@bankingreform is it the gold fluctuating or is it the currency you value it in? if you monetize gold, obviously it will not be traded as a commodity as it is today, and will not be able to be manipulated, like it is today, aka "paper gold" and "paper silver" contracts, please tell me what kind of "money" your vision of the reform can offer, that i can put under my pillow as savings today, pull it out in 60 years, and still be able to buy the same or more loafs of bread than i can do today?
But how will this "monetary reform" you keep talking about come about? Though you don't come out and say it, the only way it can be done is by government. In case you forget, these are the same people that allow and encourage fractional reserve banking in the first place, and the ones who constantly bail it out with our tax dollars when they overextend. What needs to be offered is a competing system that people can use, but then governments would probably ban it.
I can appreciate this video. After all, it was bankers who controlled the gold that people were bitching about during 1899s - 1900s
But even still, the global standard should be based on commodities... whats your thoughts of the American system of economics and Webster Tarpey if you heard of him?
William Jennings Bryan, "thou shalt not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold"
1) Ron Paul does talk about making gold and silver legal tender, but he also wants to legalize competition for currencies.
2) Saying gold is a "disaster" and we can't base our currency on it because of fluctuation in its price doesn't make sense. The fluctuations in value are in the dollar not gold. It's like saying "we can't stop printing money because there are fluctuations in our fiat currency"
Either that is a huge flaw in your logic or I'm missing a point.
@nagol1000 Think my message has been communicated wrongly so my fault, but it is fluctuations that are the problem, it is that allowing banks to create money privately as debt is a disaster and gold is a way of regulating how much money banks create as debt, it does not address the core problem, it makes people think we have monetary reform wehen in fact we have consolidated power and privatised money creation.
@bankingreform There is nothing wrong with private mintage. Gold isn't the problem. It's fractional reserve banking and central banking that are the problem. Gold/silver would bring more stability to the existing system, but I don't think a gold standard is the ideal answer.
Paul's idea of competing currencies is the correct route. Then there is choice and competition. Money originally came out of the market order. "Private" banks misses the point.
It appears that such a "money supply" would be a 1-shot issue, like priming a hydraulic system with fluid, and a balanced system of taxes and spending would keep the money flowing.
@bankingreform I've been considering the "demand" for currency outside the commodities model of the Austrians and in line with the debt-free MR approach. I'm thinking the demand for natural resources, land title, and other "privileges of sovereignty" might serve as a natural tax base and would give value to budgeted spending. Aside from an initial "printing", money would simply flow through the economy. ... sorry, just what I've been thinking lately
I am a Ron Paul supporter but the one issue I have never been settled on is gold. Probably because I watched Bill Still. His point about the rich people having all of the gold if we move to gold standard makes sense.
My questions about form that you are proposing involves implementation. Are we to trust a government that has put us where we are right now? How do we protect us from them while they change all of the rules? Can gold exist along side of what you are proposing? Thanks!
@douglasscrew We stand for a money supply created independent of banks and politicians through a monetary policy committee to be created debt free and gifted to treasury with set inflation / deflation goals.
The pure free market and pure socialist market is a myth. Life is balance.
Jun 8, 2011 Bitcoin: Currency of Resistance Is Max Keiser also Satoshi Nakamoto ?...Creator of Bitcoin. YES...or maybe he isn't...I say he is til we know for sure., in my humble opinion...I think he's the only person who could have pulled it off with all his prior experience with the HSX ..
@Apsu88 Moving to a moneyless world is such a huge mission, I would have no idea how to make that a reality. That is a step beyond what we think is actionable in todays world.
Maybe your mission is bigger than ours, but I think the world is pretty used to money and I cannot imagine how the world will be persuaded otherwise.
I like to work on things that I think we can make happen and is acceptable to emost people.
The challenge with Gold money is that it does not address the root problem and we believe that is that money is created as debt by private institutions called banks. Whether the money is backed by gold or not this always leads to increased supplies of money in boom and not enough money in bust cycles.
The gold money is the same as the current fiat money in that it does not address this issue and it also the same gold system under the Great Depression.
@bankingreform The Great Depression was scientifically created by the international bankers that wanted to reap huge profit on the U.S. populace. U.S. still had it's honor when their currency is backed by gold standard. But the seizure in 1933 and the cheap money policy by FDR changed everything.
@ltmikepowell That is my point. Because the root cause of the problem (That banks create money and can manipulate the money supply by pulling in loans) is not dealt with by backing money with Gold, that can happen and Gold does not solve the problem.
In fact it will give people the illusion that we have solves the problem and the same intervention will happen again when faced with the next depression.
We prefer policies that tackle boom and bust which Gold does not.
@bankingreform Another solution will be a debt-less and interest-less currency which Abraham Lincoln has once issued which called Greenbacks. If you compare the rate of inflation, the Greenbacks suffered less due to it's independent from the private central bank's loan and debt policy.
The problem is the money system that control by which party, is it the government or the private bankers? Be it gold standard or debt-less currency, it's still down to who's the issuer.
@ltmikepowell The inflation issue of Greenback dollars was solved by the banks themselves, since they had a vested interest in gold-backed currency. They made sure that Geeenbacks did not equate to a quantity of gold like real bank notes. If a person made a deposit in Greenbacks, he could only be repaid in Greenbacks. People got rid of Greenbacks quickly, and saved their gold for the future. It is one of the very few instances of good money driving out bad.
@fleetcenturion Even Queen Elizabeth I has restricted the bankers' power by issuing her monarch's own currency system. But all changed when the City of London and Bank of England was founded in 17th century.
As I said, it's all depends who's the issuer. Because leaders like Lincoln, Jefferson, Napoleon and Franklin know very well that if a leader depends on private banks for their money matter, it's a sign that the nation's sovereign shall lose.
@ltmikepowell Sorry, but Bill Still is wrong on several points. Queen Elizabeth I "issued" metal coins by spending them on military buildup. Lincoln's fiat money failed because gold was superior in every way-- though he is to be commended for not financing the CIvil War by debt, which allowed for a speedy recovery. Napoleon learned about finance the hard way, after he gave Swiss bankers a monopoly on French money production.
@bankingreform The bubble that caused the Great Depression was brought on more than anything else by the Fed involving itself in open market operations. They were inflating the money supply all through the 1920's.
All lenders will attempt to cheat the system no matter what the currency is based on, or how it comes into being, or what regulations are in place. Only precious metal provides a check to these institutions' greed by limiting the physical quantity of hard currency.
@fleetcenturion It was created by the Fed because under Gold money you still have the majority of money created by a bank and it dores not get any closer to solving the problem.
If you have a money supply independent of politics and banks that is working to set inflation deflation targets by issuing debt free money you do not need to regulate bank created money or political money with Gold.
Gold still leads to boom, bust, boom, bust. Nee stability not Gold.
@bankingreform And gold is still money. A real money that can help if all paper scheme fail.
By the way, I hardly heard any bust moment when the kings and queens retain their sovereign right on currency/money matter. Even it has, it's an external factor. Because after the Bank War which Andrew Jackson won, U.S. economy still suffered recession that imported from the international bankers.
@bankingreform In any system, banks and lenders will cheat. If there is finite hard money behind their credit lines, it will allow them to fail, which will always limit the risks taken once market corrects. You can have a money supply independent of politics, but lenders will always manipulate the system, whether they are legal lenders or not. There will always be a demand for credit, and no system can ever regulate that demand, nor should it try.
@bankingreform I think what you are aiming for is to eliminate busts, which while praiseworthy, is also impossible. You are dead on though, when you say that politics should play no part. When people are allowed to trade any currency they like, and markets are allowed to correct naturally, recovery will always be faster and less painful.
Simon, in the information text you misspelled your own website. Not the first, but the second link at the bottom. It says 'simonidxon'.
Furthermore I would like to say that the Gold Bugs are our greatest ally as well as our greatest enemy. They make awesome discussion partners, because other people will see that there are other ways then the current one.
Furthermore , when Gold was a real money (tool of exchange) it was still taught in school that labor and products in demand were the real wealth and gold or gold notes were a medium of easy exchange -by the way making the US economy flourish NATURALLY and FREELY - in the 1800s - Watch "American Dream" on YT - a 30 minute cartoon we all must see. A gold standard controlled by the Government is NOT the same as a Free Market (Natural) gold standard.
You are incorrect , Gold is being advocated not as a new standard of money for regular exchange. It is being advocated as a hedge against the devalued paper money which by any calculation must eventually become worthless. Gold will not become worthless - even if some tyrant demands its confiscation andcontrols its legal price - Hmm where has that happened? I get worried when I keep hearing "monetary reform" and people planet profit stability catch phrases. Sounds like classic Bolshevic talk
@bankingreform Thanks for the reply.. Well, we could make money creation illegal except by a Treasury controlled by an accountable and elected congress.Oops we did do that! It's in the Constitution - that law we don't enforce -It's our fault - not the banks. We do not enforce our laws and hold them accountable.. Root of the problem is not bad people in the banks (a snake will always be a snake) It is the fault of good people who do nothing. When is a snake not a snake? When it's a belt!
I don't agree. I think the biggest threat to banking reform is the Tobin tax.
The Tobin tax is going to re-equilibrate flows of money from the financial sector to the government and the real economy without pointing out the root cause of the actual crisis : private money creation. This tax will only hide longer the root cause of economic instability : fractional reserve banking.
@sdavid78 Tax to me does not solve the problem. It is simply perpetuating the system to higher and higher taxes to cover the interest on the governments national debt that will increase forever.
@paulrprichard There is nothing to stop competing currencies as we have seen with the creation of BitCoin and local currencies. We do however have a duopoly on money that can be used to pay tax by the central bank and the retail banks.
Under our reforms their is nothing to stop other currencies emerging.
