Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: DE, this un's fur you, my friend - not a slam, but just some solid info, imo.

By: monkeytrots in 6TH POPE | Recommend this post (0)
Wed, 30 Oct 24 5:26 AM | 15 view(s)
Boardmark this board | 6th Edition Pope Board 		Msg. 59967 of 60008
(This msg. is a reply to 59964 by De_Composed)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

>>> so long as the owner is bright enough to keep his mouth shut.

The flaw in that reasoning is that the first time you use gold to make a purchase, it becomes known that you do indeed have gold, no matter how tight-lipped you are.

On the devaluation - you are correct, I overstated it.

>>> bartering implies government non-sanctioned transactions

Bartering is basic economics, long preceding ANY monetary systems. Except in the most repressive of regimes, it has never been 'sanctioned or impeded' by governments. I have never heard that implication before, that it needed government sanction. Sounds pretty 'ultra left wing' ta me. *w*

As for farmlands being seized - the huge amount of US farmland was seized several decades ago - and turned over to Corporations. Excessive taxes and inheritance seizures were the primary methods used in that corpo-government takeover. Hiking property taxes is a way that governments have of forcing 'turnovers' to developers. Hell, even the Supreme Court in KELO made it far easier to seize private property because the government decides someone else would 'do a better job' with it - ie. make more money for the government. Point being, that time is already HERE and has been for quite a while.

Basically we differ on a completely different view of what 'hard times' means. To you, it seems that it is only the collapse of the US monetary/economic system. To me, hard times is the collapse of world economies - where NO currency retains it's 'value', such as would occur with wide ranging nuclear war, wide spread electromagnetic pulses (man made or solar), true global pandemics, and other such 'end of the world as we know it' scenarios.




Avatar

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: DE, this un's fur you, my friend - not a slam, but just some solid info, imo.
By: De_Composed in 6TH POPE
Wed, 30 Oct 24 4:39 AM 		Msg. 59964 of 60008

mt:

Re: “How many armed guards are you going to be able to hire to protect your gold ? Far easier to steal a few ounces of gold than a few tons of copper.”Zero guards. P.M. is easily hidden and transported - so long as the owner is bright enough to keep his mouth shut. P.M. isn't alone in this. A person can hide and transport jewels and, to a lesser degree, fine art. But then the list of hideable, portable (and durable) stores of wealth grows short. Now add measurable and verifiable to the qualities. Is it easy to tell how many carats a gem contains? Is it easy to tell that gemstones are even real? No, and no. Not for a layman. This last, btw, is an advantage gold has over silver. People recognize gold. (But be sure to bite it to be sure!) Silver, on the other hand, looks very much like nickel, tungsten and other metals, unless it's in the form of a minted coin. It takes an expert to distinguish silver from cheaper metals.

You're right that it's far easier to steal a few ounces of P.M. than a few tons of copper. But a few ounces of P.M. can be kept in a safe deposit box at which point it becomes very hard to steal. That's what you want to do with your P.M. if it isn't government itself that's got you worried. When government is the threat, neither approach (guarded P.M. or guarded copper) works well. That returns us to the question of what's easier to hide - tons of copper or ounces of P.M.?Re: “Also, look at recent history - like the last time the dollar collapsed. Who did better - the farmers with silos full of grain or the people who had all their wealth tied up in gold. The US Gov devalued the dollar by 10:1 overnight by outlawing the personal ownership of gold during hard times. What makes you think they won't do it again?”Please clarify: Were you referring to the Great Depression? You didn't say and I'm forced to assume you were even though that wasn't a dollar collapse. Quite the opposite: It was a banking failure and a dollar shortage.

They probably will do it again. Or maybe something worse like confiscating entire homesteads and farms. Who's going to stop them? But the rest of the history you outlined wasn't how it worked in the U.S.

When our government outlawed personal ownership of gold as it did in 1933, it didn't devalue the dollar, it added value. Better stated, the dollar gained utility (since money-by-decree is only paper. It doesn't have any real value). The problem Roosevelt had before his order was that people were redeeming their dollars for the barbarous metal, causing the dollar's value to fall at a time when he needed it to gain value and jeopardizing the government's gold reserve. Domestically, Roosevelt could bring the practice to an end without many drawbacks. You'll notice that he didn't try that with foreigners, though. He needed American dollars overseas to stay there and even grow, so he continued honoring his pathetic promise to redeem dollars for gold so long as the applicants weren't American citizens. He didn't want foreigners deciding that they preferred pesos or pounds as their reserve currency of choice. Roosevelt knew that international situations were dicey and that the dollar, even then, was the most trusted currency. He figured that few foreigners would want to trade in their dollars for gold at that time and he was right. It wasn't until the 1960s that the policy became a problem and the promise had to be reneged.

Also, when Roosevelt implemented E.O. 6102 - if that's the scenario you were referencing - it wasn't a 10:1 overnight revaluation but 1.67:1. Gold went from roughly $20/oz to about $32/oz.Re: “Much tougher for guv to steal all your grain, copper, oil, gas, and so forth than to find all your gold - or just take it every time you try to use it. From a barter standpoint, I would be in far better shape, and far safer.”We'd need to better define the scenario. Are we talking 1933 America, or 1936 Germany? I know of cases where wealth was smuggled out of countries in the form of P.M. but not in the form of copper. If you've got some examples of that, I'd be interested in hearing them.

Bartering implies a market not sanctioned by government or inclined to follow its rules. Almost anything can be bartered, so I don't think that's what you meant.







« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next