why is gold and silver going down right now?

Growth doesn't lead to bubbles' but trying to generate false growth leads to bubbles'. Well there is plenty of ways to generate growth like a revised immigrant policy, relaxing environmental and worker regulations, improving K-12 education, adjust tax policy to increase corporate and foreign investment into US etc.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Extremely important points, especially regulation. Regulation in this country is simply INSANE, and no one not in business can appreciate the level of Dante's **** all levels of government put business through nowadays. If you seriously want the economy to improve, streamline taxes and remove regulations. Its not the amount of money in taxes companies complain about most, its the overly complicated reporting requirements, and the vast array of regulations that is strangling business in this country.

If govrnment can just get out of the way, things would improve. However, way too many government employees trying to justify their jobs for that to happen.

 

With this I have to disagree. With a gold standard absent of fractional reserve banking then gold is the money and only gold is the money. Therefore the only real means of expanding the money supply is through gold production. As gold inventories are increased by the amount of current production it's compunding exponentially decreases the impact future production has on these inventories (the money supply) eventually reaching the point of virtual zero.

 

Under any sort of economy more developed than feudalism, there must be either fractional reserve banking or the circulation of real bills. Adam Smith pointed this out. Paper money won't work either, and nothing else will either if there is no fractional reserve banking or other credit system. This has nothing to do with the quantity of gold.

 

It is you who have changed the context. The discussion was the need for fractional reserve banking or other type of credit system to make the gold system operable. Nobody mentioned fiat and once again, you put words in people's mouth and try to change the subject to one more to your liking. And you should be informed that while the US was on the gold standard, fractional reserve banking was the rule and real bills circulated freely just as Adam Smith suggested.

 

Another history challenged individual.

We were not an industrial power before 1933? Son, Henry Ford started producing the Model T in 1908 and produced 16 million of them over the next 20 years. No other nation in the world had an industrial economy that could or did accomplish anything comparable. Automobile manufacturing requires a huge supply chain that doesn't appear out of thin air.

It was possible, only in the USA, because we had already built a vast railroad network during the 1800s which required huge industries in steel making and many others to support. Prior to that, the war that introduced modern warfare, the Civil War, 1860s, was won by industrial production. A fact not lost on the Europeans who came to study, with great interest what happened. And it was not until the United States entered WWI in 1917 and with it, brought its huge industrial base to bear that Germany was defeated. Germany incorrectly bet the USA could not bring enough resources to bear fast enough before Germany could win it by resuming unrestricted submarine warfare in the Atlantic. They lost that bet.

So your characterisation of the USA being an "agrarian society" while on the gold standard, is a made up fairy tale that, I supposed, that one must create in their mind rather than trust what their eyes tell them by looking at a few history books.

 

The conversation is gold standard vs fiat. If you are arguing something else then you are in the wrong topic. As for Smith, I quoted him correctly. You are offering up opinion and nothing else. I go with the quote as we know what opinions are worth.

 

Britain, France, and Germany were the industrial powers of the age, and to say we were the ones who won WWI is classic jingoism. We brought nothing "to bear" on that battlefield but fresh troops to a weary battle, but more importantly a speech from a President that promised an honorable peace to Germany. Read a little more about WWI than what your crummy websites tell you, and read about Wilson's speech about the League of Nations and Germany's reaction to it.

I have read more about this era than most others Fatima, and for you to call me a "history challenged individual" is literally nothing more than you slinging more poo.

 

Your personal acendote where you try to establish that you have superior credentials than the rest of us, are, as they have proven to be in the past, irrelevant to the conversation at hand. You did not address any point that I made in response to your post about the USA being a bunch of farmers before 1933 and you are no only offering up an opinion of France, Germany & Britain.

Furthermore, this completely avoids the original point in that economic expansion is impossible without bankster paper. Clearly the points I made about Henry Ford, the Civil War industrial production, railroads, WWI (which you are flat wrong about) and a whole host of others, all happened during the gold standard and hence prove this notion to be wrong as well.

 

We are on the same page here - I believe - my responses are to InfleXion and to what I comprehend he is advocating - A Gold Standard with no fractional reserve banking.