Right, and his solution is for the government to give the authority to simply invent new money out of thin air to some group that somehow will be magically immune to government influence or decree, despite the fact that they will inevitably be a government created group. He is also of course also completely oblivious to the massively harmful effects of that monetary inflation.
The volatility in gold exists nowadays precisely because it has been divorced from money.
@Panpiper To understand why, check out the presentation I gave at Occupy London called 'Occupy London: Are they wasting their time?'. It explains why we believe gold is not the answer and how to prevent inflation.
@bankingreform I listened to that presentation. I failed to glean any notion of how that government group would avoid inflation. In fact I specifically recall a mention of them setting an inflation target, IE, deliberately creating it. To me this is no different than keeping existing central banks but eliminating the multiplier effect of fractional reserve. While I agree that fractional reserve is highly volatile, it is the money creation itself that causes the greatest problem.
@bankingreform In a pure gold economy (non fiat, non debt), there would be price 'deflation'. This would allow an ordinary person to have their savings grow simply by saving their money in demand deposit (zero interest obviously), without requiring them to become a speculator in the stock market or something. Deflation is in my opinion far more just than the government robbing people of the growth from their savings. If the Gov needs revenue, tax it in plain sight, don't hide it in inflation.
@whahas I have never championed 'no interest'. If people lend their gold to someone, they have a right to ask interest for the loan. It is fiat currency that concerns me, that and government manipulations of interest rates. The interest rate needs to be set by the free market, by the supply of loanable funds relative to the demand for loans. Yes you should be able to pay taxes in gold. And I am more than fine with competing currencies.
@Panpiper As for dealing with the debt, both as a practical matter and as a likely consequence of the transition, I expect that existing government debt will simply be defaulted on. Governments are effectively bankrupt. In a pure gold, zero reserve economy, no government in it's right mind would deficit finance. And yes that does make it very difficult to fund unpopular wars not incidentally. The best way to achieve all this really is to simply repeal legal tender laws and let the market decide.
@whahas The best way to do it is simply by repealing legal tender laws. That would mean that the existing currency would stay in place and slowly be displaced by superior means that people trust more, through the market. Debt would be paid off in the existing, rapidly inflating fiat currency. Gold would be accrued quite naturally by people over a period of months simply as a result of accepting it in lieu of the inflating government fiat currency. No 'one' would be in control, just the market.
@Panpiper If one currency became the standard it would be solely due to it being vastly more trustworthy than any other. In a truly free market, there would be no other way for it to gain dominance. Anyone engaging in "funny business" with an alternate currency would inevitably decrease it's trustworthiness and therefore it's dominance in the market. Governments would only accept currencies 100% redeemable in gold.
@Panpiper You haven't answered all of my questions. How will we make sure everyone has gold to start with?
I mean, most people can not afford to buy gold these days, will they have to wait for their money to inflate?
How will you regulate banks? How will you prevent fractional reserves, will people have to walk around with all their gold all the time? Will IOU's be tradeable? You said lending was allowed.
@whahas The transition is not made instantaneously. People will acquire gold simply by being paid with gold if by no other means. Anyone can afford to buy gold in any case, as it does not mean you have to suddenly purchase large numbers of high weight coins. Most transactions would be still be with gold backed paper notes. It would be as simple as it is now to exchange your currency for a different currency. IOUs would be tradable if you could find anyone to accept them; can you do that now?
@Panpiper Most bank (and investor) regulations are there to deal with problems created by a fiat money system and central bank ultra cheap interest. In large part many of those regulations would become quite redundant in a true free gold based market. Existing laws against fraud and such would go a long way to keeping things on the up and up. If fractional reserve is not allowed on demand deposits, then there would be a legal requirement for regular audit, quite in keeping with normal tradition.
@Panpiper So there will still be a governmental institution to keep controlling if a bank has fractional reserves? If that's the case, then it isn't a total free market, is it? I don't understand how this will prevent bribery.
Will there be private mints? Who will control them? Who will prevent Mints from cooperating and keeping prices of gold artificially high? Your answers give rise to more questions then it answers.
I note also how you mentioned that in the UK there is effectively 'no' fractional reserve requirement in effect with banks, and I would wholeheartedly agree that that can lead to nothing but utter catastrophe.
Regardless of gold-backed or not, Congress should print our money. Why should we owe all our money to the Federal Reserve Bank, and thus pay them interest on all the money they have printed?
In addition, banks should not create new money when making loans, because that creates more money than the net worth of the U.S., so each dollar is then worth less. If banks had to loan only what money they HAD, they would lend less, and the price of houses and everything else would go DOWN. Simple.
There's nothing wrong with banks increasing credit money under a gold standard. Banks would issue credit much more carefully because they will understand that if there's a bank run /liquidity crisis/depression nobody will bail them out, because nobody can print gold. That's the beauty of the gold standard it creates discipline .
@vimeocomuk Wow. I have never heard anybody say that there is nothing wrong with private companies profiting from the creation of money at the expense of the taxpayer.
That is a new one for me.
Why not let them create coins and cash too then instead of the central bank.
That is taking the free markets to the next level.
@bankingreform "I have never heard anybody say that there is nothing wrong with private companies profiting from the creation of money at the expense of the taxpayer."
1- Well this is the system we had until 1971 and it worked better than the the unrestrained money printing system we have had for the last 40 years.
2- when you say "creation of money" you mean creation of private bank credit which makes up 98% of what we currently trade with today. The real money is the coins (2%)
@vimeocomuk We believe that it did not work well prior to 1971 and after 1971 as banks creating money as credit plus interest is unsustainable and unjust under a gold standard or no gold standard.
I appreciate your comments.
I just cannot justify bank created money in our world for all sorts of reasons and side effects, most notably the stability of banking. The gold standard was left for a reason because they wanted to prevent depression in the crazy system we operate in today and before.
@bankingreform The gold standard was left because the government wanted to be able to spend more money (usually to fight wars) and the discipline imposed by gold being money made that very difficult. You can't just 'print' gold. It had nothing to do with avoiding depressions. The notion of a central bank was 'sold' to politicians under the auspices that it would be able to prevent depressions. That obviously did not work so well.
@Panpiper We believe that under a debt based system the money supply has to increase forever and anything that holds it down will be innovated away or eliminated such as a gold standard or financial engineering.
Gold is a good way of holding down money created by a bank, but it will always be removed when faced with the fact that governments have to take on more debt to keep the system alive.
That is why we dont believe that gold as a viable solution, instead we tackle money created as debt.
@bankingreform It is perfectly feasible to have a gold standard without fractional reserve banking or any sort of debt based money creation. I heard you yourself give a very plausible explanation of how bank deposits would could work in such a system. It certainly would mean falling prices if economic growth outstrips the increase in the gold supply, but that is not the problem most economists think it is. Prices fall all the time in some industries and they thrive nonetheless.
@Panpiper My emphasis is more on the end of fractional reserve banking. I have many friends that believe gold should be combined, I feel it is not so necessary and favour an independent Monetary Policy Committee, but if you combine gold and the end of fractional reserve I will sign on the dotted line to support you.
Gold standard on it's own, I could not sign up for.
@bankingreform I believe that giving fiat money creation authority to any government group, no matter how independent you try to make it, inevitably will lead to a hyperinflating disaster. I simply do not trust government to not succumb to temptation. My biggest concern though is 'setting' interest rates. It is crucial that interest be set by the supply of loanable funds relative to demand, not by a central planning bureaucrat.
You will then argue that in reality bank credit is what money is today and there is no real difference between bank credit transfers and coins exchanging hands. Which I agree with, Now the reason bank credit is just as accepted and trusted as coins is that people correctly believe that governments and central banks will not allow private banks to default on loans from depositers who hold current accounts with them. Under a gold standard banks would be fearful of going bust and lend carefully.
The price of gold only fluctuates because big hedge funds and banks hold all the contracts. Nevertheless, the price of gold has risen constantly as opposed to currency which continues to depreciate.
@Otzmatron That is a very good reason not to base a currency on gold.
The major problem is that gold currency does not solve the problem that banks create money through credit. This is why we believe gold standards do not solve any of todays problems and it is misleading the public into thinking that money is printed by government when in fact notes are an insignificant portion of money.
@bankingreform Thanks for commenting Simon, but unfortunately for you the internet and more and more people categorically support Paul's gold standard legislation.
We, Ron Paul supporters, appreciate your input, and hope you don't get your way with American legislation, especially given the fact that you're not even an American citizen. I mean you no disrespect, but I have to keep it real.
@bankingreform Au has risen against USD sharply, but compared to a stable currency like CHF, it hasn't risen nearly as much so it really is more of USD tanking than Au rising.... further, Au, and even Ag, hasn't been able to match the rise in some commoditiy goods, but in the event of Au becoming circulating currency it's value should stabilize /against commoditys/.... but alas, Au's high value stops it from being sufficely divisible for use in small and fast transactions.........
......... some will argue for representitive currency, however if the representitive currency can not be exchanged for a commodity currency that is useable on it's own then the representive currency essentially becomes fiat....... so more likely you'll end up with competeing commodity currencies that fall into niches, say a 75:24:1 Cu:Ag:Au currency for small&fast transactions, 20:75:5 for larger or slower transactions and 15:10:75 for very large or very slow transactions.........
......... without a legally fixed exchange rate, such a system should prove robust.... but the most important thing is to get rid of legal tender, after that people will be figure things out on their own in fairly short order (say, 6 monthes) and I have little doubt that a wide range of currencies will find themselves niches......
Gold is a finite resource, that is why it is a good standard to protect currency from being hyperinflated by a central bank. It does not mean a government has a stranglehold over gold, it means that you can redeem your money in gold should you ask for it in a financial institution (of your choice).
@Otzmatron The problem is that government or central banks do not create money, those who say the governments are printing money are misleading the public. Banks create our money supply through credit which means that the cause of the problem is not solved by moving to a gold standard, and the danger is that banks will continue to expand credit and we will still have the same problem.
