titan said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We don't have to default. We just need to return to the US dollar.

---

What would that involve, implementing Ron Paul's ideas?

The dollar is enough --- you don't mean the gold standard needed?

If you had a powerful enough WH (this may be one coming) -- if wanted to, and willing to rely on blunt power, could we just force it? Its looks like Russia never really had to pay for USSR era.

---

There's a lot to flesh out. But years and years ago we used to issue a US dollar.

Then we had central bank. And it proved disastrous so we got rid of it.

Then we got invaded. War of 1812.

Then we got another central bank. 100 years later we make owning gold illegal.

But I digress. The US TREASURY can and has and should operate as the central bank. It's in the US constitution. They can set a fixed rate of increase. And a fixed interest rate to borrow from them. I think it was 3% when we did it over 200 years ago.

The US treasury should be the issuer of money at a 3% interest rate.


Fun little fact. We haven't printed a US dollar since 1971. We should start making them again and pay all the debt with federal reserve notes. Give the Fed their bag back.

Y tho

The word "dollar" used to be defined as a certain amount of gold. So that if in 1800, somebody said "give me a dollar" you would hand them about .05 troy ounces of gold. Not a piece of paper worth that much in gold (those were unconstitutional), but literally a specific weight of gold.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

Bond yields tell you what the real market believes. The Fed tries to manipulate it, but unless they are outright buying or selling bonds, they are meaningless.

Like I've said for multiple years, the FED is stuck. They can't raise, as the interest on the debt would explode. And they can't lower "too much", as we would enter hyperinflation. This is their only party trick left. It's all they have. Cut ever so slightly and hint at slow cuts to come. If the bond market brushed them off and bond yields move higher, it's game over. Investors in our debt will be screaming that they refuse to take on our risk at low rates.

---

Solid take, maz. Solid.

titan said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We don't have to default. We just need to return to the US dollar.

---

What would that involve, implementing Ron Paul's ideas?

The dollar is enough --- you don't mean the gold standard needed?

If you had a powerful enough WH (this may be one coming) -- if wanted to, and willing to rely on blunt power, could we just force it? Its looks like Russia never really had to pay for USSR era.

---

I've posted this historic piece on here once or twice - perhaps here and also the B&I board. I think it was taken down by the mods because I posted the entire letter when a link would have been sufficient for those interested in reading it.

Human Freedom Rests on Gold Redeemable Money

By HON. HOWARD BUFFETT, U. S. Congressman from Nebraska

Reprinted from The Commercial and Financial Chronicle, May 6, 1948

Warren Buffett's father...

Thank you. What fascinating reading (its just 5 pages).

It outline a link between gold currency exchange and individual freedom or taxpayer retaining a say rather well.

Proposed cures are intriguing:

Quote:

---

One is that a fixed amount of tax revenue each year would go for debt reduction. = Probably need that simply ordered some way as it is the best route.

Another is thatCongress be prohibited by statute from appropriating more than anticipated revenues in peacetime. = That's good but wonder how it would be determined?

Still another is that 10% of the taxes be set aside each year for debt reduction. = Related to the first. Unfortunately with the deep state it seems only a quasi strong man figure could impose them, and that brings you right up against the catch-22 there is no way to do that safely.

---

1933 was clearly a bad year for individual liberty between the monetary change here (which may have empowered some of FDR's excesses in retrospect) and Hitler's taking power in Germany.

This jumped out:

Quote:

---

When that day arrives, our political rulers will probably find that foreign war and ruthless regimentation is the cunning alternative to domestic strife. That was the way out for the paper-money economy of Hitler and others

---

We are already doing the war stirring, and the OBidenites had things well on the way toward regimentation. Hmm.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

titan said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We don't have to default. We just need to return to the US dollar.

---

What would that involve, implementing Ron Paul's ideas?

The dollar is enough --- you don't mean the gold standard needed?

If you had a powerful enough WH (this may be one coming) -- if wanted to, and willing to rely on blunt power, could we just force it? Its looks like Russia never really had to pay for USSR era.

---

There's a lot to flesh out. But years and years ago we used to issue a US dollar.

Then we had central bank. And it proved disastrous so we got rid of it.

Then we got invaded. War of 1812.

Then we got another central bank. 100 years later we make owning gold illegal.

But I digress. The US TREASURY can and has and should operate as the central bank. It's in the US constitution. They can set a fixed rate of increase. And a fixed interest rate to borrow from them. I think it was 3% when we did it over 200 years ago.

The US treasury should be the issuer of money at a 3% interest rate.


Fun little fact. We haven't printed a US dollar since 1971. We should start making them again and pay all the debt with federal reserve notes. Give the Fed their bag back.

---

Thanks for that reply. Much to grok in a nutshell. So part of the issue seems to be the lack of a central bank, while all along thinking there was one.

Is there a good intro book to this issue of central bank, and especially how it applies to some of the foreign ventures?

aTmAg said:

---

The word "dollar" used to be defined as a certain amount of gold. So that if in 1800, somebody said "give me a dollar" you would hand them about .05 troy ounces of gold. Not a piece of paper worth that much in gold (those were unconstitutional), but literally a specific weight of gold.

