it make ?? If its all there and its all still ours, its worth what... $160-$200 billion ? That very little compared to our GDP. Our government spends that much in a month. I guess if its just gold plated tungsten in those vaults, we just have to buy one less aircraft carrier next year. and it we'll call it even....what a shame.

1jester

Well, we should be worried about it, even at the "official" value of about $42/oz, or today's "market" value of $1250/oz, because both of those values are grossly undervalued. And that's why central banks even hold gold, because they know the true value of gold, which is far higher than the book value or market value.

I also fall into the category of the doubting Thomases. Either put up or shut up. Allow a full audit or assume there's nothing there (or ours).

PerryHall

<< <i>its gone >>



Where did it go?

CaptHenway

Severe case of THS here........

PerryHall

<< <i>Severe case of THS here........ >>

THS?

CaptHenway

<< <i>

<< <i>Severe case of THS here........ >>

THS? >>




Tinfoil Hat Syndrome.........

roadrunner

The tin foil hats have been squarely on our heads since the Gold & Economics thread started back in 2004. There may be some wear and tear on the slightly aged foil but it's stayed put for the past 6 years. It's gonna take more than mere words and a few headwinds to knock it off.

The gold that each Central Bank carries for its nation is more symbolic than anything else. Whether we want to admit it or not that gold is implicitly backing the currencies in question, at least in the eyes of other bankers. What would happen to the dollar tomorrow if Geither came out and said all 8100 tons had been sold off over the past 20 yrs? It's called leverage. The value of that gold goes FAR beyond it's market melt value, and always has. That's why there will be no formal, 100% audit of our gold stocks.

roadrunner

CaptHenway

Quite seriously, is there any audit you would believe?
Would every bar have to be melted down, recast and re-assayed?
Even then, would you believe them?

jmski52

Many businesses, if not every one, have to produce inventory results at least annually for an inventory tax. This includes all types of manufacturing plants, distribution warehouses, storage facilities and retail stores. This is done at a significant cost, while operations are shut down for inventory and employees are sent scurrying around to count pallets, drums, bins, work-in-process and even piles of sand. (As I think about it, an inventory tax is very counterproductive because it forces businesses to reduce inventories when it might be a stupid thing to do at that particular point in the business cycle.)

If the government can't conduct a simple inventory and a few random spot tests on some of the bars at least once every decade or so, then I'd say there is a problem. It's not like there's never been a case of corruption in government. I don't see the tin foil hat assertion as being valid.

Let's talk about accountability. When you are looking at a new unnecessary and onerous reporting requirement for any transaction over $600, there is a huge disparity in not having the government account for assets that are actually owned by the people. At the same time, the people are going to be forced to jump through all kinds of stupid hoops in order to document just how they are (legally) spending their own darned money. Why? The government is clearly abusing their power in both directions, imo.

And since we are talking about inventory, in spite of a 2,000 "page financial reform bill" nobody outside the Fed is allowed to even know who is holding the inventory of $trillions in bad derivatives. Instead, those offenders are given a free pass and wads of cash for bonuses and nobody get prosecuted or even booted from his job. Isn't it the government's job to protect the citizens from financial malfeasance by the banks? The reform didn't stop or prohibit the public securitization of private debt - it legitimized it and allowed it to continue unabated. What's THAT about? And the FASB's standards were changed to make it "ok" to overvalue stuff that nobody will buy, except that the Treasury is now willing to trade Treasuries for it. Creating new public debt to pay off bankers' derivative gambling debts. Nice touch, eh?

How much of this do you think that JSP pays any attention to? Probably more than you think, but less than he should.

I have to reiterate, "What's the problem with doing a simple inventory from time to time?"

yellowkid

<< <i>Many businesses, if not every one, have to produce inventory results at least annually for an inventory tax. This includes all types of manufacturing plants, distribution warehouses, storage facilities and retail stores. This is done at a significant cost, while operations are shut down for inventory and employees are sent scurrying around to count pallets, drums, bins, work-in-process and even piles of sand. (As I think about it, an inventory tax is very counterproductive because it forces businesses to reduce inventories when it might be a stupid thing to do at that particular point in the business cycle.)