The price of gold is fluctuating dramatically these days as a reflection of the instability of fiat currency. Blaming that on gold is simply dishonest and/or wrong. I'm not saying gold is THE answer - TPTB can always fudge the ration of currency to gold - but for now gold is the only liquid, portable way I know of to ride out the coming chaos.
@walktheworld Thanks for sharing and I would agree with you, just as judging fiat money is not a fair comparison now as we operate of fractional reserve banking.
Please dont get me wrong, invest all you like it is a great investment in these times, but not a foundation for a stable monetary system.
We don't want a gold standard. Simon is right. When the gold supply is controlled by politically unstable govt.s i.e. Russia and China and then gold is directly linked to money supply, what good will that do? What we need is for the Central Bank to control the QUANTITY of money in the economy and to issue it DEBT FREE. Banks should not be allowed to create money out of thin air! Banks should not have a monopoly on our money supply!
It's a mistake to think there is only one type of gold bug. I know one type which is louder than the other but some of us invest in gold because of an obsession with the gold standard while others do so to protect ouselves against inflation and counterparty risk.
I, and many other holders of precious metals belong to the second category. I also think you will find more receptive and open minded people in that category.
What I'd like to see in the US is competing currencies with one as a means of exchange and the other used for savings. The federal government should issue its own debt-free money, spending it into existence on infrustructure, etc. The states could issue gold or silver coins as a secondary currency that floats in price against the exchange currency.
The exchange currency would be required to pay taxes and be always accepted for exchange. The secondary currency *could* be used for exchange but only between two willing participants. The primary function of the secondary currency would be for savings. It would be gold or silver with no taxes to pay when redeeming the coins for the exchange currency.
This would make allies of debt-free monetary reformers and gold-backed reformers.
@bankingreform people who want a gold standard either have no clue about monetary history or a selective form of monetary history. There are many examples in history where a gold standard brought economic tyranny among the nations people..benefiting only those who hold most of the gold.
I believe backing currency by a percentage of gold and other commodities is a decent solution. The idea is to link a unit of currency to a specific quantity of a finite resource with value. This will prevent monetization, hence inflation. Using gold coin I can understand is tempting, and the price must be fixed, but I'm concerned about all the billionaires and smart central banks currently hording gold. If the US returns to a gold standard these players will have an unfair advantage.
@combatjm89 Of course the basis of banking reform is two-fold: end fractional reserve banking and bring back the Glas-Steigel Act, separating investment from commcial banking. These two things at the very least are essential, then we can look at monetary reform.
@combatjm89 That is monetary reform. We are talking the same language here. We stand for three reforms:
1. Depositors must be the legal owners of their money on deposit.
2. Banks must tell depositors what type of investments they will make.
3. End Fractional Reserve Banking.
You cannot end fractional reserve without replacing the debt money with a debt free money supply otherwise you would have a depression. That is where monetary reform comes in.
@bankingreform Then by what mechanism do you limit M3? Let the Fed do it? Or the Treasury? They are the problem. Even with the end of fractional reserve banking, any money created not backed by a finite resource will still allow gov't abuse of M3, and continued welfare/warfare spending, and the hidden tax of inflation? What is your solution?
@combatjm89 In the UK the solution monetary reformers propose is that when banks are no longer to create money as credit that an independent monitory policy committee create debt free money. History has proven that neither banks nor politicians are able to create money. When you have one transparent fiat money supply called M, it is very easy to monitor. The MPC would be set inflation / deflation targets and gift the right amount of money to the treasury to spend debt free into the economy.
@bankingreform, well if all the banks loans & deposits need to be back by gold (or backed by a currency backed by gold) then by extending too much credit - they risk a bank run, which their shareholders wouldn't appreciate.
This was the case all through the 19th century in the US and worked relatively well.
@LibertyDownUnder As I said you dont need to back it by gold. It is not what money is backed by that is important, it is who creates it.
Gold still operates off a system where private banks create money through credit.
Calling it a printing machine is very misleading, 97% of money is created when a bank issues credit, there is no printing press. This is the issue we believe needs to be solved by monetary reform.
@bankingreform, well then why did this system work so well in the US in the 19th century?
Back then banks could not 'create' endless credit - they had to have it in the 1st place. There was no fractional reserve, they had to have the money in order to lend it. Please answer the question.
If it worked so well for over 100 years - why do you think it wouldn't work now?
@LibertyDownUnder In the 19th century money was still being multiplied and we did not have stability over that period. Ending fractional reserve banking is a solution we promote, you then need an alternative monetary system.
Us monetary reformers believe that once you have a transparent money supply called M there is no need for a gold backing. The goal will be inflation / deflation targeting only rather than leaving it to the luck of who has gold - a highly manipulated and controlled market.
@LibertyDownUnder Money is created independent of politicians and banks by a independent monetary policy committee that has set inflation / deflation goals. That is all they do. They are answerable to parliament and report their monthly meetings to the public about the amount of money created or destroyed to meet inflation / deflation targeting. Rather than doing this indirectly through interest rates and banks this would be completely transparent. Money can only be created for this reason.
@bankingreform, how is this different than the Fed? They are supposed to be independent, they report to the Government, and they are supposed to keep inflation in check.
Politicians will always find a way to get into this, and Gold seems to be the only refuge after the inevitable collapse.
The Nazis hoarded gold, Malaysian markets are now using gold coins, Zimbabwe reverted to gold recently, the Chinese are hoaring gold now, European central banks sit on tonnes of it, and the list goes on.
@LibertyDownUnder The Fed is private for one. They would have to be nationalised. At the moment they use interest rates to indirectly control the money supply. This is impossible and does not work. When money is created debt free it is completely transparent rather then trying to manipulate privately controlled money.
Currently the government do not print money, banks create money, important to know the difference.
We believe that MPC is better than banks creating money regulated by gold.
@LibertyDownUnder What 19th century America are you talking about? There were at least 6 recessions and two depressions, multiple panics and runs on the banks. Plus, while reserves were kept higher than today, the banks still circulated more notes than they had gold on hand.
@bankingreform Dear Simon Dixon, in a system with 100% reserves not the bank is the money creator. The are two main form of banking, the deposit banking and loan banking. There is no CREDIT banking.
In the history of human kind, the longest stable monetary system which lasted around 950 years, in the byzantine monetary system the money creator was the saver who take that savings went to the state official and coined the money. The banks couldn't estabilish a monopolistic system.
Lol, gold bugs are the threat to monetary stability??? Try insolvent governments, bankruptcy banks and a monetary system based on debt. Man, whether it be central bankers or politicians, should not be able to create money and credit out of thin air. The USD as the reserve currency RIP
@misterman6000 Thanks for sharing. You are so right, it is for all the resins above that monetary reform needs to happen.
Unfortunately debt based money continues under gold money and the issue still persists.
It is for that reason that we see gold bugs as a threat, because it is a system that continues debt based money and does not deal with the root of the issue - a privately created debt based money supply.
Free markets and money creation do not mix well as we see today.
and you dont seem to understand that money is a product itself. Money is not a construct as much as its a naturally occuring phenomenon. There are attributes to these naturally occuring moneys. You should learn what these are to know why gold is good. Austrian economics, mises.org
I sort of know what you are saying, but its not a case of gold or reform, its gold AND reform, and thats what we really need, dont bash the gold bugs but join them and reinforce your message to them
@GSDebunked I have studied all schools of economics and am very familiar. I am an economist myself. That is what has drawn me to the conclusion that money is not subject to free market rules. We currently have a privately created money supply by banks, it does not work.
@bankingreform it isnt subject to free market rules, you are right. but it should be. I believe opening the market for money is the right way, gold money, silver money, oil money, basket-of-commodities money.
I try to learn a lot from ron paul just in terms of his debating skills, he is so passive and persuasive. He also says "i believe so on", "hayek said: x because x and i agree with him" rather than this IS right, this IS wrong. Your doing a good thing, just work on the comms
ok so are you against an asset backed money? dont you know that when gold was money it didnt fluctuate like a commodity?
just read some of your previous comments, it seem you dont understand what caused the depression, because you think that because we were under a gold system before that must have something to do with it... you dont understand free markets and price discovery, you have no faith in the compounding effect of markets that adam smith coined the invisible hand
@GSDebunked Thanks for your comments. Just to clarify.
I dont think the depression was caused by Gold. It happened under Gold, the point being gold does not prevent fractional reserve banking..
I believe in free markets, but money needs to be created debt free independent of government and banks, gold backed money does not achieve this. We have a privately controlled money supply right now.
I am an ex trader and now a business person who is fully aware of price discovery.
@bankingreform OK, Im moving your way now, but as i said, i would suggest not saying its gold vs reform.
There are a lot of people that would like to fix the system and they are learning about gold, they actually know what the federal reserve is, they know what the fractional reserve banking is, many of them know the critical problem that money is created in debt. I would work on making everyone aware that we could bring about a gold standard without fixing the problem.
What you are basically saying is: Gold isnt good as a backing for a currency because now, in a FIAT System, the price fluctuation of gold is too big? ....Think about it again....you dont have to be a Goldbug to see that your argument is an epic fail
@roeschuxxx Gold does not solve the problem that banks create money as debt.
To have a gold currency and fractional reserve banking is more of the same. That is the system that lead to the great depression and it will be removed again when faced with another depression.
It ignores the core problem that money is privately created through credit.
Gold will create the illusion that monetary reform has happened, but we will still have the same system.
@bankingreform I didnt say that a gold backed currency will solve our problems...I just say your argument about the "volatibility of Gold" is nonsense. You cant say a Goldbacked Currency would be a problem because *now* in a FIAT System the price of gold is too volatil. You see the error in your argument? No offense..
@roeschuxxx Yes, good question... The proposal is to thing in gold, and you will see the big fluctuation of the hypothetical fiat money, supposed to have value. :-)
As Ron Paul also said, even gold is not a perfect money. That's true.
