Problem with Gold and a Gold-Redeemable Currency

Protocol 20:22 "YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE GOLD STANDARD HAS BEEN THE RUIN OF THE STATES WHICH ADOPTED IT, FOR IT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY THE DEMANDS FOR MONEY, THE MORE SO THAT WE HAVE REMOVED GOLD FROM CIRCULATION AS FAR AS POSSIBLE."

Man has been on a gold and silver standard since money was first mentioned in the Bible in the days of Abraham about 2000 BC and the Silver Shekel of Tyre. The widespread use of money fits with Revelation's description of money being revealed during the 3rd Seal or 3rd Millennium of man's mortal existence on this Earth (Black Horse).

But the Black Horse of the 3rd Seal isn't primarily about money. The Black Horse represents famine. According to the prophecy, artificial scarcity resulted in a days wages barely purchasing enough wheat or barley for one man to survive. However, luxury items like oil and wine were unaffected. The artificial scarcity of a gold-redeemable currency, has driven nations to plunder and subjugate neighboring peoples for gold for thousands of years.

I believe money should be backed by real assets as well as being fully redeemable for those assets without causing unwanted inflation. But a Constitutional money system should also not need to constrain us to the scarcity of gold, nor cause our banking institutions to be vulnerable to failure due to fractional reserve banking and periodic contractions in the money supply.

Unfortunately, I see an eventual end to the FED and a return to a gold standard. If this happens, will the US confiscates gold from the people again like it did in 1933 or will it confiscate half of Germany's gold supply that is currently being held by the New York FED? (Max Keiser)

SSS is not inflationary. Loans focus on retaining value and would not be approved for inflationary profiteering. Constitutional voluntary fee/tax would also control inflation levied for the use of national credit. Also, the SSS currency is backed by real redeemable assets. And SSS protects banks from their inherent vulnerability to failure due to commodity price fluctuations and the consequences of fractional reserve banking.

What good is it to have gold-redeemable currency when your bank fails, the curency fails, and the economy falls into a deep depression? Why not prevent the bank failure? ****Letting the bank redeem their money following an individual failure is better then letting the people redeem their money following a total banking, currency and total economic failure.*****

Don't fall for the obvious Gold propaganda that is being overplayed in both the mainstream and alternative media. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Genesis Communication all preaching gold, gold, gold.

> Money is just a medium of exchange. As long as the parties involved agree upon what the exchange rate. If individuals are free to make private contracts with one another, then they should be free to exchange money. Money, as I see it, could be described as a standardized government contract form approved for use by its citizenry.
>
> The issues with gold is that while it is innert and lasts a long time, there isn't much of it around. This creates a problem of scarcity. And when something is made scarce, then it gets a false value associated with it. On the flip side, you don't want people to be able to counterfeit money either. That goes for the government also. However, with modern technology, we can better create paper currencies that cannot easily be counterfeit.

> Today, we really don't need gold at all because we can create a relatively counterfeit-proof currency that is equally accessible. Thus we can get back to money just being just a contract again and not treated as something of value in and of itself.
>
> I am afraid that just because the FED instituted a fraudulent, inflationary, and destructive fiat currency that we necessarily need to run away from paper back to the inequality and scarcity of gold. That said, money has to be tied to something of value. I agree that the Goverment shouldn't counterfeit either.

> I am of the opinion that it was the HUD/FHA amortized loan and other amortized loans like it that were the major drivers of inflation in our economy. Banks create most of the money in our economy and amortized loans are the tool by which banks create that money. And exactly as the Feidman macroeconomic equation predicts, the amortized mortgage (double death) creates money each time a home is bought and sold for a higher price that does not match an increase in real output. It's the same house as before, just older and now costs more but is not worth more. This is an amazing verification of the Friedman equation. (in fact this point is exactly what woke me up in 2008)

> Despite your opinion that the Freidman Macroeconomic equation doesn't apply to the macroeconomics of inflation, I think I have just shown you a clear example of how a microeconomic mismatch between money creation, velocity, and real output creates macroeconomic inflation. The Amortized Mortgage is an inflation generator by doing exactly what the Freidman equation predicts.
>
> Freidman Monetarism may be ruining this country, but it's not because the equations don't apply or don't work. The equations do apply and the system is working just as the equation predicts.

> I suggest that because the Friedman equation does apply, that it is very possible that the SSS would not produced the unwanted inflation that you are convinced it would produce. Remember, money would never be created out of nothing. Money would only br created if there was a durable good it was being created to purchase or produce. Not unlike your system. Money supply, money velocity would stay proportional to real output.
>
> Again, just like your system. The real asset and the price has been negotiated before the loan is applied for. There is no speculation. if a building is being built, the materials, land, labor etc already exists and has a negotiated price before the money is created. In this system money ceases to be the rate limiting step.

> Again, I don't remember saying this or thinking this. If inflation is controlled, simple interest, fee-based loans can compete in a free market. Anyone is free to charge more and pay more. However in the SSS, local banks make money as they do now by charging a loan origination fee and a monthly service charge. The Gov makes money by charging a prime interest rate and generating revenue on what is a Constitutionally-sound voluntary tax on the entire money supply and not just a fraction of it (could make the income tax obsolete). And then we can get rid of the useless "too-big-to-fail" mega banks who were instituted because of our short but persistent history of small bank failures.

> In the Safety Society System we don't need the unelected wealthy capitalist to decide what to invest in. Our capitalist system tells us we need those few rich guys at the top of the pyramid. In this system we have a free market without a need for the the capitalists (oligarchs). And we can still have our football stadium and aquarium.
>
> In the SSS, If an individual is credit worthy and there is a real asset to purchase, the local bank would extend the loan and the loan would be repaid with interest and fees. And when the owner resold the asset, he would have equity from day 1 such that he wouldn't need to inflate the asking price to his neighbor.
>
> Furthermore, if a community wants a museum or an aquarium, they can qualify for a loan to build the aquarium or museum. And they don't need Billionaire ultra-elite capitalists to fund these building projects. Other financial institutions would fill the niches for venture capital and other speculative activities. SSS is about being full reserve and staying safe.