If the government can't conduct a simple inventory and a few random spot tests on some of the bars at least once every decade or so, then I'd say there is a problem. It's not like there's never been a case of corruption in government. I don't see the tin foil hat assertion as being valid.

Let's talk about accountability. When you are looking at a new unnecessary and onerous reporting requirement for any transaction over $600, there is a huge disparity in not having the government account for assets that are actually owned by the people. At the same time, the people are going to be forced to jump through all kinds of stupid hoops in order to document just how they are (legally) spending their own darned money. Why? The government is clearly abusing their power in both directions, imo.

And since we are talking about inventory, in spite of a 2,000 "page financial reform bill" nobody outside the Fed is allowed to even know who is holding the inventory of $trillions in bad derivatives. Instead, those offenders are given a free pass and wads of cash for bonuses and nobody get prosecuted or even booted from his job. Isn't it the government's job to protect the citizens from financial malfeasance by the banks? The reform didn't stop or prohibit the public securitization of private debt - it legitimized it and allowed it to continue unabated. What's THAT about? And the FASB's standards were changed to make it "ok" to overvalue stuff that nobody will buy, except that the Treasury is now willing to trade Treasuries for it. Creating new public debt to pay off bankers' derivative gambling debts. Nice touch, eh?

How much of this do you think that JSP pays any attention to? Probably more than you think, but less than he should.

I have to reiterate, "What's the problem with doing a simple inventory from time to time?" >>



Because they follow the maxim that says "do as I say, not as I do"

CaptHenway

But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

jmski52

But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

A tiny fraction of the cost of building, staffing, protecting and maintaining a permanent high security gold storage facility. Every ten years = drop in bucket.

We've been off the gold standard for 40 years. What's the point of incurring all the expense of keeping the biggest stash of gold in the world?

Something in this picture just isn't making any sense at all. Aren't fiat currencies "good enough"?

mrearlygold

<< <i>But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

A tiny fraction of the cost of building, staffing, protecting and maintaining a permanent high security gold storage facility. Every ten years = drop in bucket.

We've been off the gold standard for 40 years. What's the point of incurring all the expense of keeping the biggest stash of gold in the world?

Something in this picture just isn't making any sense at all. Aren't fiat currencies "good enough"? >>

CaptHenway

<< <i>But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

A tiny fraction of the cost of building, staffing, protecting and maintaining a permanent high security gold storage facility. Every ten years = drop in bucket.

We've been off the gold standard for 40 years. What's the point of incurring all the expense of keeping the biggest stash of gold in the world?

Something in this picture just isn't making any sense at all. Aren't fiat currencies "good enough"? >>



$5 million?
$25 million?
$50 million?
How much are you willing to spend to be satisfied?
Answer the question.

jmski52

How about $3 million? That would probably cover a basic audit with some sampling and assays.

It's hardly a cost issue. They could sell off 2,407 oz. of the 147,341,858 oz. that are stored to obtain the $3,000,000.

Now you should answer mine. I don't know how much it costs us on an annual basis to keep the stuff but, "What's the point of incurring all the expense of keeping the biggest stash of gold in the world?"

Are you saying that spending money for an audit is too expensive to justify an accounting?

roadrunner

But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

I'd offer to do it for $1 MILLION. I could hire 100 accountants and pay them <$5,000 each. Rest would go towards per diem, lodging, assaying, computers, guards, etc. Figure on about 2 weeks to inventory Fort Knox (about 40 bars per hour per person). But something tells me that for such an historic event I'd get a lot of volunteers who would do the work for nothing. There are sophisticated detectors out there that can measure for thermal/electrical conductivity, speed of sound, and other parameters that should rule out tungsten without having to melt down a huge pile of bars. Even if only half the bars were held, inspected, and counted, that would be a successful audit imo. The others could just be counted in place. With over half a million equivalent 400 oz bars, it's a lot of work. Lodging in barracks at Fort Knox would be fine with me...saves money.