The dependence of money, which was created by printing too much money, it can be cured only by a successive fall back to real exchanges instead of money based exchanges. The economy is not limited to money only, there are exchanges everywhere, even in family, but the "calculation" are not based on money, there. So, gold not being perfect to resolve the problem, but more expansion of money is not a solution at all.
@TrackballClick But money is not created by printing too much money, money is created by fractional reserve banking through loans. Banks determine how many loans they make and this makes up the money supply.
If you do not stop this then you have not solved the problem.
Gold & silver will protect your wealth & create a stable economy. Art I sect 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to *coin* money, not print worthless fiat trash. This guy is either clueless or an agent. Thumbs down.
@faulconandsnowjob Gold does not solve the problem that banks create money as debt.
To have a gold currency and fractional reserve banking is more of the same. That is the system that lead to the great depression and it will be removed again when faced with another depression.
It ignores the core problem that money is privately created through credit.
Gold will create the illusion that monetary reform has happened, but we will still have the same system.
money doesnt have to be back by metal if we had mutual credit clearing house to enable buyers to buy and sellers to by in a fair honest and fully accountable way. Its not the form of money that matters but how its allowed to freely represent exchange for goods and services.Its suppose to be an exchange instrument and not necessarily a commodity. But its fair to call Gold a representation of value but to have it back our money is another question.I would fear those who own most of it to control
@charronfamilyconnect instead of mutual credit, the mutual exchange is an additional tool to substitute the money. But the credit (not the loan!) is a transfer of wealth from the future to the present. Which at first look seems to be perfect, but the probability that someone does not realize the promission, it ijects a loss, which loss is tried to fill by other's work. That is the hidden transfer of wealth into the direction who mostly fails to realize the promisses.
@TrackballClick sorry man you lost me there? One thing I dont believe in is paying 3 times for the same house for which the builder(the real producer) only got paid once yet the bank gets paid 3 times. Is that the kind of system you believe in? Sorry if I misunderstood you. I think its okay to borrow, but not pay 3 times the initial principal. You agree?
@charronfamilyconnect I understand your concern, and here I fully agree with you with that the bank always is there in the middle of any real exchange. But this is because he is the only monopoly who has right to create money out of nothing, which rights the state has given to them. This dependence of money it could be built exactly because the ever existence of fiat money. And in the details of this not so simple gamble we cannot find a common understanding yet.
LOL! Price volatility of gold? Even my 13 year old nephew knows that the price volatility of gold is simply the result of our current floating exchange rate mechanism monetary system. Gold's supply increases at an annual rate of 2% per year, and has done for many centuries, nothing volatile about that. I think the real reason you think the gold movement is a theat to your silly pet project is because it is based on sound reasoning, facts, and a proper understanding of monetary history.
To be clear, Ron Paul is not for a government mandated gold backed currency. He is for free currency competition: let the market decide what should be used as money.
He may believe that the market will choose gold, but he does not suggest it as a state controlled gold-money monopoly.
You're absolutely right Simon. And this is a battle we can win. Any debate on this, public or academic, is easily winnable. These zealots worshiping their golden calf, they cannot win the public's support.
The only reason gold's "price" is fluctuating wildly right now is because it's priced in fiat dollars, and the exodus is on. Gold's "value" which is what we need to create stability in any currency has been very stable for 5000 years. We need to start thinking in terms of value vs. price. Looking at things strictly through the fiat dollar price mechanism is extremely deceptive.
Economic growth requires capital. Capital comes from savings and underconsumption. To encourage saving, prudent savers need to be sure that their purchasing power will not be eroded via inflation/money printing. Gold helps to maintain people's purchasing power much better than a fiat currency simply because it cannot be created out of thin air.
People should not fear gold, but they should definitely fear paper currencies - no matter who has control over the printing press
@monetaryintelligence I think your austrian perspective (read: reason and logic) is lost on Simon Dixon. He wants magical free state money for all, because after all, we can totally trust politicians to control the supply of money
@bankingreform Gold and Silver are been manipulated by the creation of paper gold and silver, so if the right to create this fake asset was taken away from the JP Morgans and we based our money on REAL gold and silver then we would have a very stable monetary foundation to build on. I used to think you knew what was going on, but you have so lost my respect with your misunderstanding of the basics. Sorry i will not be buying the book :(
@StandUp555 Look at history you will see the elite have used gold to their advantage as well. See the English Goldsmiths and the tally stick system. The Currency Act of 1764 and Stamp Act of 1765 is another good example when Britain forced the Colonies to pay taxes in gold, which at the time Britain controlled the quantity of and the colonies had little to no gold to use. This led to open revolt.
@bankingreform is it the gold fluctuating or is it the currency you value it in? if you monetize gold, obviously it will not be traded as a commodity as it is today, and will not be able to be manipulated, like it is today, aka "paper gold" and "paper silver" contracts, please tell me what kind of "money" your vision of the reform can offer, that i can put under my pillow as savings today, pull it out in 60 years, and still be able to buy the same or more loafs of bread than i can do today?
K3ys3rS0ze 1 month ago
But how will this "monetary reform" you keep talking about come about? Though you don't come out and say it, the only way it can be done is by government. In case you forget, these are the same people that allow and encourage fractional reserve banking in the first place, and the ones who constantly bail it out with our tax dollars when they overextend. What needs to be offered is a competing system that people can use, but then governments would probably ban it.
fleetcenturion 1 month ago
I can appreciate this video. After all, it was bankers who controlled the gold that people were bitching about during 1899s - 1900s
But even still, the global standard should be based on commodities... whats your thoughts of the American system of economics and Webster Tarpey if you heard of him?
William Jennings Bryan, "thou shalt not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold"
ParapaDrifter 1 month ago
Maybe I'm missing something but;
1) Ron Paul does talk about making gold and silver legal tender, but he also wants to legalize competition for currencies.
2) Saying gold is a "disaster" and we can't base our currency on it because of fluctuation in its price doesn't make sense. The fluctuations in value are in the dollar not gold. It's like saying "we can't stop printing money because there are fluctuations in our fiat currency"
Either that is a huge flaw in your logic or I'm missing a point.
nagol1000 1 month ago
@nagol1000 Think my message has been communicated wrongly so my fault, but it is fluctuations that are the problem, it is that allowing banks to create money privately as debt is a disaster and gold is a way of regulating how much money banks create as debt, it does not address the core problem, it makes people think we have monetary reform wehen in fact we have consolidated power and privatised money creation.
It will lead to the same result.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 1 month ago 2
@bankingreform There is nothing wrong with private mintage. Gold isn't the problem. It's fractional reserve banking and central banking that are the problem. Gold/silver would bring more stability to the existing system, but I don't think a gold standard is the ideal answer.
Paul's idea of competing currencies is the correct route. Then there is choice and competition. Money originally came out of the market order. "Private" banks misses the point.
joepeeler34 1 month ago
@bankingreform Ah, I see what you mean. I figured I was missing something. Thanks for the follow-up.
nagol1000 1 month ago
It appears that such a "money supply" would be a 1-shot issue, like priming a hydraulic system with fluid, and a balanced system of taxes and spending would keep the money flowing.
etzel33 1 month ago
@etzel33 Not quite sure what you mean by this. Be interested if you could elaborate a bit more!
Thanks for the analogy.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 1 month ago
@bankingreform I've been considering the "demand" for currency outside the commodities model of the Austrians and in line with the debt-free MR approach. I'm thinking the demand for natural resources, land title, and other "privileges of sovereignty" might serve as a natural tax base and would give value to budgeted spending. Aside from an initial "printing", money would simply flow through the economy. ... sorry, just what I've been thinking lately
etzel33 1 month ago
Simon,
I am a Ron Paul supporter but the one issue I have never been settled on is gold. Probably because I watched Bill Still. His point about the rich people having all of the gold if we move to gold standard makes sense.
My questions about form that you are proposing involves implementation. Are we to trust a government that has put us where we are right now? How do we protect us from them while they change all of the rules? Can gold exist along side of what you are proposing? Thanks!
douglasscrew 1 month ago
@douglasscrew We stand for a money supply created independent of banks and politicians through a monetary policy committee to be created debt free and gifted to treasury with set inflation / deflation goals.
The pure free market and pure socialist market is a myth. Life is balance.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Jun 8, 2011 Bitcoin: Currency of Resistance Is Max Keiser also Satoshi Nakamoto ?...Creator of Bitcoin. YES...or maybe he isn't...I say he is til we know for sure., in my humble opinion...I think he's the only person who could have pulled it off with all his prior experience with the HSX ..
TheWhiteRose161718 1 month ago
so wrong lol
GSDebunked 2 months ago
@Apsu88 Moving to a moneyless world is such a huge mission, I would have no idea how to make that a reality. That is a step beyond what we think is actionable in todays world.
Maybe your mission is bigger than ours, but I think the world is pretty used to money and I cannot imagine how the world will be persuaded otherwise.
I like to work on things that I think we can make happen and is acceptable to emost people.
Am I wrong?
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 2 months ago
When the paper money fails, gold/silvers and some other agricultural products takeover as the money itself.
ltmikepowell 2 months ago
@ltmikepowell Thanks for sharing.
The challenge with Gold money is that it does not address the root problem and we believe that is that money is created as debt by private institutions called banks. Whether the money is backed by gold or not this always leads to increased supplies of money in boom and not enough money in bust cycles.
The gold money is the same as the current fiat money in that it does not address this issue and it also the same gold system under the Great Depression.
bankingreform 2 months ago
@bankingreform The Great Depression was scientifically created by the international bankers that wanted to reap huge profit on the U.S. populace. U.S. still had it's honor when their currency is backed by gold standard. But the seizure in 1933 and the cheap money policy by FDR changed everything.
ltmikepowell 2 months ago
@ltmikepowell That is my point. Because the root cause of the problem (That banks create money and can manipulate the money supply by pulling in loans) is not dealt with by backing money with Gold, that can happen and Gold does not solve the problem.
In fact it will give people the illusion that we have solves the problem and the same intervention will happen again when faced with the next depression.
We prefer policies that tackle boom and bust which Gold does not.
Make sense?
bankingreform 2 months ago
@bankingreform Another solution will be a debt-less and interest-less currency which Abraham Lincoln has once issued which called Greenbacks. If you compare the rate of inflation, the Greenbacks suffered less due to it's independent from the private central bank's loan and debt policy.
The problem is the money system that control by which party, is it the government or the private bankers? Be it gold standard or debt-less currency, it's still down to who's the issuer.
ltmikepowell 2 months ago
@ltmikepowell The inflation issue of Greenback dollars was solved by the banks themselves, since they had a vested interest in gold-backed currency. They made sure that Geeenbacks did not equate to a quantity of gold like real bank notes. If a person made a deposit in Greenbacks, he could only be repaid in Greenbacks. People got rid of Greenbacks quickly, and saved their gold for the future. It is one of the very few instances of good money driving out bad.
fleetcenturion 2 months ago
@fleetcenturion Even Queen Elizabeth I has restricted the bankers' power by issuing her monarch's own currency system. But all changed when the City of London and Bank of England was founded in 17th century.
As I said, it's all depends who's the issuer. Because leaders like Lincoln, Jefferson, Napoleon and Franklin know very well that if a leader depends on private banks for their money matter, it's a sign that the nation's sovereign shall lose.
ltmikepowell 2 months ago
@ltmikepowell Sorry, but Bill Still is wrong on several points. Queen Elizabeth I "issued" metal coins by spending them on military buildup. Lincoln's fiat money failed because gold was superior in every way-- though he is to be commended for not financing the CIvil War by debt, which allowed for a speedy recovery. Napoleon learned about finance the hard way, after he gave Swiss bankers a monopoly on French money production.
fleetcenturion 1 month ago
@bankingreform The bubble that caused the Great Depression was brought on more than anything else by the Fed involving itself in open market operations. They were inflating the money supply all through the 1920's.
All lenders will attempt to cheat the system no matter what the currency is based on, or how it comes into being, or what regulations are in place. Only precious metal provides a check to these institutions' greed by limiting the physical quantity of hard currency.
fleetcenturion 2 months ago
@fleetcenturion It was created by the Fed because under Gold money you still have the majority of money created by a bank and it dores not get any closer to solving the problem.
If you have a money supply independent of politics and banks that is working to set inflation deflation targets by issuing debt free money you do not need to regulate bank created money or political money with Gold.
Gold still leads to boom, bust, boom, bust. Nee stability not Gold.
I used to believe in Gold too.
bankingreform 2 months ago
@bankingreform And gold is still money. A real money that can help if all paper scheme fail.
By the way, I hardly heard any bust moment when the kings and queens retain their sovereign right on currency/money matter. Even it has, it's an external factor. Because after the Bank War which Andrew Jackson won, U.S. economy still suffered recession that imported from the international bankers.
ltmikepowell 2 months ago
@bankingreform In any system, banks and lenders will cheat. If there is finite hard money behind their credit lines, it will allow them to fail, which will always limit the risks taken once market corrects. You can have a money supply independent of politics, but lenders will always manipulate the system, whether they are legal lenders or not. There will always be a demand for credit, and no system can ever regulate that demand, nor should it try.
fleetcenturion 1 month ago
Comment removed
fleetcenturion 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bankingreform I think what you are aiming for is to eliminate busts, which while praiseworthy, is also impossible. You are dead on though, when you say that politics should play no part. When people are allowed to trade any currency they like, and markets are allowed to correct naturally, recovery will always be faster and less painful.
fleetcenturion 1 month ago
sellout.
stereorail 3 months ago
Simon, in the information text you misspelled your own website. Not the first, but the second link at the bottom. It says 'simonidxon'.
Furthermore I would like to say that the Gold Bugs are our greatest ally as well as our greatest enemy. They make awesome discussion partners, because other people will see that there are other ways then the current one.
whahas 3 months ago in playlist Meer video's van bankingreform
@whahas Thanks for letting me know and I will update that.
Your words are very wise and I am in complete agreement with you.
Thanks again.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
Furthermore , when Gold was a real money (tool of exchange) it was still taught in school that labor and products in demand were the real wealth and gold or gold notes were a medium of easy exchange -by the way making the US economy flourish NATURALLY and FREELY - in the 1800s - Watch "American Dream" on YT - a 30 minute cartoon we all must see. A gold standard controlled by the Government is NOT the same as a Free Market (Natural) gold standard.
ShoreScout 3 months ago
You are incorrect , Gold is being advocated not as a new standard of money for regular exchange. It is being advocated as a hedge against the devalued paper money which by any calculation must eventually become worthless. Gold will not become worthless - even if some tyrant demands its confiscation andcontrols its legal price - Hmm where has that happened? I get worried when I keep hearing "monetary reform" and people planet profit stability catch phrases. Sounds like classic Bolshevic talk
ShoreScout 3 months ago
@ShoreScout The problem I have with Gold is that it allows the banks to create money as debt and therefore will always be abolished due to this fact.
We believe that money creation by banks is the root of our problems and Gold does not fix that problem.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
P.S. I am a business man and believe in capitalism, just not with money creation as debt by banks.
bankingreform 3 months ago
@bankingreform Thanks for the reply.. Well, we could make money creation illegal except by a Treasury controlled by an accountable and elected congress.Oops we did do that! It's in the Constitution - that law we don't enforce -It's our fault - not the banks. We do not enforce our laws and hold them accountable.. Root of the problem is not bad people in the banks (a snake will always be a snake) It is the fault of good people who do nothing. When is a snake not a snake? When it's a belt!
ShoreScout 3 months ago
@ShoreScout Very interesting angle you come from.
Thanks for sharing.
Accepting responsibility is the key to progress. We cannot control others, we can control out own action.
I really like your comment.
Thanks
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
I don't agree. I think the biggest threat to banking reform is the Tobin tax.
The Tobin tax is going to re-equilibrate flows of money from the financial sector to the government and the real economy without pointing out the root cause of the actual crisis : private money creation. This tax will only hide longer the root cause of economic instability : fractional reserve banking.
sdavid78 3 months ago
@sdavid78 Tax to me does not solve the problem. It is simply perpetuating the system to higher and higher taxes to cover the interest on the governments national debt that will increase forever.
No solution.
Simon
bankingreform 3 months ago
Allow competing currencies.
paulrprichard 3 months ago
@paulrprichard There is nothing to stop competing currencies as we have seen with the creation of BitCoin and local currencies. We do however have a duopoly on money that can be used to pay tax by the central bank and the retail banks.
Under our reforms their is nothing to stop other currencies emerging.
Thanks for your comment.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
Right, and his solution is for the government to give the authority to simply invent new money out of thin air to some group that somehow will be magically immune to government influence or decree, despite the fact that they will inevitably be a government created group. He is also of course also completely oblivious to the massively harmful effects of that monetary inflation.
The volatility in gold exists nowadays precisely because it has been divorced from money.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper To understand why, check out the presentation I gave at Occupy London called 'Occupy London: Are they wasting their time?'. It explains why we believe gold is not the answer and how to prevent inflation.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
@bankingreform I listened to that presentation. I failed to glean any notion of how that government group would avoid inflation. In fact I specifically recall a mention of them setting an inflation target, IE, deliberately creating it. To me this is no different than keeping existing central banks but eliminating the multiplier effect of fractional reserve. While I agree that fractional reserve is highly volatile, it is the money creation itself that causes the greatest problem.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper I believe there should be zero inflation as a target, but I dont want to set this in stone as part of our reforms.
bankingreform 3 months ago
@bankingreform In a pure gold economy (non fiat, non debt), there would be price 'deflation'. This would allow an ordinary person to have their savings grow simply by saving their money in demand deposit (zero interest obviously), without requiring them to become a speculator in the stock market or something. Deflation is in my opinion far more just than the government robbing people of the growth from their savings. If the Gov needs revenue, tax it in plain sight, don't hide it in inflation.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper You would propose a non fiat, non debt, no interest, free market gold economy?
Doesn't one of those factors contradict some of the others?
I mean, am I going to pay my taxes in gold or in which currency?
There is no debt, but I can still loan out my money? You mean there is no National Debt, right?
There are competing currencies, I guess?
What will be the impact of deflation on all outstanding debt?
Inflation is indeed a bad way to tax people.
whahas 3 months ago
@whahas I have never championed 'no interest'. If people lend their gold to someone, they have a right to ask interest for the loan. It is fiat currency that concerns me, that and government manipulations of interest rates. The interest rate needs to be set by the free market, by the supply of loanable funds relative to the demand for loans. Yes you should be able to pay taxes in gold. And I am more than fine with competing currencies.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper As for dealing with the debt, both as a practical matter and as a likely consequence of the transition, I expect that existing government debt will simply be defaulted on. Governments are effectively bankrupt. In a pure gold, zero reserve economy, no government in it's right mind would deficit finance. And yes that does make it very difficult to fund unpopular wars not incidentally. The best way to achieve all this really is to simply repeal legal tender laws and let the market decide.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper How are you going to give everyone enough gold to start up the system?
Who is going to control which pieces are going to be used and who aren't?
If the market is going to decide that, what will prevent one currency of becoming the standard?
Who will control the standard?
How will you prevent that the ones that benefit the most from some currency will manipulate prices like it's being done now?
