

- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-2196910...
And how does the biggest economy in the world make this transition? How does the federal government acquire the gold that it would need to back the dollar? Certainly if it began buying it the price of gold would go up drastically.
According to the M2 definition, there are about $10.5 Trillion in existence. So if the government went to the gold standard and set the price at $1,000 per ounce (a price that at today's rate nobody would accept), it would take $10.5 billion ounces of gold to back up our currency.
Here is an article on how much gold there is in the world by the BBC. If we use the larger estimate of 2.5 million metric tons of gold as the total in the world, then that is the equivalent of 80.376 billion troy ounces. So the US government would have to own 1/8 of the world's gold and have it sitting there, redeemable in Ft Knox (or someplace else obviously). If we use the smaller estimate of 171,000 metric tonnes then there are only 5.5 billion troy ounces in the world total so the price of the dollar would have to be $2,000 per oz and the US would have to have stockpiled all the gold in the world.
I'm not seeing how this could work. It seems to me that the world's need for currency has greatly outstripped its supply of gold.
In the late 1990s, I did invest in gasoline futures and home heating oil futures. As risky as those are, I did make a killing on them."
We invest in the same way, except I have no exposure to precious metals right now and I've lost money or broken even almost every time I've traded derivatives. I know a decent bit about them, but when I speculate I usually lose.
Rates would go *down* if we started retiring debt. We should start right now before some event causes rates to spike and generates a crisis.
As for silver, I would compare it to stainless steel in terms of ease of corrosion. Yes, both do corrode, just not all that quickly or easily.
And that will make this depression and the great depression both look like hiccups. And spread worldwide
2) America does not even want to take symbolic steps to reduce the debt anymore. When Paul Ryan's and Tim Penny's plans for reducing the deficit (not the debt) are viewed as extremist when they aren't even close to enough, it is time to shrug.
Yes. Short-term Treasuries alone, esp these days, are NOT a great store of value. 2-3% per year sounds right.
It's a HUGE problem. On the other hand if we just took modest steps, the problem would disappear. We don't take modest steps though. All we want to do is take symbolic steps, like a politician at a ground breaking ceremony moving one 300ml of dirt. We should address it now while modest steps would work, not wait for it to become a crisis.
As for the passive investment that stays ahead of inflation, I am willing to take risks in the stock market in order to increase my wealth. The increase in the stock market lately seems like a bubble because of all the low interest money out there right now. My concern is that many of these companies are ridden with more debt than they were prior to 2000.
Load more comments...