What type of audit would convince me? One that was done by people that are not "owned" by the govt with members of the general populace generously sprinkled in, counting the bars, and doing enough non-destructive tests on say at least 10-20% of them at random to ensure they are all really gold. I'd also need to see the real books of leases, swaps, and sales. Without that, the inventory at best would merely prove that the gold is still here on US soil, but with ownership unproven.

The US govt spends $4 BILLION per day. It routinely loses track of up to $50 BILL at a crack (HUD affair, Iraq, etc.). Certainly $1 MILLION to do an inventory on the nations dowry is a simple price to pay (the equivalent of about 15 seconds of new US debt). I'd bet the PTP (plunge protection team) spends over a MILLION dollars each hour (or minute) just to jerk the financial markets around. If all the gold were found to be there it would probably knock the price of gold down somewhat and help the PTP cause. Win-Win!

roadrunner

jmski52

Go ahead roadrunner - undercut my price!

roadrunner

Too many years of reviewing bids and contracts.

But what couldn't be learned after spending just $1 MILL? I don't know if there's a top flight auditing company that I would trust. Would rather just hire 100 mixed accountant types or 5th graders with strong backs.

And if the bean counters give too much grief over the $1 MILL, then cancel one state dinner or one outing in Air Force One. That should cover it.

roadrunner

CaptHenway

<< <i>But seriously......what type of an audit would it take to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt, and how many millions of the taxpayers' dollars are you willing to spend to conduct this audit?

I'd offer to do it for $1 MILLION. I could hire 100 accountants and pay them $5,000 each. Rest would go towards per diem, lodging, and assaying. Figure on about 2 weeks to inventory Fort Knox (about 40 bars per hour per person). But something tells me that for such an historic event I'd get a lot of volunteers who would do the work for nothing. There are sophisticated detectors out there that can measure for conductivity, speed of sound, and other parameters that should rule out tungsten without having to melt down a huge pile of bars. Even if only half the bars were held, inspected, and counted, that would be a successful audit imo. The others could just be counted in place. With over half a million equivalent 400 oz bars, it's a lot of work. Lodging in barracks at Fort Knox would be fine with me...saves money.

What type of audit would convince me? One that was done by people that are not "owned" by the govt with members of the general populace tossed in, counting the bars, and doing enough non-destructive tests on say at least 10-30% of them at random to ensure they are all really gold. I'd also need to see the real books of leases, swaps, and sales. Without that the inventory at best would merely prove that the gold is still on US soil but doesn't prove ownership.

The US govt spends $4 BILLION per day. It routinely loses track of up to $50 BILL at a crack (HUD affair, Iraq, etc.). Certainly $1 MILLION to do an inventory on the nations dowry is a simple price to pay (the equivalent of about 15 seconds of new US debt). I'd bet the PTP (plunge protection team) spends over a MILLION dollars each hour (or minute) just to jerk the financial markets around. If all the gold were found to be there it would probably knock the price of gold down somewhat and help the PTP cause. Win-Win!

roadrunner >>



Let's say you have a vault that is 75-80% full by volume, giving you some room to walk around in the front. How are you going to count the bars in the back and be sure they aren't sections of 2x4?

You have to start with one full Vault A and empty vault B. Have a crew load up a cart with x number of bars (whatever the cart will hold) and wheel it out of vault A. Have somebody outside the vault pick one bar at random and do your weight and resonance tests. Let the crew stand around waiting while he does this. Wheel the cart to the door to Vault B and have some guy there record the random weights, and bar numbers if applicable, while the crew waits some more. Then let the crew stack the bars in the back of Vault B and go back to Vault A. Repeat the process. At night place unique lead seals on both Vault A and Vault B to make sure nobody tampers with them during the night. Continue the next morning, and subsequent days, until done. Then put a seal on Vault B and open Vault C. Repeat the process emptying Vault C into Vault A.

