It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump pick for the Treasury Secretary hinted that he will implement the gold standard

page: 6
23
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Like here.


That already covers what I stated, that monetized gold was affected, not ALL gold as was claimed.

Due try to follow along Neo, this conversation is not that complicated.




posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
Like here.


That already covers what I stated, that monetized gold was affected, not ALL gold as was claimed.

Due try to follow along Neo, this conversation is not that complicated.


And that is about as inaccurate as it gets.

Simple FACT.

www.antiquemoney.com...

Seems like some one is forgetting fiat currency that could be redeemed for gold.

Which were essentially worthless since they couldn't be used.
edit on 6-12-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
And that is about as inaccurate as it gets.

Simple FACT.

www.antiquemoney.com...

Seems like some one is forgetting fiat currency that could be redeemed for gold.


Oh, Jesus Christ, those are gold certificates and hence fall under the category of, wait for it, monetized gold. They needed to be redeemed for the same price as gold specie.

Dude, if you are going to try and argue this topic at least brush up on what it is you are talking about.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




Oh, Jesus Christ, those are gold certificates and hence fall under the category of, wait for it, monetized gold. They needed to be redeemed for the same price as gold specie.


ONLY if redeemed.

The rest of the time.

Freaking dollars.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
ONLY if redeemed.


The EO demanded that they be redeemed so your argument that they became worthless, is well, worthless.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
ONLY if redeemed.


The EO demanded that they be redeemed so your argument that they became worthless, is well, worthless.



That depends on perspective since the fact FDR did take private property from it's citizens.

That hasn't been disputed in the least.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
That hasn't been disputed in the least.


We covered this already, I am not talking about what Roosevelt did, I am talking about what type of gold was affected and how much it was worth.

Do you want to go for three times on this point?



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I doubt US has any gold remaining given the FED has blocked all attempts to audit gold residing at fort knox. So to return to the gold standard Mr Trump will have to buy 3.3 trillion dollars worth of gold to cover todays fiat in ciculation. How does one buy 3.3 trillion dollars worth of gold without further diluting the value of that fiat?



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: glend
How does one buy 3.3 trillion dollars worth of gold without further diluting the value of that fiat?


There is not even close to the amount of refined gold on the planet to cover United States currency.




edit on 6-12-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Zazz 2020!



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
That hasn't been disputed in the least.


We covered this already, I am not talking about what Roosevelt did, I am talking about what type of gold was affected and how much it was worth.

Do you want to go for three times on this point?


Well I was since he took us off the gold standard in 1933.

Back to word games and condescension.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Well I was since he took us off the gold standard in 1933.

Back to word games and condescension.


Then you were talking to yourself since I never brought up that topic.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
Well I was since he took us off the gold standard in 1933.

Back to word games and condescension.


Then you were talking to yourself since I never brought up that topic.


Is that right ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Is that right ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Uh, yeah, Neo, no. Let me explain this to you again.

Another poster incorrectly stated that ALL gold was confiscated. I said only monetized gold was affected by EO 6102. I did not see myself discussing Roosevelt or what I thought of his policy, I was pointing out that the other poster made an erroneous statement. Which the above link pretty clearly spells out if your have even a minimal grasp on reading comprehension.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




I did not see myself discussing Roosevelt or what I thought of his policy, I was pointing out that the other poster made an erroneous statement.


Let me explain something to someone.

That's what some people call the 'legitimate rape' argument.

The FACT that FDR took private property which in todays' dollars would be worth billions if not trillions.

Still hasn't been disputed.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Still hasn't been disputed.


So go dispute it with someone, that is not what I was discussing.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
Still hasn't been disputed.


So go dispute it with someone, that is not what I was discussing.


Your right someone was 'arguing' as long as people got to wear their bling there wasn't any problems.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Your right someone was 'arguing' as long as people got to wear their bling there wasn't any problems.


Nope, still not right my hyperbolic friend.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yes!

Yes!

'Hyperbole' !



Thank GOD for Ford legalizing it in '74.

Thank You Ford for allowing me to own GOLD bullion again.
edit on 6-12-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
'Hyperbole'


Pretty much, since you are not posting anything that I have not already stated. Read subsections A, B, C and D of section 2 and tell me if I was incorrect.

I know, as is your wont, you will make an irrelevant reply, but I am on vacation this week and can go back and forth as long as you want.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
This is a terrible idea for several reasons. First of all, because we have constant population and business growth, the money supply has to expand. If it doesn't then money will become hard to get and poverty will result.

Secondly, this guy has it totally backwards. The FED may help bankers in some regards, but they absolutely protect the rest of us from being bankrupted and the economy crashing when there's a recession. That's really the main reason that we ever came out of the great recession, because lowering interest rates spurred purchasing that grew the economy.

Without the Fed we'd have high interest rates, like Trump and his buddies want, which will make bankers richer because all of our debts will become more expensive to pay off.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join