U.S. Going Back to Gold Standard? Dollar Bill Act of 2009

Aside which, everyone knows that the greenback is backed by the NYC subway box.

Ruben

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And NASA shall amend the law of gravity to reduce the amount of rocket fuel necessary for launching missions.

 

Good one, Hontonai!! :high5:

 

It could happen, but that would mean a really bad depression first. Check out The Great Gold Comeback by James R. Cook isbn:0-9641917-2-5 published by Newsletter Systems. While your at it, check out http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/ .

 

I don't think there is enough gold. I could be wrong, but I know that the American Museum of Natural History puts the worlds total gold composition at something like 30 cubit square feet. At 800/ounce how much gold do you need for a 50 trillion dollar economy?

Ruben

 

I'm watching this video on how monetary system works right now and it just got to the part about andrew Jackson. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912

Your post, Ruben, just shows us the true value of a dollar. It would have to be severely devalued, just like they are doing. (is said They hahaha)

 

The value of a dollar is only a tool for the government to maintain a working economy and civic peace. Once that is understood, the rest of the economy can be understood.

Ruben

 

http://wfhummel.cnchost.com/index.html

 

I would say because this little thing called the constitution says we have to.. but hey the govt doesn't seem to care about that document any more.

 

That is interesting. I never saw any clause in the constitution addressing a gold standard. From where is that derived.

Ruben

 

I don't see why it has to be gold. Backed by anything tangible would be fine with me. The fact that there's a finite amount of the resource is the point actually. That's what limits inflation. Theoretically they can print as much money as they want under the current system, until the real value approaches zero anyways (hyperinflation). Then they'll have to come out with a new dollar, whether they want to or not. I've seen it happen first hand in Peru (Nuevo Sol).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peruvian_nuevo_sol

Deflation, of course, is an entirely different problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation

 

What is "30 cubit square feet"? (Wasn't the Ark build in units of 'cubits'?)

What I think you meant to say is "30 cubic feet". (30 cubic square feet would make no sense at all.)

According to How Stuff Works:

 

similarly

http://periodic.lanl.gov/elements/79.html

It is estimated that all the gold in the world, so far refined, could be placed in a single cube 60 ft. on a side. Of all the elements, gold in its pure state is undoubtedly the most beautiful. It is metallic, having a yellow color when in a mass, but when finely divided it may be black, ruby, or purple. The Purple of Cassius is a delicate test for auric gold. It is the most malleable and ductile metal; 1 oz. of gold can be beaten out to 300 ft2. It is a soft metal and is usually alloyed to give it more strength. It is a good conductor of heat and electricity, and is unaffected by air and most reagents.

 

I read in the Nat Geo mag on gold that there was enoug gold to fill in two olimpic swiming pools.

 

given what they said, the world reserve of gold at 10 billion ounces is pretty close the US GDP alone. that would be nearly 9 trillion dollars total.

Ruben

 

I have been thinking about this, and one of the main problems I think I see with it, is at the present time by law for accounting purposes our gold reserves are valued at 42 dollars a troy oz. So unless they change this and raise the statitory limit on the value of gold then if they were to use the .002 of a troy oz of gold for the value of a dollar. The dollar would only be worth .84. Just like I think before they used the silver reserves to make all the ASE and commems the silver reserve for accounting purposes was only valued at 2 dollars and some odd cents per oz.


Dave

 

wishful thinking, thats all it is.

 

The beauty of the Mexican plan is that subsequent drops in commodity prices don't matter. Once a coin rises to a price like $300, it is always convertible at that price. So the holder captures the upside and has no downside risk. I know the reply is "who would pay $300 for a coin worth $252, but everyday people pay $1 for a piece of paper worth $0.01.

The Mexican idea of protecting the holder is unique. I think their central bank killed it.

 

Correction: Make that a finite amount that's accessible at any given point in time. I'm willing to concede that, even if all the gold on this planet were exhausted, someone would build a rocket and start mining gold on Mars. And now that I think about it, I bet if we had stayed on a gold standard that's exactly what the human race would doing right now, instead of waging never-ending wars against intangible opponents -- Why not just nuke the capitol of Terrorism and Drugs and let everyone celerbate V-day already?

Call it the unintended consequences of allowing multinational monopolists to corrupt free markets. Instead of correcting the mistake (of not enforcing antitrust law) we're exacerbating the problem. JP Morgan, the Rothschilds and Rupert Murdock be damned... :secret:

 

Oh, and one last thing before I leave -- I don't like the rules here and the Internet is like a free country, so I'll contribute elsewhere.

Sustained growth comes from investing in the jobs of the future, which today means technology, not old economy industrials. If public works projects got us out of the Great Depression (debatable) it was only because heavy industry was the "new economy" of that time. Those investments paid dividends for decades afterwards. We're making no such investments today.