The number of teams that can do this at the same time and speed up the process depends on how many empty vaults there are to empty other vault into. Are there any empty vaults available? I don't know.

At your estimated rate of 40 bars per hour, 500,000 bars would take one crew with one tester and one recorder 12,500 hours, or 1,562.5 eight-hour days, or 6.25 years assuming everybody got two weeks vacation each year. Double the crews and you halve the time. Triple the crews and get done in only a little over two years.

You might want to have two recorders, one counting the bars out of Vault A and another counting them into Vault B just to check each other's work, plus at least one guard at each vault and a third guard to fill in while the others take turn eating and going to the potty.

Still think you can do it for $1 million?

Do you think that all of the nay-sayers will take your word that you did it hoestly and correctly, or will they now doubt YOU???

TD

meluaufeet

I'd also need to see the real books of leases, swaps, and sales. Without that, the inventory at best would merely prove that the gold is still here on US soil, but with ownership unproven.




If given a choice between an audit of the vault... or the books... I prefer the books. After all, the Fed has testified to using leases.

CaptHenway

<< <i>How about $3 million? That would probably cover a basic audit with some sampling and assays.

It's hardly a cost issue. They could sell off 2,407 oz. of the 147,341,858 oz. that are stored to obtain the $3,000,000.

Now you should answer mine. I don't know how much it costs us on an annual basis to keep the stuff but, "What's the point of incurring all the expense of keeping the biggest stash of gold in the world?"

Are you saying that spending money for an audit is too expensive to justify an accounting? >>



My estimation of what such an audit might entail appears above. I believe it would be very expensive to complete. We won't worry about the cost of the gold abraded off of all 500,000 bars as they are moved, as the floor sweepings can be accumulated and re-refined.

I think it is good that the U.S. owns a tremendous boodle of gold. I do not begrudge the annual expense to hold that gold, since the cost of the facility is long-since paid off and much of the security for it is provide by the Fort Know Army Base (my brother trained there).

HOWEVER, I do not think that everybody would be satisfied by such an audit. Some nay-sayers would still say that the auditors lied, or that the gold was stolen the week after the audit was finished.

TD

meluaufeet

"HOWEVER, I do not think that everybody would be satisfied by such an audit."


I can't argue with that... especially if a congressional committee was in charge... its not the same, but there is still much disagreement with the findings of the 911 Commision and Warren Commission, for example.

If its a matter of money ( let me rehpase that to FRN's ) I'd buy my share of Ft. Knox / Ny Bank / Fed Books... silver or gold commems... to help finance it.

EagleEye

Playing fact referee:

Jmski said- We've been off the gold standard for 40 years

Actually in 1971 Nixon removed the United States from gold convertibility in international transactions. He did it without Congressional approval or consultation with the IMF or our world partners. The US went off of the "Gold Standard" in 1933.

I don't mean to hijack the thread, just want to put some facts in this thread (It sure needs it).

KUCH

Seriously considering what RR said.......... I would first examine the books. Who does own that yellow metal in Fort Knox? If documents prove others have title, then any physical audit is unneccesary. What if ledger shows some US ownership?............. Physical audit would probably take 1 week.

Why doesn't the US government wish to inventory it's gold? It's suspicious.

jmski52

I don't mean to hijack the thread, just want to put some facts in this thread (I sure needs it).

Why not add something substantiative then? I would argue that Nixon's default on gold convertibility in international transactions was probably one of the more important aspects of the gold standard, so my statement isn't all that inaccurate.

