Bitcoin

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by slang

Good point, Clodfobble.



Tricky Dick took the dollar off the gold standard some time in 71, IIRC.



Before that disconnect one wouldn't need gold since a paper dollar was effectively gold. It was backed at some ratio to gold.



There were exceptions for jewelry but digging a big hole somewhere in your backyard to bury bullion wasn't even possible. The US gov't had the bullion gold in vaults.



Gold wasn't available to the public again until sometime in '75(?) because it was technically no longer money, it was just an element. The dollar was backed by the full faith and credit of the US. An individual didn't have the FFAC so they wanted gold bullion and started buying it.

No no, dear friend. Just after the crash of the Great Depression, Roosevelt issued an order demanding that all gold be turned in as a way to fund The New Deal. The gold standard was never a guaranteed 1-to-1 ratio on the dollar, it was "a dollar equals what we say it equals," a number which changed regularly, and exchange markets compared to other currencies still applied. The whole point was they knew they were going to need extra money, so they took all the gold, giving the public the old exchange rate in bills, then said, "oh, gosh, you know what? This gold is now worth more US dollars than we said it was before. Good thing we have it all to spend now." The U.S. had all the bullion in vaults after that *precisely because* they took it; prior to that there was plenty of gold floating around and being used for exchange, especially in frontier areas where banking wasn't as reliable.

My dad (a professional gold dealer, now retired) wrote a whole book on it called "Confiscation."

The point is, the government always does what it wants. You can try to be clever and go around them with a different system, but if they decide they don't like it, they have means of mass coercion at their disposal. (Insert standard "nuh-uh cuz I have guns!" argument here, except if they do a good enough PR job--by, for example, making everyone believe that "one wouldn't need gold"--then you're just a single looney in an irrational standoff that will end badly.)

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

The point is, the government always does what it wants. You can try to be clever and go around them with a different system, but if they decide they don't like it, they have means of mass coercion at their disposal.

Earlier this month, the People's Bank of China (PBOC) which is the central regulatory authority that regulates financial institutions and drafts the monetary policy of the country, issued a statement that “it would block access to all domestic and foreign cryptocurrency exchanges and ICO websites.”

Their will be done.

[slang]

I would like the envoke the bigV super duper luper politeness protocol before I begin with my reply.

BigV is a very smart guy. He’s a polite guy too, which is difficult for most people, including me, when defending a position or asking questions to clarify a given position. Therefore I am naming this communication protocol after him.

(tm-Vsdlpp)

That sounds funny but maybe adding some humor to these posts debates is beneficial.

Clodfobble is also a nice helpful person though I’ve not met her in real life.

She did the voice work for my terribly produced and nearly forgotten animated video series. And her voice was honestly the best part of the videos.

Friend: Ok, ok…I’ll watch your video, slang.
Friend: Well...It’s not great but who did the voice work?
Slang: Clodfobble!
Friend: Ahh. Who?

So having benefitted from her expertise on that and learning about the process as well, we’re friends or at least friendly. Even though we are polar opposites on core issues.

And so…

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

No no, dear friend. Just after the crash of the Great Depression, Roosevelt issued an order demanding that all gold be turned in as a way to fund The New Deal. The gold standard was never a guaranteed 1-to-1 ratio on the dollar, it was "a dollar equals what we say it equals," a number which changed regularly, and exchange markets compared to other currencies still applied. The whole point was they knew they were going to need extra money, so they took all the gold, giving the public the old exchange rate in bills, then said, "oh, gosh, you know what? This gold is now worth more US dollars than we said it was before. Good thing we have it all to spend now." The U.S. had all the bullion in vaults after that *precisely because* they took it; prior to that there was plenty of gold floating around and being used for exchange, especially in frontier areas where banking wasn't as reliable.

So the government took the gold from citizens in the east but did not have effective and efficient methods of taking the gold from the people in the frontier. One couldn’t “push a button” on a keyboard to take their property like today. But then again, didn’t need a keyboard as the dollar was whatever they decided.

