The Virtue of Hoarding

[KentuckyThinker]

My position is that it's good to "hoard" or save money, especially in times like these.

I agree with you in principle, but I would much rather hoard gold, silver or necessities rather than dollars.

I'd agree with that 100%. Besides, gold and silver are "real" money.

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

 

[Paulie]

I agree with you in principle, but I would much rather hoard gold, silver or necessities rather than dollars.

I'd agree with that 100%. Besides, gold and silver are "real" money.

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

how can we ever expect society to 'learn the hard way' when the government keeps coming in and saving them from having to?

 

[KentuckyThinker]

I'd agree with that 100%. Besides, gold and silver are "real" money.

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

how can we ever expect society to 'learn the hard way' when the government keeps coming in and saving them from having to?

Well, I think when the shit really hits the fan people will be using their dollars for kindling. The gubmint will not be able to save them IMO.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I agree with you in principle, but I would much rather hoard gold, silver or necessities rather than dollars.

I'd agree with that 100%. Besides, gold and silver are "real" money.

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

Only if we see real hyperinflation I'm afraid. People obviously wouldn't be accepting paper in that scenario and would probably want gold, silver, or anything else that has real value. Cigarettes would probably be big on some peoples lists as well.

 

[Paulie]

I'd agree with that 100%. Besides, gold and silver are "real" money.

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

Only if we see real hyperinflation I'm afraid. People obviously wouldn't be accepting paper in that scenario and would probably want gold, silver, or anything else that has real value. Cigarettes would probably be big on some peoples lists as well.

I don't think hyperinflation is a realistic potential for the US. At least, not the Weimar Republic type.

We'd have to have lost the reserve currency status before that would happen, as there is still a necessity for countries like China to hold a certain amount of Dollars.

I do think that we're going to see some pretty bad price inflation down the road though. Apparently the market thinks so too, that's why gold is at an historic high.

Oh wait I forgot, gold's REALLY at a high because TV commercials are pimping it and causing a craze

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes sir they are! The only bad thing about having silver, gold, etc. is how will we get the dumbed-down shopkeepers to accept these for payment? Do you think when the dollar really goes down that a lot more people will become educated the hard way about metals and in turn happily accept junk silver? My biggest fear is trying to explain to some cashier that my 1952 Franklin halves are worth more than 50 cents each.

Only if we see real hyperinflation I'm afraid. People obviously wouldn't be accepting paper in that scenario and would probably want gold, silver, or anything else that has real value. Cigarettes would probably be big on some peoples lists as well.

I don't think hyperinflation is a realistic potential for the US. At least, not the Weimar Republic type.

We'd have to have lost the reserve currency status before that would happen, as there is still a necessity for countries like China to hold a certain amount of Dollars.

I do think that we're going to see some pretty bad price inflation down the road though. Apparently the market thinks so too, that's why gold is at an historic high.

Oh wait I forgot, gold's REALLY at a high because TV commercials are pimping it and causing a craze

I don't know that we'll be seeing hyperinflation either, but I think that hyperinflation would be the only way for a majority of people to suddenly realize that green pieces of paper aren't real money.

 

[Paulie]

Only if we see real hyperinflation I'm afraid. People obviously wouldn't be accepting paper in that scenario and would probably want gold, silver, or anything else that has real value. Cigarettes would probably be big on some peoples lists as well.

I don't think hyperinflation is a realistic potential for the US. At least, not the Weimar Republic type.

We'd have to have lost the reserve currency status before that would happen, as there is still a necessity for countries like China to hold a certain amount of Dollars.

I do think that we're going to see some pretty bad price inflation down the road though. Apparently the market thinks so too, that's why gold is at an historic high.

Oh wait I forgot, gold's REALLY at a high because TV commercials are pimping it and causing a craze

I don't know that we'll be seeing hyperinflation either, but I think that hyperinflation would be the only way for a majority of people to suddenly realize that green pieces of paper aren't real money.

Which may also ironically be why the government would most likely never allow it to happen.

These SOB's know EXACTLY what they're doing. Ever since the whole world financial system became intertwined, it became like CAKE for the banksters to do just about whatever they want.

 

[thrival]

Gold is no more or less real than anything else. Money is only a perception of value. Personally I value food, water, liberty and transportation more than gold. Not too many people know what to do with gold but sock it away in a vault somewhere. While gold only has a perceived value, those other things mentioned have real, life-saving value; just an example of how impractical humans can be, and how our values have been corrupted by banksters. It was a wise native-American who said "Only when the last tree has died, and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught, will the white man realize that he can't eat money." Silver has value to me, but only because I know how to make medicine with it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Gold has value because people give it value.

 

[Neubarth]

Gold has value because people give it value.

