Question for those with a lot of silver.
PerryHall
Posts: 46,140 ✭✭✭✭✭
Silver bullion in the form of bars, ASE's, etc can be heavy and bulky if you have been stacking for several years and have managed to accumulate a significant quantity. Have any of you considered converting your silver stash to gold to reduce the weight and bulk of your hoard?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
0
Comments
It becomes an issue of storage volume, weight etc.
I have converted some of my silver to gold right here through these boards.
Probably will do it again.
Gold is Sooooo much easier to store, doesn't spot/less reactive and…easy to grab & go if needed!
A single 10" x 10" size safe deposit box at my bank will (if filled) comfortably accommodate 2,800 ounces of silver. Four such safe deposit boxes would permit storing over 10,000 ounces. Its all secure, not cluttering my home and affordable.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
A few years ago I found myself with a higher percentage of gold than I felt comfortable with. So I traded my B&M straight up 10 PAMP 1-ounce bars for 10 platinum maple leafs. The deal was slightly in his favor at the time. But it's been in my favor now for a long time and I'm glad I went that route.
Silver is crazy heavy in large amounts, though. 20 gold eagles will fit in your hand. The equivalent in silver would be about 100 lbs of clunky metal. Imagine five 20-lb weights on your weight bench, or 3 car batteries.
--Severian the Lame
<< <i>
A single 10" x 10" size safe deposit box at my bank will (if filled) comfortably accommodate 2,800 ounces of silver. >>
They may fit in there comfortably, but I'm not sure that a 10" x 10" that weighs 175 lb is very comfortable on the back.
Buying small gold wastes a lot of extra premium, and I know it makes more sense to buy closer to the oz size then ten 1/10ths.
<< <i>The space required for silver storage will not induce me to switch over to "only gold".
A single 10" x 10" size safe deposit box at my bank will (if filled) comfortably accommodate 2,800 ounces of silver. Four such safe deposit boxes would permit storing over 10,000 ounces. Its all secure, not cluttering my home and affordable. >>
Have you thought about a "worst case scenario" where you could not physically get your metal from the SDB?
How does one discuss or rate the G/S balance. I'm at least 3/4's silver, 'money wize' which means it doesn't take long to have a pile of silver and a handful of gold.
Is there a good average balance to be at?
<< <i>
<< <i>The space required for silver storage will not induce me to switch over to "only gold".
A single 10" x 10" size safe deposit box at my bank will (if filled) comfortably accommodate 2,800 ounces of silver. Four such safe deposit boxes would permit storing over 10,000 ounces. Its all secure, not cluttering my home and affordable. >>
Have you thought about a "worst case scenario" where you could not physically get your metal from the SDB? >>
I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence.
The possibility of being robbed at home concerns me a great deal while being robbed by my bank concerns me not at all.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
A single 10" x 10" size safe deposit box at my bank will (if filled) comfortably accommodate 2,800 ounces of silver. >>
They may fit in there comfortably, but I'm not sure that a 10" x 10" that weighs 175 lb is very comfortable on the back. >>
My bank will dispense with the light gauge metal box if asked. The resulting SDB open space fits 28 USPS small Priority Mail boxes quite nicely. Each such box will hold 10 ten ounce bars.
I would not dream of trying to lift 28 of them at once - one at a time will do.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
You will all laugh but I have a workshop with 2x10 walls and the monster boxes fit just fine between the 2x 10's and if I stack them too high I can always move over to the next stud bay. Never paid a SDB fee yet and have quite a few monster boxes as they also hold the 1 oz tubes of rounds. Fire Dept is 500 yards from the house LOL.....
keep stacking
Tom
<< <i>Holding both metals is definitely better than all of one. The ratio will depend on a lot of factors. Conventional wisdom is to have one's PM portfolio be a higher the closer one is to retirement age. Younger stackers I think will be better off with a higher percentage of silver as they have more time to ride out the more volatile price swings of that metal. >>
Good point. Diversity of PM holdings is never a bad idea.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Something that brings down our electronic infrastructure. No power, no computer, no data.
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
If you are space constrained I could see just switching to gold buying. You obviously have space for what you own at the moment.
If you have bulky silver maybe you could exchange it evenly with someone for a more compact form.
I never thought too much about space with silver but someone was showing me some 10 oz and 1 kilo Koala coins recently and those are ridiculous with regards to how much space silver in that form takes up compared to bars of the same size.