---

Just double-checking -- so when "return to the dollar" is used, it by implication means the gold backing. That makes total sense, if that's what you mean. The 1948 write-up by Buffett seems to use it in just that way. So in a real way -- we are off the dollar at the moment, technically -- having nothing to do with BRICS and other such challenges.

So what do you do to protect your 401K, investments, savings, etc? Precious metals, land, crypto, guns and bullets?

tcc66 said:

---

So what do you do to protect your 401K, investments, savings, etc? Precious metals, land, crypto, guns and bullets?

---

Edit: misunderstood.
Diversify my dude.

Buy QQQ puts or SPY puts out to mid next year. Set a trailing stop or treat it as insurance. Or just go into cash (a position) and wait out the next few months. It's been a huge year and chickens are likely coming home to roost with DOGE. Could be short term pain for long term gain. The days of can kicking are over. A Powell Trump fued is brewing. Both on bitcoin and policy the Fed fears is inflationary. Pretty crazy situation we are in with low interest needed for debt service, but also a reinflation concern at same time.

Oh, there is also a H5N1 virus spook, Chinese drones, gov shutdown, IDF bomb campaigns, Ukraine war mongering, last domino Iran.....all while we got got a dementia ridden prostitute at the helm.

But the biggest indicator things aren't good is no one cares about pronouns, DEI, or climate change hysteria at the moment. That's the FobTies indicator to be on watch. When petty leftist issues fall out of the headlines, there could be storms brewing. When CNN is mocking Durban on spending bills, tides are shifting.

But, it's not end of days. Just end of deep state days.

Idk. It's been a lifetime of aggregation that's formed my opinions of central banks.

The "reason" for them was unified liquidity. If you read the constitution it allows for banks to issue notes too.

So banks were all issuing their own notes. US dollars in the vaults. Bank notes for liquidity.

So even today. Let's say you have 100 bucks in a wellsfargo checking acct. legally what you OWN is a 100 bucks of wellsfargo note. Not even federal reserve notes let alone US dollars. You own wellsfargo notes.


So the argument is that the central banks allow for unified bank notes and increased liquidity.


Problem is that fractional banking gets out of control to the point we're at today.


I'll add. This currency debate has been going on before we became a nation. At the time of the Revolution America had very little actual coins within America. Which made it incredibly expensive to buy foreign goods. England issued trading sanctions against the US purely so American couldn't export goods to increase liquidity.


So Mexico/Spain become big trade partners with America then. And the Spanish 8 became the most prevalent coin in America. There was a massive mint in Mexico City. So it was put forth to make the Spanish 8 the official currency of the United States.

They have to cut rates because the job market is **** and the revisions just came out showing how bad it's been.

Sahm rule says we are in a recession, if you guys wait for the pop to try and boost the economy, it is going to be absolutely brutal.

titan said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

The word "dollar" used to be defined as a certain amount of gold. So that if in 1800, somebody said "give me a dollar" you would hand them about .05 troy ounces of gold. Not a piece of paper worth that much in gold (those were unconstitutional), but literally a specific weight of gold.

---

Just double-checking -- so when "return to the dollar" is used, it by implication means the gold backing. That makes total sense, if that's what you mean. The 1948 write-up by Buffett seems to use it in just that way. So in a real way -- we are off the dollar at the moment, technically -- having nothing to do with BRICS and other such challenges.

---

I assume that is what he means.

Though even that should actually be unconstitutional. The constitution denies states the ability to coin money or emit bills of credit (aka print money). It does grant congress the power to coin money but does NOT emit bills of credit. So in reality, we all should be using gold and silver coins right now.

The cheesy (and BS) way that our government got around that is by pretending that the Federal Reserve is a private entity. That GOVERNMENT is not emitting bills of credit, the FED is!! Despite doing so at government direction and funding. They were desperate for the ability to inflate the currency to spend our money without taxing us directly. It's a bogus and deceitful shell game.

titan said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

titan said:

---

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

We don't have to default. We just need to return to the US dollar.

---

What would that involve, implementing Ron Paul's ideas?

The dollar is enough --- you don't mean the gold standard needed?

If you had a powerful enough WH (this may be one coming) -- if wanted to, and willing to rely on blunt power, could we just force it? Its looks like Russia never really had to pay for USSR era.

---

There's a lot to flesh out. But years and years ago we used to issue a US dollar.

Then we had central bank. And it proved disastrous so we got rid of it.

Then we got invaded. War of 1812.

Then we got another central bank. 100 years later we make owning gold illegal.

But I digress. The US TREASURY can and has and should operate as the central bank. It's in the US constitution. They can set a fixed rate of increase. And a fixed interest rate to borrow from them. I think it was 3% when we did it over 200 years ago.

The US treasury should be the issuer of money at a 3% interest rate.


Fun little fact. We haven't printed a US dollar since 1971. We should start making them again and pay all the debt with federal reserve notes. Give the Fed their bag back.

---

Thanks for that reply. Much to grok in a nutshell. So part of the issue seems to be the lack of a central bank, while all along thinking there was one.

Is there a good intro book to this issue of central bank, and especially how it applies to some of the foreign ventures?