Hear, Hear!

 

[Care4all]

Gold has value because people give it value.

same with paper money though, no?

What makes gold special? We do, right?

 

[Paulie]

Gold has value because people give it value.

same with paper money though, no?

What makes gold special? We do, right?

HISTORY is what makes gold special. It's always been the store of value during inflationary periods.

Paper money comes and goes, but gold has always been there and has always served the same purpose.

 

[Care4all]

Gold has value because people give it value.

same with paper money though, no?

What makes gold special? We do, right?

HISTORY is what makes gold special. It's always been the store of value during inflationary periods.

Paper money comes and goes, but gold has always been there and has always served the same purpose.

the dollar has been around for a few centuries and it is still around....?

if the currency lasts through my lifetime, then what more could i ask for?

Also, again, what makes gold valuable...and so what if it has been around for a while?

What value does it really have? Can you eat it? can you put it over your head as a roof?

Why was gold chosen as the metal of choice for currency?

I contend that gold can be as useless as the paper dollar, if we deem it to be useless....

I suppose it is mind over matter...the matter being gold as a useless object or metal, but the mind says it is worth something, so it is worth something.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Gold has value because people give it value.

same with paper money though, no?

What makes gold special? We do, right?

No, the government gives paper money value. Paper would never serve as a medium of exchange on a free market because what person in their right mind is going to trade a tangible good for a green piece of paper with a dead President on it?

 

[Paulie]

Care you just have to understand that gold is valuable because it's been valuable it's entire existence.

When you say "because we make it so", that is true. Since day one of gold's life, it has been considered valuable. It's psychology more than anything else.

The entire world society would have to decouple from gold as a valuable source of wealth for it to become valueless. And like I said, that has happened to paper money before, but NEVER has it happened to gold.

It's not like anyone's saying to forsake all food and shelter for gold instead. All that's being said is that it is, and has always been, the place where people store their cash value during inflation to hedge against paper money loss in value.

That's it, really. Just like it would be stupid to have JUST cash, it would be stupid to have JUST gold. Of course people need to eat. That's why other things are traded as valuable commodities, like wheat, corn, soy beans, etc.

 

[thrival]

Gold is pretty to look at and (more recently from a historical perspective), has been found useful for
making electrical contacts. But apart from it's industrial value, the "perceived" value is largely
aesthetics (artistic works.) Yes, savages admired and traded their land for pretty trinkets, that's not an
indicator of value or IQ, but only something that was rare in their culture and caught their fancy..

And the popularity of script money took off specifically because it was lighter, harder to detect and
therefore, steal, than gold. Banksters exploited this fact by issuing 10X more script than they held gold
on deposit, becaus only 10% of people came back for it. This proves people would rather trust banks
who provide paper currency, than own gold. Gold is what made fractional reserve banking possible.
Human values do evolve, or at least they should.

But banksters also understand that everything people need (and much they don't) has value too, if
people think so. It makes no sense to spout economic rhetoric if it doesn't follow common sense. Yes
gold has value because we give it value, but that's true for everything else humans value. The value
some people give gold really is disproportionate and irrational. There's so much you really can't do
with gold, vs. say, power tools. It supplies zero calories.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Gold is pretty to look at and (more recently from a historical perspective), has been found useful for
making electrical contacts. But apart from it's industrial value, the "perceived" value is largely
aesthetics (artistic works.) Yes, savages admired and traded their land for pretty trinkets, that's not an
indicator of value or IQ, but only something that was rare in their culture and caught their fancy..

And the popularity of script money took off specifically because it was lighter, harder to detect and
therefore, steal, than gold. Banksters exploited this fact by issuing 10X more script than they held gold
on deposit, becaus only 10% of people came back for it. This proves people would rather trust banks
who provide paper currency, than own gold. Gold is what made fractional reserve banking possible.
Human values do evolve, or at least they should.

But banksters also understand that everything people need (and much they don't) has value too, if
people think so. It makes no sense to spout economic rhetoric if it doesn't follow common sense. Yes
gold has value because we give it value, but that's true for everything else humans value. The value
some people give gold really is disproportionate and irrational. There's so much you really can't do
with gold, vs. say, power tools. It supplies zero calories.

No, government made fractional reserve banking possible, not gold. If the government hadn't allowed banks to commit fraud by refusing to give their customers their rightful property during bank runs then banks would be forced to keep their reserves because they know a bank run is possible at any time.

 

[thrival]

Beg to differ. Fractional reserve practices are much older than the US government. Jeffrey Marks in his book The Modern Idolatry traces back to the first Jewish goldsmiths in the old testament, where Yaweh expresses his displeasure with those who "refuse to restore the debtors' pledge, oppress the widow and the poor, lend at discount and at interest." A friend said that banking goes back even further to China.