I think of slabbed bullion being the worst case scenario. All that worthless bulky plastic
<< <i>My "worst-case-scenario" wou;dn't be bank or government driven. It would be natural disaster. EMP from the Sun, massive earthquake, meteor sriking the Earth, things of that nature.
Something that brings down our electronic infrastructure. No power, no computer, no data. >>
You might as well throw in Global Thermonuclear War.
I will leave it to others to ponder how to contend with a new Iron Age and focus on concerns of a more probable nature.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same.
<< <i>Mr Binion, just don't move them, n u will be fine...
Plus, Ted, never had to worry about the hassle of selling that massive stockpile.
<< <i>
<< <i>My "worst-case-scenario" wou;dn't be bank or government driven. It would be natural disaster. EMP from the Sun, massive earthquake, meteor sriking the Earth, things of that nature.
Something that brings down our electronic infrastructure. No power, no computer, no data. >>
You might as well throw in Global Thermonuclear War.
I will leave it to others to ponder how to contend with a new Iron Age and focus on concerns of a more probable nature. >>
Actually the EMP from the sun 'A Carrington Event'' is a very real possibility in our lifetime. It's why homeland security has taken an active roll in gathering the stuff to control riots. linky Similar flares have happened and luckily they were pointed away from earth. Since our satellites went up that can measure such events there have been a dozen or so. I take it serious enough to convert some of my stack into protecting the electronic stuff I need to make life easier. Basically a grounded metal shed holding a vehicle, washer, microwave, ham equip.,etc...
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I have as much silver as I can carry by myself in a sturdy backpack or duffle bag, and it's a variety of value density, from some junk silver all the eay up to 4 figure rarities. Gold, similar, have some generic pre-33 and AGEs as well as collector coins. platinum, just a smattering, some of a post-97 type set. While I "get" the appeal of having a literal ton of silver or something, I seek density in the value, preferring to add gold, plat, and numismatic coins rather than bulky junk silver >>
I've thought about platinum many times over the years but I can't bring myself to go there. I visit dealers stop at shows or look at BST posts about platinum and its all museum listings. People trying to sell platinum look desperate , the spreads are too wide .
I was at a coin shop in the boston area and a dealer had 1/4 oz proofs he was asking $500 for , if I go back a year from now they will still be there .
I have a theory that platinum coins are so thinly traded that a lot of dealers are buried in them . They paid too much or got too emotionally invested or whatever and they may be willing to cheerfully negotiate on 99% of their stock but if you try to get a better deal on their 3 lonely platinum coins they get ticked off.
<< <i>I have as much silver as I can carry by myself in a sturdy backpack or duffle bag, and it's a variety of value density, from some junk silver all the eay up to 4 figure rarities. Gold, similar, have some generic pre-33 and AGEs as well as collector coins. platinum, just a smattering, some of a post-97 type set. While I "get" the appeal of having a literal ton of silver or something, I seek density in the value, preferring to add gold, plat, and numismatic coins rather than bulky junk silver >>
where u goin camping???... no jerky, chewbacky, reefer, jd, granola???...
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Anyone with the cash and inclination could have loaded up on US gold coins over a 40 year period at what now looks like a bargain price.
I cannot understand why anyone would have fretted about gold bars when they could load up on generic $20 Double Eagles for a bit over melt. Some stackers today prefer US gold coins over bars when assembling their gold holdings.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins. >>
So, what happened if the government caught you hoarding gold bars?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins. >>
So, what happened if the government caught you hoarding gold bars? >>
Obsess about gold bars if it helps rationalize the fallacy that the government confiscated gold owned by US citizens in the 1930's.
In the 1960's (during the so-called gold confiscation period) anyone with about $10,000 to spend could purchase around 200 generic $20 Double Eagles. 192 ounces of gold in your hands is hardly what I call an oppressive gold confiscation regime.
Smart collectors where loading up on common US gold coins and not fretting about gold bars.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins. >>
So, what happened if the government caught you hoarding gold bars? >>
Obsess about gold bars if it helps rationalize the fallacy that the government confiscated gold owned by US citizens in the 1930's.
In the 1960's (during the so-called gold confiscation period) anyone with about $10,000 to spend could purchase around 200 generic $20 Double Eagles. 192 ounces of gold in your hands is hardly what I call an oppressive gold confiscation regime.
Smart collectors where loading up on common US gold coins and not fretting about gold bars. >>
You still didn't answer my question. There were specific penalties cited for those caught hoarding gold which included fines and imprisonment. While there was a loophole for rare gold coins held by collectors, there was no exception for those holding gold bars. You are entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins. >>
So, what happened if the government caught you hoarding gold bars? >>
Obsess about gold bars if it helps rationalize the fallacy that the government confiscated gold owned by US citizens in the 1930's.