Since we're naming names - maybe LBJ shouldn't have spent as much effort focused on bankrupting the country with the Great Society and the Vietnam War before Nixon took office. And since you are concerned about the facts - there were many things FDR did without precedent or congressional approval pertaining to the gold standard - so maybe the demonization should start way back at that point, or even back to Hoover, whose template for big government is what FDR adopted, if you really wanna get picky about it.

EagleEye

You can argue, as you say, but I wasn't trying be argumentative, just pointing out facts. What's your problem? why so mean?

jmski52

You keep trying to bait people into political arguments, instead of discussing the issue. You said you weren't trying to hijack the thread, but you were - because your "point" doesn't change the impetus of my statement at all.

It's interesting that CaptnHenway and I can question each other and even disagree on an issue without injecting irrelevant political points into the conversation, but that seems to be the first thing on your agenda when you post.

You should make a contribution to the discussion of the issue. You did not. Do you care to explain yourself? Why so hostile?

roadrunner

At your estimated rate of 40 bars per hour, 500,000 bars would take one crew with one tester and one recorder 12,500 hours, or 1,562.5 eight-hour days, or 6.25 years assuming everybody got two weeks vacation each year......Still think you can do it for $1 million?

Yeah, for $1 MILLION. And when that money is spent the audit is over. It will still be the best audit the vaults would have had in over 50 yrs. And considering I'm one of the biggest skeptics out there, I think it would satisfy 99% of Americans. The hardest skeptics in the <1% (like yourself and EE) might never be satisfied even if every ounce were melted, assayed and then reformatted back into bars (ie the bars were swapped after reformatting). Your 6.25 yrs is if ONE lone individual did the entire job by themselves which is unrealistic. But if that's the case, yeah, give the guy 2 weeks of vacation each year...and then enter him in the Mr. Olympia after the audit is done. By the time that one guy inventoried the gold in 2017 there's no doubt in my mind that all of the gold would have been leased or swapped by that time (lol). The books in 2017 would look nothing like the physical gold in earlier years.

100 people x 40 bars/hr x 8 hrs/day x 10 days = 320,000 bars (roughly within 10% of whats purported to be in Fort Knox - 147M troy ounces or 367,500 four hundred oz. bars). That's 8,000 manhours. I would not be testing every bar, only 10-30%. But certainly those on the outside or inside of any stack can be simply testing on contact without removal. With the technology available to science today, there are testers that can be had for taking tungsten out of the equation. Conductivities, sound speed and other parameters will negate everything else. Wood bars even with a metal coat won't test very well against a simple $3,000 depth/UT device. I used those on boiler tubes for years and they are quite accurate to measure dimensions to .001 and sound speed to 1 ft/sec. You could test a bar with this in 5-10 seconds. I also mentioned that even if only half the bars were tested (160,000 or 20 bars per hour per man) the audit would still be a huge improvement over what's been done the past 50 yrs. and determine if the gold (in the right purity and qty) is either there or not. It would be best to try and avoid assaying say more than 100 bars pulled from random locations. I think that hand held detectors calibrated to both 90% coin gold and .995 good delivery bars should do the trick for the vast majority of bars. Since all the GD bars should be previously stamped from their former assays, that paper work needs to be made available. There are approx 28-30 vaults, each about 10 ft. square (8 ft tall?). That would allow 4 accountants/workers per vault. They have 2 weeks to get their vault done or about 1 lineal foot per day. One other source indicated the vaults hold 30,000 bars each would suggest only 12 vaults to inspect. Using gold's density of 1 cu inch = 10.13 troy oz, that would imply 8397 ft3 of space or a cube roughly 20ft per side. 12 vaults of around 9 ft per side could contain about 360,000 bars.

My team is waiting and we're all packed. All we need is that $1 MILL Purchase Order signed by Tim Geithner and we'll be on our way to Ft. Knox. And to just to satisfy the skeptics my choices for positions #99 and #100 would be CaptHenway and EagleEye.

roadrunner

CaptHenway

So, you think you can count the bars in a well-packed vault without having to take them out of the vault to count the ones way in the back?
TD