US government never required 100% reserves against loans, so runs on the banks were common, because bankers do make bad loans without sufficient deposit margins. Gold being scarce and in only a few hands, wasn't sufficient assets to expand the money supply for what needed to be done.

But if you want to discuss the injustices our gubmint let(s) banks get away with, let's not forget how the continent was acquired in the first place, with firearms and fire-water. No treaty with natives that we didn't break.

Mere gold & silver is short-sighted and simply prejudicial. Again, you can't eat the stuff and it's cumbersome to carry. Plenty of other assets can serve as backing for currency, if you don't have faith in your government's script. There surely isn't enough gold to cover all the US obligations and currency outstanding today, and assuming we went back on the gold standard tomorrow, the metal would be gone the day after all those obligations were called in by investors.

But at least we can agree that govt/banking relations is a collusion, but you want to preserve banking which is a criminal industry by it's very principle of lending inflated and worthless script, and then foreclosing upon and acquiring real assets bought with same.

Gold/silver backing solves nothing, it's simply a preference. You could just as well use the signatures of famous persons, for all the good they serve. Gold and silver should be used for the purposes it serves, not locked in a vault somewhere. "Dig it up, melt it down, bury it again" (is stoopid.) Why don't we use food as currency? Because it rots if it sits too long. And yet it sustains life much better than gold. Food should be eaten and gold should be used, industrially and otherwise.

You're free to hoard gold and that will effect it's price, but it's only what you can buy with it, that keeps you alive. It's simply a reflection of what you value, and your personal prejudices that others may share; very pretty ...gold.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Beg to differ. Fractional reserve practices are much older than the US government. Jeffrey Marks in his book The Modern Idolatry traces back to the first Jewish goldsmiths in the old testament, where Yaweh expresses his displeasure with those who "refuse to restore the debtors' pledge, oppress the widow and the poor, lend at discount and at interest." A friend said that banking goes back even further to China.

US government never required 100% reserves against loans, so runs on the banks were common, because bankers do make bad loans without sufficient deposit margins. Gold being scarce and in only a few hands, wasn't sufficient assets to expand the money supply for what needed to be done. Mere gold & silver is short-sighted and simply prejudicial. Again, you can't eat the stuff and it's cumbersome to carry. Plenty of other assets can serve as backing for currency, if you don't have faith in your government's script. There surely isn't enough gold to cover all the US obligations and currency outstanding today, and assuming we went back on the gold standard tomorrow, the metal would be gone the day after all those obligations were called by investors.

But at least we can agree that govt/banking relations is a collusion, but you want to preserve banking which is a criminal industry by it's very principle of lending inflated and worthless script, and then foreclosing upon and acquiring real assets bought with same.

Gold/silver backing solves nothing, it's simply a preference. You could just as well use the signatures of famous persons, for all the good they serve. Gold and silver should be used for the purposes it serves, not locked in a vault somewhere. "Dig it up, melt it down, bury it again." Why don't we use food as currency? Because it rots if it sits too long. And yet it sustains life much better than gold. Food should be eaten and gold should be used, industrially and otherwise.

You're free to hoard gold and that will effect it's price, but it's only what you can buy with it, that keeps you alive. It's simply a reflection of what you value, and your personal prejudices that others may share; very pretty ...gold.

Yes, fractional reserve banking is older than the U.S. but it always requires a government to back it up. Otherwise the system would be seen as the fraud that it is and people would simply not use banks. Under a 100% gold standard the banks would have to keep 100% of their reserves on hand, rather than inflating the money supply. That's why gold is superior to paper.

 

[thrival]

How much gold bullion do you actually own, that you have ready access to touch and feel, or do you own certificates or futures (paper) where the actual, physical gold is held by someone else? (What's your address, I'll send my boys over-- LOL); and that's my point. US may as well use uranium as basis for currency, any other metal (or all of them), plus capital goods, inventory, federal lands & assets, etc. Gold is just a preference. You're obsessed with one element of nature and you don't have a rational explanation why. You would likewise have other people in thrall to the same yellow metal, again for no rational reason. That dumbs us all down.

100% reserves isn't practical, trillions (in credit) outstanding today, which is what made this rich and diverse economy you love, possible. The only problem with that is, we're working for bankers and not for ourselves. You're still defending banking even when you know they're crooks and the reason for our tax system. Why not just pay bank owners a distribution fee? Gummint could just print enough money for that, no %. Me thinks you still like the idea of earning money for nuthin' (letting it sit somewhere to accrue.) With Uncle Sam as lender of record to everyone at 0%, would be difficult for private lenders to get a leg up, and that would be a good thing.