---

Keep a close eye on this lady, titan. She's in Trump's camp and has some interesting ideas return to "sound money".

Judy Shelton

titan said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

The word "dollar" used to be defined as a certain amount of gold. So that if in 1800, somebody said "give me a dollar" you would hand them about .05 troy ounces of gold. Not a piece of paper worth that much in gold (those were unconstitutional), but literally a specific weight of gold.

---

Just double-checking -- so when "return to the dollar" is used, it by implication means the gold backing. That makes total sense, if that's what you mean. The 1948 write-up by Buffett seems to use it in just that way. So in a real way -- we are off the dollar at the moment, technically -- having nothing to do with BRICS and other such challenges.

---

Not necessarily. The government can issue money/dollar backed by the goodwill of the nation. England did this I want to say in the 1600s. And it became a success for them.

Then some bankers, specifically the bank of the London got the king to switch from England back money to their banks money.


You can have a currency printed by a nation and make it work without having to back every dollar with a certain amount of gold. You need rigorous guardrails however to prevent rate changes and or inflations etc.


Which obviously we haven't had.

We had a US dollar and a federal reserve note in circulation together for about 80 years. In 1971 the US treasury officially stopped printing US dollars. Because the federal reserve note is a "good enough equivalent"

I have history books that were published in the year 1900. Very fascinating reads. But this currency money debate has been going on with great fervor since before our founding.

(As a side note it mentions several cases of election fraud in the late 1800s lol)


Nothings changed for 200-300 years

Quote:

---

The cheesy (and BS) way that our government got around that is by pretending that the Federal Reserve is a private entity. That GOVERNMENT is not emitting bills of credit, the FED is!! Despite doing so at government direction and funding. They were desperate for the ability to inflate the currency to spend our money without taxing us directly. It's a bogus and deceitful shell game.

---

This being part of what Ron Paul talks about and that it creates the bubbles. Its becoming clearer why the WH control of who runs it seems so puzzlingly indirect.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

titan said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

The word "dollar" used to be defined as a certain amount of gold. So that if in 1800, somebody said "give me a dollar" you would hand them about .05 troy ounces of gold. Not a piece of paper worth that much in gold (those were unconstitutional), but literally a specific weight of gold.

---

Just double-checking -- so when "return to the dollar" is used, it by implication means the gold backing. That makes total sense, if that's what you mean. The 1948 write-up by Buffett seems to use it in just that way. So in a real way -- we are off the dollar at the moment, technically -- having nothing to do with BRICS and other such challenges.

---

Not necessarily. The government can issue money/dollar backed by the goodwill of the nation. England did this I want to say in the 1600s. And it became a success for them.

Then some bankers, specifically the bank of the London got the king to switch from England back money to their banks money.


You can have a currency printed by a nation and make it work without having to back every dollar with a certain amount of gold. You need rigorous guardrails however to prevent rate changes and or inflations etc.


Which obviously we haven't had.

We had a US dollar and a federal reserve note in circulation together for about 80 years. In 1971 the US treasury officially stopped printing US dollars. Because the federal reserve note is a "good enough equivalent"

---

How difficult would it be to shift to that you think? Sounds like a good compromise between having enough gold to back all, but also having some restraints to wild rate and inflation bubbles.

`Power of the nation' --- America, China and Russia all have that ---- is that what can ultimately prop them up. Seems nukes and armies are a coin of sorts.

I will keep an eye on how her influence goes. Very familiar with the Mises Institute.

General question, thanks for the intriguing replies all.

One drawback to gold I see (and this may be mistaken) is doesn't it sort of make imperialism needed for a given country? They have go capture enough of it if they don't already have it, if their currency is to be backed by gold. Is there even enough in the world for every nation to have currency reliably backed?

One of the pluses of the fiat system does seem to be that it allows a common standard that doesn't require physical capture of valuables. But it depends on faith in the credit and stature. (That's why the ruble bounces around so much, and China seems to play with its yen)

Probably missing something fundamental. Just an impression.

Rate should be 2 point higher. Not the current rate or any lower. Its bad.

just love how every "expert" on CNBC the last four years

has been proven wrong over and over and over again

when it comes to inflation and rates

Zerohedge saying it's "over and margin is calling" after a 1 day move yesterday is pretty crazy. Gonna take more downside support failures and a bigger negative catalyst than Powell expressing concern over Trump policy.

That said, plenty of things brewing and markets hate uncertainty. Trump is being handed a fiscal mess...a bit of it tied to his own COVID overspending, but Biden really shyt the bed.

I've thought a lot about this. It's definitely doable but there's alot of factors.

We can do a 1 for 1 swap from Fed notes to dollars without creating that much money. Most Fed notes are from monetizing assets via debt and expanding bank balance sheets. Banks are required to hold ZERO. LET ME REPEAT. ZERO Fed notes to issue Fed note loans. The banks just create the "money".

So much of the money supply is fictitious in debt. Which is why we could still have a deflation death spiral as people race for cash. There's not much actual cash.


The biggest issue is the liquidity for the markets.

Zero hedge is just edgy for clicks

Cutting fed rate while market rates are rising. Is this a good approach?