Must the government accept all form of currency?
whahas 3 months ago
@whahas The best way to do it is simply by repealing legal tender laws. That would mean that the existing currency would stay in place and slowly be displaced by superior means that people trust more, through the market. Debt would be paid off in the existing, rapidly inflating fiat currency. Gold would be accrued quite naturally by people over a period of months simply as a result of accepting it in lieu of the inflating government fiat currency. No 'one' would be in control, just the market.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper If one currency became the standard it would be solely due to it being vastly more trustworthy than any other. In a truly free market, there would be no other way for it to gain dominance. Anyone engaging in "funny business" with an alternate currency would inevitably decrease it's trustworthiness and therefore it's dominance in the market. Governments would only accept currencies 100% redeemable in gold.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper You haven't answered all of my questions. How will we make sure everyone has gold to start with?
I mean, most people can not afford to buy gold these days, will they have to wait for their money to inflate?
How will you regulate banks? How will you prevent fractional reserves, will people have to walk around with all their gold all the time? Will IOU's be tradeable? You said lending was allowed.
whahas 3 months ago
@whahas The transition is not made instantaneously. People will acquire gold simply by being paid with gold if by no other means. Anyone can afford to buy gold in any case, as it does not mean you have to suddenly purchase large numbers of high weight coins. Most transactions would be still be with gold backed paper notes. It would be as simple as it is now to exchange your currency for a different currency. IOUs would be tradable if you could find anyone to accept them; can you do that now?
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper Most bank (and investor) regulations are there to deal with problems created by a fiat money system and central bank ultra cheap interest. In large part many of those regulations would become quite redundant in a true free gold based market. Existing laws against fraud and such would go a long way to keeping things on the up and up. If fractional reserve is not allowed on demand deposits, then there would be a legal requirement for regular audit, quite in keeping with normal tradition.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper So there will still be a governmental institution to keep controlling if a bank has fractional reserves? If that's the case, then it isn't a total free market, is it? I don't understand how this will prevent bribery.
Will there be private mints? Who will control them? Who will prevent Mints from cooperating and keeping prices of gold artificially high? Your answers give rise to more questions then it answers.
whahas 3 months ago
I note also how you mentioned that in the UK there is effectively 'no' fractional reserve requirement in effect with banks, and I would wholeheartedly agree that that can lead to nothing but utter catastrophe.
Panpiper 3 months ago
Regardless of gold-backed or not, Congress should print our money. Why should we owe all our money to the Federal Reserve Bank, and thus pay them interest on all the money they have printed?
In addition, banks should not create new money when making loans, because that creates more money than the net worth of the U.S., so each dollar is then worth less. If banks had to loan only what money they HAD, they would lend less, and the price of houses and everything else would go DOWN. Simple.
1tuuber 4 months ago
There's nothing wrong with banks increasing credit money under a gold standard. Banks would issue credit much more carefully because they will understand that if there's a bank run /liquidity crisis/depression nobody will bail them out, because nobody can print gold. That's the beauty of the gold standard it creates discipline .
vimeocomuk 4 months ago
@vimeocomuk Wow. I have never heard anybody say that there is nothing wrong with private companies profiting from the creation of money at the expense of the taxpayer.
That is a new one for me.
Why not let them create coins and cash too then instead of the central bank.
That is taking the free markets to the next level.
Appreciate your opinion though.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform "I have never heard anybody say that there is nothing wrong with private companies profiting from the creation of money at the expense of the taxpayer."
1- Well this is the system we had until 1971 and it worked better than the the unrestrained money printing system we have had for the last 40 years.
2- when you say "creation of money" you mean creation of private bank credit which makes up 98% of what we currently trade with today. The real money is the coins (2%)
vimeocomuk 4 months ago
@vimeocomuk We believe that it did not work well prior to 1971 and after 1971 as banks creating money as credit plus interest is unsustainable and unjust under a gold standard or no gold standard.
I appreciate your comments.
I just cannot justify bank created money in our world for all sorts of reasons and side effects, most notably the stability of banking. The gold standard was left for a reason because they wanted to prevent depression in the crazy system we operate in today and before.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform The gold standard was left because the government wanted to be able to spend more money (usually to fight wars) and the discipline imposed by gold being money made that very difficult. You can't just 'print' gold. It had nothing to do with avoiding depressions. The notion of a central bank was 'sold' to politicians under the auspices that it would be able to prevent depressions. That obviously did not work so well.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper We believe that under a debt based system the money supply has to increase forever and anything that holds it down will be innovated away or eliminated such as a gold standard or financial engineering.
Gold is a good way of holding down money created by a bank, but it will always be removed when faced with the fact that governments have to take on more debt to keep the system alive.
That is why we dont believe that gold as a viable solution, instead we tackle money created as debt.
bankingreform 3 months ago
@bankingreform It is perfectly feasible to have a gold standard without fractional reserve banking or any sort of debt based money creation. I heard you yourself give a very plausible explanation of how bank deposits would could work in such a system. It certainly would mean falling prices if economic growth outstrips the increase in the gold supply, but that is not the problem most economists think it is. Prices fall all the time in some industries and they thrive nonetheless.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper My emphasis is more on the end of fractional reserve banking. I have many friends that believe gold should be combined, I feel it is not so necessary and favour an independent Monetary Policy Committee, but if you combine gold and the end of fractional reserve I will sign on the dotted line to support you.
Gold standard on it's own, I could not sign up for.
Simon
bankingreform 3 months ago
@bankingreform I believe that giving fiat money creation authority to any government group, no matter how independent you try to make it, inevitably will lead to a hyperinflating disaster. I simply do not trust government to not succumb to temptation. My biggest concern though is 'setting' interest rates. It is crucial that interest be set by the supply of loanable funds relative to demand, not by a central planning bureaucrat.
Panpiper 3 months ago
@Panpiper I do not trust banks or politicians with money creation power either.
I dont believe money should be controlled through interest rates.
I describe out thoughts on this in the video titled 'Occupy London: Are they wasting their time'
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
You will then argue that in reality bank credit is what money is today and there is no real difference between bank credit transfers and coins exchanging hands. Which I agree with, Now the reason bank credit is just as accepted and trusted as coins is that people correctly believe that governments and central banks will not allow private banks to default on loans from depositers who hold current accounts with them. Under a gold standard banks would be fearful of going bust and lend carefully.
vimeocomuk 4 months ago
The price of gold only fluctuates because big hedge funds and banks hold all the contracts. Nevertheless, the price of gold has risen constantly as opposed to currency which continues to depreciate.
Otzmatron 4 months ago
@Otzmatron That is a very good reason not to base a currency on gold.
The major problem is that gold currency does not solve the problem that banks create money through credit. This is why we believe gold standards do not solve any of todays problems and it is misleading the public into thinking that money is printed by government when in fact notes are an insignificant portion of money.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform Thanks for commenting Simon, but unfortunately for you the internet and more and more people categorically support Paul's gold standard legislation.
We, Ron Paul supporters, appreciate your input, and hope you don't get your way with American legislation, especially given the fact that you're not even an American citizen. I mean you no disrespect, but I have to keep it real.
Otzmatron 4 months ago
@bankingreform Au has risen against USD sharply, but compared to a stable currency like CHF, it hasn't risen nearly as much so it really is more of USD tanking than Au rising.... further, Au, and even Ag, hasn't been able to match the rise in some commoditiy goods, but in the event of Au becoming circulating currency it's value should stabilize /against commoditys/.... but alas, Au's high value stops it from being sufficely divisible for use in small and fast transactions.........
IsaacKarjala 3 months ago
@IsaacKarjala Thanks for sharing your commentary.
Most useful.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 3 months ago
......... some will argue for representitive currency, however if the representitive currency can not be exchanged for a commodity currency that is useable on it's own then the representive currency essentially becomes fiat....... so more likely you'll end up with competeing commodity currencies that fall into niches, say a 75:24:1 Cu:Ag:Au currency for small&fast transactions, 20:75:5 for larger or slower transactions and 15:10:75 for very large or very slow transactions.........
IsaacKarjala 3 months ago
......... without a legally fixed exchange rate, such a system should prove robust.... but the most important thing is to get rid of legal tender, after that people will be figure things out on their own in fairly short order (say, 6 monthes) and I have little doubt that a wide range of currencies will find themselves niches......
IsaacKarjala 3 months ago
Gold is a finite resource, that is why it is a good standard to protect currency from being hyperinflated by a central bank. It does not mean a government has a stranglehold over gold, it means that you can redeem your money in gold should you ask for it in a financial institution (of your choice).
Otzmatron 4 months ago
@Otzmatron The problem is that government or central banks do not create money, those who say the governments are printing money are misleading the public. Banks create our money supply through credit which means that the cause of the problem is not solved by moving to a gold standard, and the danger is that banks will continue to expand credit and we will still have the same problem.
Make sense?
Thanks for sharing.
bankingreform 4 months ago
The price of gold is fluctuating dramatically these days as a reflection of the instability of fiat currency. Blaming that on gold is simply dishonest and/or wrong. I'm not saying gold is THE answer - TPTB can always fudge the ration of currency to gold - but for now gold is the only liquid, portable way I know of to ride out the coming chaos.
walktheworld 4 months ago
@walktheworld Thanks for sharing and I would agree with you, just as judging fiat money is not a fair comparison now as we operate of fractional reserve banking.
Please dont get me wrong, invest all you like it is a great investment in these times, but not a foundation for a stable monetary system.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
We don't want a gold standard. Simon is right. When the gold supply is controlled by politically unstable govt.s i.e. Russia and China and then gold is directly linked to money supply, what good will that do? What we need is for the Central Bank to control the QUANTITY of money in the economy and to issue it DEBT FREE. Banks should not be allowed to create money out of thin air! Banks should not have a monopoly on our money supply!
rowestocktrader 4 months ago
@rowestocktrader I am with you there.
Thanks for sharing your passion for reform.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform
It's a mistake to think there is only one type of gold bug. I know one type which is louder than the other but some of us invest in gold because of an obsession with the gold standard while others do so to protect ouselves against inflation and counterparty risk.
I, and many other holders of precious metals belong to the second category. I also think you will find more receptive and open minded people in that category.
BlunderCity 4 months ago
@BlunderCity Invest away. In my opinion it is a one way bet. I have no problem with that.
When we refer to gold bugs we refer to the people that believe money should be backed by Gold to achieve stability.
Thanks for adding that further clarity.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
What I'd like to see in the US is competing currencies with one as a means of exchange and the other used for savings. The federal government should issue its own debt-free money, spending it into existence on infrustructure, etc. The states could issue gold or silver coins as a secondary currency that floats in price against the exchange currency.
CornFlu 4 months ago
cont.
The exchange currency would be required to pay taxes and be always accepted for exchange. The secondary currency *could* be used for exchange but only between two willing participants. The primary function of the secondary currency would be for savings. It would be gold or silver with no taxes to pay when redeeming the coins for the exchange currency.
This would make allies of debt-free monetary reformers and gold-backed reformers.
CornFlu 4 months ago
@CornFlu Interesting proposals.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
The only thing of true value in an economy is the goodfaith that exists between members of that society.
rebelforgod 4 months ago
@bankingreform people who want a gold standard either have no clue about monetary history or a selective form of monetary history. There are many examples in history where a gold standard brought economic tyranny among the nations people..benefiting only those who hold most of the gold.
dogbarker1981 4 months ago
I believe backing currency by a percentage of gold and other commodities is a decent solution. The idea is to link a unit of currency to a specific quantity of a finite resource with value. This will prevent monetization, hence inflation. Using gold coin I can understand is tempting, and the price must be fixed, but I'm concerned about all the billionaires and smart central banks currently hording gold. If the US returns to a gold standard these players will have an unfair advantage.
combatjm89 4 months ago
@combatjm89 Of course the basis of banking reform is two-fold: end fractional reserve banking and bring back the Glas-Steigel Act, separating investment from commcial banking. These two things at the very least are essential, then we can look at monetary reform.
combatjm89 4 months ago
@combatjm89 That is monetary reform. We are talking the same language here. We stand for three reforms:
1. Depositors must be the legal owners of their money on deposit.
2. Banks must tell depositors what type of investments they will make.
3. End Fractional Reserve Banking.
You cannot end fractional reserve without replacing the debt money with a debt free money supply otherwise you would have a depression. That is where monetary reform comes in.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform Then by what mechanism do you limit M3? Let the Fed do it? Or the Treasury? They are the problem. Even with the end of fractional reserve banking, any money created not backed by a finite resource will still allow gov't abuse of M3, and continued welfare/warfare spending, and the hidden tax of inflation? What is your solution?
combatjm89 4 months ago
@combatjm89 In the UK the solution monetary reformers propose is that when banks are no longer to create money as credit that an independent monitory policy committee create debt free money. History has proven that neither banks nor politicians are able to create money. When you have one transparent fiat money supply called M, it is very easy to monitor. The MPC would be set inflation / deflation targets and gift the right amount of money to the treasury to spend debt free into the economy.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@combatjm89 This also leaves what we believe to be the major problem to stay alive - that is banks still create money as debt.
Privately created money by banks backed by gold will lead to the same problems we face today.
Whop controls money is way more important than what it is backed by.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
Steve Keen from Australia has a similar view. I own gold but I also have learnt that returning to a gold standard is not the answer.
BTinHD 4 months ago
The key here is DISCIPLINE, not some obsession with a shiny metal.
Obviously the Gold price won't fluctuate under a Gold Standard, that's the whole point, you moron.
Since banks won't be able to print more money, there will be a fixed amount of money and a fixed amount of gold.
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder Gold does not solve what we believe to be the root cause of the problem - that banks create money as debt.
Banks dont print money, they create it by issuing loans and this is not solved by Gold?
If gold solved this issue I would be with you.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, well if all the banks loans & deposits need to be back by gold (or backed by a currency backed by gold) then by extending too much credit - they risk a bank run, which their shareholders wouldn't appreciate.
This was the case all through the 19th century in the US and worked relatively well.
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder Allowing banks to create money and backing it by Gold will be just as destructive to the economy as it is today.
Why should banks benefit from creating money?
The rules still apply in this gold backed system:
1. If you want more money, you need to have more debt (Backed by gold in this case)
2. If you want less debt, then you have to have less money (And a recession)
If you want rule by bankers, then vote for such a system.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, how can you create new money and back it by gold?
This canot be done, unless you have a magical gold printing machine. I already explained the bank run issue, what did I get wrong?
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder As I said you dont need to back it by gold. It is not what money is backed by that is important, it is who creates it.
Gold still operates off a system where private banks create money through credit.
Calling it a printing machine is very misleading, 97% of money is created when a bank issues credit, there is no printing press. This is the issue we believe needs to be solved by monetary reform.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, well then why did this system work so well in the US in the 19th century?
Back then banks could not 'create' endless credit - they had to have it in the 1st place. There was no fractional reserve, they had to have the money in order to lend it. Please answer the question.
If it worked so well for over 100 years - why do you think it wouldn't work now?
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder In the 19th century money was still being multiplied and we did not have stability over that period. Ending fractional reserve banking is a solution we promote, you then need an alternative monetary system.
Us monetary reformers believe that once you have a transparent money supply called M there is no need for a gold backing. The goal will be inflation / deflation targeting only rather than leaving it to the luck of who has gold - a highly manipulated and controlled market.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, in a system like the one you're suggesting, what would stop the Government from printing more money?
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder Money is created independent of politicians and banks by a independent monetary policy committee that has set inflation / deflation goals. That is all they do. They are answerable to parliament and report their monthly meetings to the public about the amount of money created or destroyed to meet inflation / deflation targeting. Rather than doing this indirectly through interest rates and banks this would be completely transparent. Money can only be created for this reason.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, how is this different than the Fed? They are supposed to be independent, they report to the Government, and they are supposed to keep inflation in check.
Politicians will always find a way to get into this, and Gold seems to be the only refuge after the inevitable collapse.
The Nazis hoarded gold, Malaysian markets are now using gold coins, Zimbabwe reverted to gold recently, the Chinese are hoaring gold now, European central banks sit on tonnes of it, and the list goes on.
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder The Fed is private for one. They would have to be nationalised. At the moment they use interest rates to indirectly control the money supply. This is impossible and does not work. When money is created debt free it is completely transparent rather then trying to manipulate privately controlled money.
Currently the government do not print money, banks create money, important to know the difference.
We believe that MPC is better than banks creating money regulated by gold.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform, there is no improvement whatsoever in the system you're suggesting, and you may as well stop.
Handing over the printing press to whatever President or Presidential appointee, is even worse than the Fed.
I'm going to stop here, you can have the last word.
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder Again thank for sharing, it is important to debate.
We believe abolishing fractional reserve banking is a big step forward from privately created debt based money.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@LibertyDownUnder What 19th century America are you talking about? There were at least 6 recessions and two depressions, multiple panics and runs on the banks. Plus, while reserves were kept higher than today, the banks still circulated more notes than they had gold on hand.
CornFlu 4 months ago
@CornFlu, the busts in the 19th century were tiny compared to those today, and were mostly local ones.
Bank runs only happened to banks who issued too much credit, which actually kept the system in check,
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
@bankingreform Dear Simon Dixon, in a system with 100% reserves not the bank is the money creator. The are two main form of banking, the deposit banking and loan banking. There is no CREDIT banking.
In the history of human kind, the longest stable monetary system which lasted around 950 years, in the byzantine monetary system the money creator was the saver who take that savings went to the state official and coined the money. The banks couldn't estabilish a monopolistic system.
TrackballClick 4 months ago
@TrackballClick, well said.
This bankingreform guy is totally ignorant and I'm struggling to get him to see reason.
LibertyDownUnder 4 months ago
Lol, gold bugs are the threat to monetary stability??? Try insolvent governments, bankruptcy banks and a monetary system based on debt. Man, whether it be central bankers or politicians, should not be able to create money and credit out of thin air. The USD as the reserve currency RIP
misterman6000 4 months ago
@misterman6000 Thanks for sharing. You are so right, it is for all the resins above that monetary reform needs to happen.
Unfortunately debt based money continues under gold money and the issue still persists.
It is for that reason that we see gold bugs as a threat, because it is a system that continues debt based money and does not deal with the root of the issue - a privately created debt based money supply.
Free markets and money creation do not mix well as we see today.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
and you dont seem to understand that money is a product itself. Money is not a construct as much as its a naturally occuring phenomenon. There are attributes to these naturally occuring moneys. You should learn what these are to know why gold is good. Austrian economics, mises.org
I sort of know what you are saying, but its not a case of gold or reform, its gold AND reform, and thats what we really need, dont bash the gold bugs but join them and reinforce your message to them
GSDebunked 4 months ago
@GSDebunked I have studied all schools of economics and am very familiar. I am an economist myself. That is what has drawn me to the conclusion that money is not subject to free market rules. We currently have a privately created money supply by banks, it does not work.
Simon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform it isnt subject to free market rules, you are right. but it should be. I believe opening the market for money is the right way, gold money, silver money, oil money, basket-of-commodities money.
I try to learn a lot from ron paul just in terms of his debating skills, he is so passive and persuasive. He also says "i believe so on", "hayek said: x because x and i agree with him" rather than this IS right, this IS wrong. Your doing a good thing, just work on the comms
GSDebunked 4 months ago
@GSDebunked Thanks for the feedback. Communication is everything and Ron Paul has been at it for a while and communicates with perfection.
He would make such a great president.
Thanks for sharing
Simon
bankingreform 4 months ago
ok so are you against an asset backed money? dont you know that when gold was money it didnt fluctuate like a commodity?
just read some of your previous comments, it seem you dont understand what caused the depression, because you think that because we were under a gold system before that must have something to do with it... you dont understand free markets and price discovery, you have no faith in the compounding effect of markets that adam smith coined the invisible hand
GSDebunked 4 months ago
@GSDebunked Thanks for your comments. Just to clarify.