 

My conversation is fractional reserve banking under a gold system. If you have a different topic in mind, then don't bother to respond to my posts because you are having a reading comprehension problem. Your Adam Smith quote is irrelevant since the focus is on Smith's comments about the real bills doctrine and not his comments about fiat.

 

I agree with you.

 

Not 'the rest of us" Fatima, just you. Everything in your post was meaningless. The US was 90% farmers/land workers during WWI. We were not the world industrial power, and IDC about Henry Ford. Britain, Germany, and France all had dozens of car manufacturers making better cars than him, (Ever heard of Daimler?). Btw, in this era there was massive amounts of paper money, fractional reserve banking, and many other modern finances to fund all of this.

I seriously do not know what Fatima wants. Maybe he wants me to say, "Yeah, my grandparents had it so much better 80 years ago. They live with their parents for 5 years before they could buy a piece of land to dig a basement house to live in. It was so much nicer to pay half your take home pay in food bills than the 5% today. Overall, the standard of living was SO much higher back then thanks to our friend gold."

A gold standard is an albatross around the neck of any country stupid enough to adopt it. Do we have problems with debt? Yeah, but we will work our way out of it. If by "work our way out" someone thinks inflation, sure let them buy gold or silver as a hedge for that, but a gold standard is simply artificially hindering/crippling your economy for a quaint historical belief.

You seriously have some kind unheard history goggles on if you believe we were anywhere near the economic or military power Britain or Germany was during this era. Personally I simply believe its Fatima trolling again so therefor am done posting on this 3 degrees removed from giving a crap discussion.

 

Then you are still wrong. Real Bills Doctrine isn't about the modern practice of fractional reserve banking. Maybe you should provide an example of exactly what you are talking about. For example, exactly where does the extra gold come from to pay the bankster's interest?

 

Nobody said anything about "best" car. Industrial production isn't about competing against hand built, one of a kind, automobiles. Maybe you don't understand what that means.

The rest of your post is nonsense and has nothing to do with what was posted. I don't want you to do anything beyond address the point and I don't care what you think about your grandma as it's irrelevant. I made a point, you don't believe it, yet you can't support your beliefs with anything credible, hence the personal acnedotes, distractions, etc. If you want to believe the USA wasn't an industrial power, and IMO, the major one, before 1933 then so be it. You haven't said anything to prove otherwise.

[highlight]

[/highlight]Ahh, so the USA was not only a bunch of farmers but "stupid" as well from 1792 until 1933 or 1971 for international. This statement alone demonstrates your grasp of American history.

 

So is gold and silver still going down in this month-old post?

 

Well, first of all, you are so out of the loop here that you failed to notice that justafarmer and I have completed our conversation on the issue you are attempting to hijack and are in agreement. And your reading comprehension scores just dropped again because I never said the Real Bills Doctrine was about fractional reserve banking. It was an either/or comment.

Regarding interest, it seems from this and prior posts you've made that you believe that there must be $1 of currency in circulation for every $1 of asset value in the economy. That's what trips up the goldbugs. There never has been and never will be $1 of currency [either gold or fiat] for every $1 in asset value in the economy. It wasn't true in the US during the 19th century either. Perhaps this was true 6,000 years ago, but it hasn't been for most of human history with economies above the subsistence level.

 

If your conversation has been completed, then there really is no reason for you to continue to carry on about goldbugs and to restate your personal opinion of me. Both are irrelevant.

You quoted Adam Smith out of context, can't explain how what he did write is relevant, and simply got it wrong because you didn't understand it. You did this because you got tripped up on the differences between "fractional reserve banking", "fiat currency" and "paper certificates" It's why you can't give one simple example of what you state. So you are left with calling anyone who disagrees names and doing anything else you can to distract from this mistake.

 

to go back on point which is how this started, yes. and mostly for thr reasons i put forth in page 2 of this thread. the Euro is going to fall more/dollar rise in the near term no matter what the 5year outlook is. so gold down with higher dollar. silver too, maybe more with industrial use declining. look for more QE of some form around june as the market here slips and they restart the budget/debt fight and credit rating outlook. the metals will make a comeback 2nd half.

 

Charming