Originally Posted by wig

The point I was making, which you seem to have not appreciated, is that if the US experiences a hyperinflation like Argentina did, the version of "collapse" that we'll be dealing with will not be the same version of "collapse" that Argentina or Zimbabwe went through.

The world didn't miss a beat then. On the other hand, if you apply the same economics to the US as the worlds reserve currency issuer, in a global economy and where systemic risk is attached to the world, you end up with a scenario where gold doesn't mean shit because as was said, you can't eat it, sleep under it, etc.

We are talking past each other because we've widened the distance between the definitions of "collapse".