In the 1960's (during the so-called gold confiscation period) anyone with about $10,000 to spend could purchase around 200 generic $20 Double Eagles. 192 ounces of gold in your hands is hardly what I call an oppressive gold confiscation regime.
Smart collectors where loading up on common US gold coins and not fretting about gold bars. >>
You still didn't answer my question. There were specific penalties cited for those caught hoarding gold which included fines and imprisonment. While there was a loophole for rare gold coins held by collectors, there was no exception for those holding gold bars. You are entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts. >>
The fact is that common generic (not just rare) US gold coins were readily available to collectors from 1933 thru 1973. It represents an inconvenient truth for those who claim US citizens could not own gold from 1933-1973. I had an 1843-O $2.50 in my registry set that Max Mehl sold for $4.25 in the 1930's. With gold fixed at $35 at the time the buyer paid $4.25 for $4.23 worth of gold. That is a premium of under 1% when supposedly only "rare"gold coins were exempted.
Perhaps some during the 1950's and 1960's fretted about gold bars; others assembled sizeable collections of US gold coins.
Something as simple as a date set of $20 Double Eagles could represent about 80 ounces of gold. Add in the $1 to $10 denominations and you're looking at a lot of ounces.
I don't recall anyone ever claiming that Eliasberg, Bass, Norweb and Pittman were gold hoarders.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't give anti-bank/anti-government conspiracy theories any credence. >>
There is a precedence for the US government confiscating (stealing) the gold owned by its citizens. If there is an economic emergency, I can see history repeating itself. >>
Gold was demonitized. It was not confiscated. Anyone who wished to retain their gold did so using the numismatic exception. For nearly 40 years anyone who wished to could assemble thousands of ounces of gold in the form of US gold coins with a then current gold price of $40 or less. US gold coins were readily available for anyone with the cash and inclination to spend same. Otherwise how would the major gold collections of that period have been assembled? I don't imagine Eliasberg was worried about gold confiscation. >>
I was referring to gold bars rather than coins. There were severe penalties for not turning them in for paper and it's not like people had any choice in the matter. Sounds like confiscation to me. >>
Forced surrender vs confiscation; pretty much one and the same. >>
You are welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
US gold coins with numismatic value, i.e. a coin collection, were exempted by the Act. You could continue to own what you had and you could add more if you wished. All you needed were the money and the inclination to own US gold coins. US gold coins were readily available for sale. Common generic stuff was just a bit over melt. The major private US gold collections were created openly after 1933. If I had the necessary cash pre-1973 I would have loaded up on US gold coins. >>
I wasn't making up my own facts, but was merely restating the previous poster's opinion in a slightly different way. Forced surrender under the threat of punishment is for all intents and purposes the same as if they'd come into your home or place of business and took it. At least they gave you the equivalent value in paper money. Actually gold bars were allowed if you had a legitimate business/commerce use for them.
"On the other hand, numismatist Tom DeLorey recounts a story told to him by Abe Kosoff. “Abe Kosoff once told me how he had arranged, on behalf of a few wealthy clients, to have bags of U.S. $20s shipped to a European bank PRIOR to the Gold Surrender Act, in anticipation of it and in the expectation that the price of gold would be raised. It was. He was then visited by a U.S. Treasury agent AFTER the Gold Surrender Act who told him that they had been examining bank records to see who had been withdrawing gold coins in the six months prior to the Act, and that according to the records he had withdrawn x number of bags of $20s. He was given a fixed amount of time to return the coins to the Treasury, or face prosecution. He got them back and returned them.”
<< <i>Interesting little tidbit from here from our own Captain Henway.
"On the other hand, numismatist Tom DeLorey recounts a story told to him by Abe Kosoff. “Abe Kosoff once told me how he had arranged, on behalf of a few wealthy clients, to have bags of U.S. $20s shipped to a European bank PRIOR to the Gold Surrender Act, in anticipation of it and in the expectation that the price of gold would be raised. It was. He was then visited by a U.S. Treasury agent AFTER the Gold Surrender Act who told him that they had been examining bank records to see who had been withdrawing gold coins in the six months prior to the Act, and that according to the records he had withdrawn x number of bags of $20s. He was given a fixed amount of time to return the coins to the Treasury, or face prosecution. He got them back and returned them.” >>
Sounds like confiscation to me. He should have just claimed he was a coin collector.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire