Fitty Silver Dollars:2 cents:

its not the same as other markets no, but it can still be over inflated. Especially when gold/silver isn't as rare as they claim it to be. Do you think diamonds are truly precious too?

As for having no confidence in the US dollar... try going to a grocery store and pay with gold coins, let me know how far that takes you... currency is a necessary means for civilized society, even the romans used it so it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

I have Diamonds on hand, that no one want's unless I'm prepaired to dump:disgust

Terrible argument. Fiat currencies aren't necessary, they're just the status quo which is why I'm not going to be paying for anything with my precious metals. Lol@civilized society though, considering fiat currencies have caused us great pains in the long run whereas commodity currencies have succeeded for millennia. Even in today's age, we can certainly have a fractional reserve commodity system.

Backing currency with commodity(s) is stupid.

Commodity backed currencies "succeeded" in many "great pains" in history.

Not a single currency in the world today is backed by gold. That alone should tell you something.

Someone called it!

Great thing history shares your point of view. Oh wait.

And yet we're in a worldwide depression. That should tell you something. But by your logic, if something isn't happening, it's because it doesn't work!

oh - what about commodity baskets?

if backing currency with commodities is stupid, what, if anything, should they be backed by?

if currency reflects the perceived differences in economies around the planet, as decided by a multinational marketplace, but are only convieniently used locally, what does that mean for the local currency users and the concept and rule of nations?

qft.....

well, I'm not suggesting they might be usefully backed with gold or metals with perceived rarity.

currency is transforming before our eyes, in our lifetimes, and the future of currency is an interesting problem.

commodities baskets have been proposed in the past - in a sense a commodities basket is just a proxy for international sentiment - so they have to be put on the list of possible future models for currency.

baskets have advantages over single metals, in that they reflect use, not storage of value thru rarity and resistance to decay.

wig just started his argument, I wanted to see where he would take it.

currency and teh rule of nations is a tough problem, and we are likely to see some wild swings this century.

Oh wait, what. History is full of examples of pre-FED disasters.

Some of the worst economic panics in US History occurred before the Fed existed. 1837 and 1873 come to mind.

WTF? I mean things aren't looking real great and you know I'm pretty bearish, but we are not in a world wide depression.

They should not be backed by anything. The argument that backing currencies with commodities will avoid economic "black swans" or keep the supply of money stable are pipe dreams.

It would only ensure the economy itself is stably at a Stone Age level.

I'll expand on this but I am going out of town so perhaps early next week.

Fractional Reserve commodity system.

Please quantify these events in regards to correlation or causation.

they are backed by SOMETHING, thats what currency is, a promise of value.

I know, you mean "should not be backed by anything material", they should reflect nothing more than a promise to pay.

that does seem to leave us permanently vulnerable to manipulation by speculators, moneytraders, and black swans.

not that any of us here will likely have any influence on what currency will eventually become.

it's certainly possible that the metals thing will be tried as we go thru the turmoil of this century.

My father had money invested in RRSPs (Registered Retirement Savings Plan) that is to be divided up amongst us three children - my sister and I get 33% each, while my baby brother gets 34% - just the way the bank decided to split it.

Because my father and his mother are well known in the community, and well known by the bank holding his RRSPs, the bank has agreed to let us cash out his RRSPs as survivor benefits ... meaning we will claim it as income on next year's taxes, but allowing us to cash it out immediately (with a simple letter of direction to the bank signed by the three children), rather than tie it up in probate to be later disbursed as a tax-free inheritance.

Also, having the funds tied up in probate would see us spend approximately 20% of the funds in lawyers fees, so cashing out the RRSPs as survivor benefits made much more sense from a financial standpoint.

Kinda sounds like what happened to Epass, the fake story to epass that is :thumbsup