Ok.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

My dad (a professional gold dealer, now retired) wrote a whole book on it called "Confiscation."

It’s on my list now. Might an autographed copy be arranged at some point?

For a fee, of course.

I believe that I’ve heard it referenced in some of the videos I listen to. Not the crazy videos, the more conventional ones.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

The point is, the government always does what it wants. You can try to be clever and go around them with a different system, but if they decide they don't like it, they have means of mass coercion at their disposal.

What if what it wants is not what millions of people want? Or a hundred fifty million people? Or if what it wants runs counter to what it agreed to and even penalized citizens for not following?

What if it is controlled by a Communist? A Nazi? Someone not qualified?

What if it has transitioned into a government within a government? Something that is not responsive to the lawful requests and demands of half of the people and the legal system?

Do you believe that we both might have that opinion depending on if there is an R or a D controlling it?

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

(Insert standard "nuh-uh cuz I have guns!" argument here, except if they do a good enough PR job-"--

Guns give people the opportunity to have a potential to resist violence. Power through independence.

Many progressives believe that conservative gun owners think that they can fight the US government and win. By framing the argument in those terms they make conservatives seem…crazy.

And in a fair amount of cases, they would be correct.

But there is much more to the second amendment that progressives see, IMO. It’s for every American citizen. You and me.

There was allegedly a sharp increase in gun sales after Trump was elected, to first time gun buyers many who might be considered progressive. I can remember seeing many people at the range who did not fit into the standard template of gun owners. They didn’t know anything about guns or shooting or rules or laws or anything. Looking nervous, being awkward and a bit defiant in their expressions. Especially to MAGA hat wearing folks.

That’s fine. It’s still yours and mine, the second amendment.

But the alleged movement was caused allegedly because they didn’t trust the government to defend them against these MAGA people.That without (ENORMOUS) government they’d be sitting ducks to any crazy ass gun wielding D bag MAGA hat wearing imbicile.

To which I respond “welcome home! That’s how we’ve felt for YEARS against an enormous government, that they could easily suspend protection of conservatives against nearly any criminal type.”

They’ve managed to do that quite effectively in the court system. Until lately anyway.

It’s not just to resist the awesome power of the Feds, it’s to resist the people that the Feds no longer restrain.

Antifa maybe?

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

by, for example, making everyone believe that "one wouldn't need gold"--

I see your point. Gold ( and silver and cash ) are a pain to work with. Can be a big security risk too if not done properly. They offer no yield, outside of the system. But there’s no counter party risk. There’s no one in between you and your money. You don’t need to trust any institution. No paperwork involved. You only need to trust the person holding the goods. And despite the Matrix working against metals, many people still recognize having some is a good idea (reuters).

I do trust the banks for the most part, except when things get really seriously bad. In those cases you’re not in a good position when compared to their interests. Their interests are the bank. Not you.

But your metals are yours, not something that is actually the bank’s but will repay you later should the bank fail. They often pay after all the good deals that could be yours, are gone, if only you had cash or gold outside the banking system to make a deal. Suspensions and limited redemptions are a fact of life in the system. There are a few bullion visa card (click the currency and card tab) exceptions but they can be suspended or limited as well.

And when the good deals on nearly everything show up, a paper check may not be acceptable for payment for the deal. Homes, land, boats. Things that might be purchased with one payment at a fraction of their value in a normal market.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

then you're just a single looney in an irrational standoff that will end badly.)

Maybe. It’s certainly happened for conservatives before.

It’s not just me this time around. It’s at the very least tens of millions.

Thank you for the thoughtful comment. And the book suggestion.

I will continue to enjoy many of the cool things that you post but disagree with most of your political views.

Now let's watch what's happening in the CW2.

[slang]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Their will be done.

"Chinese Government Concerned About Fraud"

It's amusing to me that every government is "concerned" about fraud. Government is the source of fraud. They invented fraud. They don't want to lose control of the game that they rigged in their favor. That's every government to some degree.