Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire BRICS gold backed currency

Debts are assets until they fail. Then the .f3d.G0v bails them out with money from thin air.

If it isn't money, why do they let you leave with your 'purchases'?

It is the only game in town. The U.S. government declares it the only legal tender and by law it must be accepted, so it is, but is devaluing at a dizzying rate.

You either accept the Federal Reserve IOUs or you don't do business.

1819,1837,1857,1873,1893. there were several smaller ones before 1913. Of course, the largest was in 1929.

You forgot the panic of 1907. As usual the government steps in and uses a crisis to really screw things up. Such as creating a private Federal Reserve in 1913 in response to the previous hiccups. The FR proceeded to loot the country of its gold reserve and sound money.

Then we got 1929 through 1939 which made all the previous "panics" or recessions look like a walk in the park.

Now as the plan comes together we will have our savings and investments devastated by inflation and our real property devastated by taxation to keep the FR banks paid. Private property is at huge risk of being destroyed through taxation. Debts must be paid by somebody and the bankers aren't going to take the hit.

One heck of a racket, loan money printed out of thin air, then charge interest on that same money. This racket is big enough to start wars with anyone willing to buck the system, even WWIII.

I left out 1907 as it was smaller. Doesn't make any less painful for those damaged.

There are a couple of things we as a country have been arguing for a while. National Bank or no? And Stable Currency.

The problem that may overwhelm us is that under the well known 'no free lunch' law you eventually have to pay for what you consume. Gold isn't going to get you a stable currency as long as the law of supply and demand is in place; and it isn't going anywhere.

We are in the runup to WW3. The western bankers are pushing it up right now. Otherwise we wouldn't be doing the insanity of attempting to put Russia in a corner.

One thing I don't get is why bankers, who are a diverse lot, would want a war. Unless bankers is a code word, in which case I would excuse myself and take care of the days chores.

Financial panics aren't caused by the gold standard. They're caused by speculation or dramatic changes in markets.

They haven't gone away since we went to fiat currency, either. They're only mitigated by flooding the market with more worthless currency. In other words, by kicking the can down the road. Eventually, the piper has to be paid.

And when that day comes, it will be much worse than if we had taken our lumps as each downturn had occurred.

there's a lot of content here. Try this on... the Fiat argument is a lot like the Paper argument of the 19th cent.

It was a 1 to 1 ratio classical gold standard prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, after which ours became only a 40% gold backed currency.

During the Great Depression the communist FDR unconstitutionally transformed the Federal Government into a poverty program purveyor. Had it not been for that, we would have quickly recovered from it. The result of making the Federal Government the purveyor of poverty programs was deficit spending, so they illegally departed from the 40% gold standard and began paying folks in dollars with less and less gold reserve backing it, also recalling all the physical gold coins from the American people (ending convertibility within our borders) so the Fed would at least be able to redeem their currency with actual gold abroad.

Then came WWII, during most of which we were trading our goods to Europe in exchange for their gold, so our national coffers of it became gigantic, as most of the gold of Europe drained away. After that war, to help Europe recover, we got Breton Woods, which meant that the US Dollar (backed by gold at 40%) would become the world's reserve currency instead of the actual metal itself (and Europe had plenty of those due to massive loans by us to them). This created the perverse incentive on the part of the United States to export our inflation to the rest of the world, while enjoying prosperity at home, by simply printing up as much currency as we desired.

During Nam word got out that we were doing this, and European nations started asking to redeem their dollars for gold. We only possessed a tiny fraction of the gold we were supposed to to back all that currency, so Nixon had to close the gold exchange window (1971), converting our currency into a 100% fiat currency. Out of control spending really went into high gear after that, leading to where we are today.

So, every fractional departure we took away from gold and silver as money took us further down the path to destruction.

Houston 2 is a kghunt

-Reuters

The central bankers of the western world may be diverse in some ways but they are working toward a single goal. World domination. One world dictatorship by an oligarchy. If it walks like a duck, etc. Why else would the west be so intent on destroying an independent Russia which unless invaded (Napoleon-Hitler) has historically been isolationist and nationalist.

Hint: Russia has a huge land mass and huge untapped natural resources. It is a prize of immense wealth and world domination cannot succeed with Russia being independent.

Russian resources have recovery limitations. These is also a large pain in the ass factor when trying to do business there. I don't think the bankers of the world are organized enough to do what you fear. They are more often responding to events than driving them.

The Invisible Hand is still supreme as a driver of economic forces.

My favorite Psalm.

It's all grifters playing a Ponzi scheme.... our current system that is... gold standard brings accountability, can't have that

Our overlords go to great lengths to hide how fiat money works.

Money

Great Article. Murray Rothbard’s What Has Government Done to Our Money? is one of my favorites on the subject. I've read it three or four times.

Good analysis...don't think gold is the answer. Sound monetary policy would cause a recession but is the only way I see. Problem is, there is no support for it.

Have you read Free to Choose?