I dont think the depression was caused by Gold. It happened under Gold, the point being gold does not prevent fractional reserve banking..
I believe in free markets, but money needs to be created debt free independent of government and banks, gold backed money does not achieve this. We have a privately controlled money supply right now.
I am an ex trader and now a business person who is fully aware of price discovery.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform OK, Im moving your way now, but as i said, i would suggest not saying its gold vs reform.
There are a lot of people that would like to fix the system and they are learning about gold, they actually know what the federal reserve is, they know what the fractional reserve banking is, many of them know the critical problem that money is created in debt. I would work on making everyone aware that we could bring about a gold standard without fixing the problem.
GSDebunked 4 months ago
What you are basically saying is: Gold isnt good as a backing for a currency because now, in a FIAT System, the price fluctuation of gold is too big? ....Think about it again....you dont have to be a Goldbug to see that your argument is an epic fail
roeschuxxx 4 months ago
@roeschuxxx Gold does not solve the problem that banks create money as debt.
To have a gold currency and fractional reserve banking is more of the same. That is the system that lead to the great depression and it will be removed again when faced with another depression.
It ignores the core problem that money is privately created through credit.
Gold will create the illusion that monetary reform has happened, but we will still have the same system.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform I didnt say that a gold backed currency will solve our problems...I just say your argument about the "volatibility of Gold" is nonsense. You cant say a Goldbacked Currency would be a problem because *now* in a FIAT System the price of gold is too volatil. You see the error in your argument? No offense..
roeschuxxx 4 months ago
@roeschuxxx I see what you are saying.
I do not agree with the current system, that is why I campaign for monetary reform. Many people think I am defending the current.
It is easy to be misunderstood on YouTube, the fluctuation is not the reason it is that the fractional reserve banking problem is not fixed by gold.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon
bankingreform 4 months ago
@roeschuxxx Yes, good question... The proposal is to thing in gold, and you will see the big fluctuation of the hypothetical fiat money, supposed to have value. :-)
TrackballClick 4 months ago
As Ron Paul also said, even gold is not a perfect money. That's true.
The dependence of money, which was created by printing too much money, it can be cured only by a successive fall back to real exchanges instead of money based exchanges. The economy is not limited to money only, there are exchanges everywhere, even in family, but the "calculation" are not based on money, there. So, gold not being perfect to resolve the problem, but more expansion of money is not a solution at all.
TrackballClick 4 months ago
@TrackballClick But money is not created by printing too much money, money is created by fractional reserve banking through loans. Banks determine how many loans they make and this makes up the money supply.
If you do not stop this then you have not solved the problem.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
Gold & silver will protect your wealth & create a stable economy. Art I sect 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to *coin* money, not print worthless fiat trash. This guy is either clueless or an agent. Thumbs down.
faulconandsnowjob 4 months ago
@faulconandsnowjob Gold does not solve the problem that banks create money as debt.
To have a gold currency and fractional reserve banking is more of the same. That is the system that lead to the great depression and it will be removed again when faced with another depression.
It ignores the core problem that money is privately created through credit.
Gold will create the illusion that monetary reform has happened, but we will still have the same system.
Thanks for sharing.
Simon Dixon
bankingreform 4 months ago
Price fluctuations in gold??? Has gold ever crashed like most fiat currencies and the the imaginary values you find in the stock market?
realitychk69 4 months ago
money doesnt have to be back by metal if we had mutual credit clearing house to enable buyers to buy and sellers to by in a fair honest and fully accountable way. Its not the form of money that matters but how its allowed to freely represent exchange for goods and services.Its suppose to be an exchange instrument and not necessarily a commodity. But its fair to call Gold a representation of value but to have it back our money is another question.I would fear those who own most of it to control
charronfamilyconnect 4 months ago
@charronfamilyconnect instead of mutual credit, the mutual exchange is an additional tool to substitute the money. But the credit (not the loan!) is a transfer of wealth from the future to the present. Which at first look seems to be perfect, but the probability that someone does not realize the promission, it ijects a loss, which loss is tried to fill by other's work. That is the hidden transfer of wealth into the direction who mostly fails to realize the promisses.
TrackballClick 4 months ago
@TrackballClick sorry man you lost me there? One thing I dont believe in is paying 3 times for the same house for which the builder(the real producer) only got paid once yet the bank gets paid 3 times. Is that the kind of system you believe in? Sorry if I misunderstood you. I think its okay to borrow, but not pay 3 times the initial principal. You agree?
charronfamilyconnect 4 months ago
@charronfamilyconnect I understand your concern, and here I fully agree with you with that the bank always is there in the middle of any real exchange. But this is because he is the only monopoly who has right to create money out of nothing, which rights the state has given to them. This dependence of money it could be built exactly because the ever existence of fiat money. And in the details of this not so simple gamble we cannot find a common understanding yet.
TrackballClick 4 months ago
LOL! Price volatility of gold? Even my 13 year old nephew knows that the price volatility of gold is simply the result of our current floating exchange rate mechanism monetary system. Gold's supply increases at an annual rate of 2% per year, and has done for many centuries, nothing volatile about that. I think the real reason you think the gold movement is a theat to your silly pet project is because it is based on sound reasoning, facts, and a proper understanding of monetary history.
cankorgbr 4 months ago
It's those wicked ETs that want their gold. No wonder they found a way to influence the rich.
Licmycat 4 months ago
To be clear, Ron Paul is not for a government mandated gold backed currency. He is for free currency competition: let the market decide what should be used as money.
He may believe that the market will choose gold, but he does not suggest it as a state controlled gold-money monopoly.
GoldenDragon214 4 months ago
You just allow for competing currencies and don't give a monopoly on currency to one central bank.
MrGreeneggsnham 4 months ago
You're absolutely right Simon. And this is a battle we can win. Any debate on this, public or academic, is easily winnable. These zealots worshiping their golden calf, they cannot win the public's support.
etzel33 4 months ago
The only reason gold's "price" is fluctuating wildly right now is because it's priced in fiat dollars, and the exodus is on. Gold's "value" which is what we need to create stability in any currency has been very stable for 5000 years. We need to start thinking in terms of value vs. price. Looking at things strictly through the fiat dollar price mechanism is extremely deceptive.
sharpcin 4 months ago
Gold will not solve it. The question is WHO controls the quantity of money! doesnt matter if its backed or not if u cant get it anywhere
Denoomi 4 months ago
@Denoomi Could not agree more.
By debating what it is backed by is completely missing the point. Who controls it is the real issue to be debated.
Thanks for adding.
Simon
bankingreform 4 months ago
Amazing that you can stand up straight, considering the law of gravity is so wrong.
pretorious700 4 months ago
Ron Paul is for legalized competition. Not a monopoly on gold.
Lukeor 4 months ago 9
The "biggest threat"? Good grief. Not the banks. Not the government. Not crony capitalists. Not fascists. Gold bugs!
monetaryintelligence 4 months ago 2
@monetaryintelligence Banks is what we stand to reform, that is given, but if we do it through Gold, banks will not be reformed at all.remain
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform Hmmm.
Economic growth requires capital. Capital comes from savings and underconsumption. To encourage saving, prudent savers need to be sure that their purchasing power will not be eroded via inflation/money printing. Gold helps to maintain people's purchasing power much better than a fiat currency simply because it cannot be created out of thin air.
People should not fear gold, but they should definitely fear paper currencies - no matter who has control over the printing press
monetaryintelligence 4 months ago
Comment removed
cankorgbr 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@monetaryintelligence I think your austrian perspective (read: reason and logic) is lost on Simon Dixon. He wants magical free state money for all, because after all, we can totally trust politicians to control the supply of money
cankorgbr 4 months ago
I very rarely downgrade a video .. but this one is misleading IMO , and therefore a thumbs down.
BTW ... you said : "just look at the volatile price of gold"
... now that was the silliest statement I've heard for a while.
& you want to discuss monetary reform ?
OMG
StandUp555 4 months ago 6
@StandUp555 Gold prices are crazy right now. Become a speculators hunting ground.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@bankingreform
CBs WW are stocking up on Gold.
Whether we like it or not, Gold is the basis of banking , the Bankster's money.
If you think things will change after 6000 yrs. of history, just because we are in the information age , IMO you are wrong.
Sure , at some stage Gold will be repriced - by politicians - to allow a new ponzi scheme to begin.
Check out Martin Armstrong's recent audios .... the fiat-ponzi-scheme RESETs every 40+ years.
"Real" change is unfortunately idealistic !
StandUp555 4 months ago
@bankingreform Gold and Silver are been manipulated by the creation of paper gold and silver, so if the right to create this fake asset was taken away from the JP Morgans and we based our money on REAL gold and silver then we would have a very stable monetary foundation to build on. I used to think you knew what was going on, but you have so lost my respect with your misunderstanding of the basics. Sorry i will not be buying the book :(
eyeswideopennimrod 4 months ago 2
@eyeswideopennimrod No problem. All I can say is that we differ in opinion rather than a misunderstanding of the basics.
I have been through the whole Gold thing for years, I have just come to a different conclusion to you.
I can assure you it is well researched. Hard to share on YouTube comments though.
bankingreform 4 months ago
@StandUp555 Look at history you will see the elite have used gold to their advantage as well. See the English Goldsmiths and the tally stick system. The Currency Act of 1764 and Stamp Act of 1765 is another good example when Britain forced the Colonies to pay taxes in gold, which at the time Britain controlled the quantity of and the colonies had little to no gold to use. This led to open revolt.
dogbarker1981 4 months ago
Why would a gold & silver backed currency not work?
Be specific!
TheSilverGuild 4 months ago