Actually that is the definition of money.

Money = a commonly accepted medium of exchange (intermediary).

"Money is any object or record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given country or socio-economic context.[1][2][3] The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value; and, occasionally in the past, a standard of deferred payment.[4][5] Any kind of object or secure verifiable record that fulfills these functions can serve as money."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money




It clearly is NOT "a medium of exchange", at least not in the US, maybe in some other country you can exchange a gold coin for a loaf of bread, but I doubt it... :2 cents:

see my comment about money/currency/legal tender.

If the government makes a law prohibiting you from using a shovel to dig holes in the ground, that does not mean your shovel will no longer be a shovel.

Where is gold commonly accepted for exchange?

Is gold money? If by money you mean legal tender no gold isn't money. Go to wal-mart with $1000 worth of gold and try to buy a $1000 TV. You can't.

I'm not sure what you mean, one of the requirements for something to be "money" is that it is "a medium of exchange." Gold clearly does not satisfy that requirement, hence it's not "money."

It was considered "money" in the past, could possibly be considered "money" in the future, but today it's just a precious metal like Bernanke pointed out.

That's right, but, not so very long ago that's exactly what you did. Walked up to someone or into a business with gold in your hand.

If by not long ago you mean 130 years ago them you're right. But that gold was minted into coinage which was legal tender. Do you know how bad inflation would be if we still used gold coins? A $1 gold coin would have several hundreds $ worth of gold in it. People would horde $1 coins then melt them down. How would that be good?

That's a flawed comparison. A shovel is still a shovel, even in that instance. It's just no longer a tool for digging, or, if you prefer, an accepted digging aparatus.

Gold is gold. Period. Just like a shovel is shovel. Just in this instance, gold is no longer an accepted monetary unit.

The majority of the world's central banks still keep gold as part of their reserves. Would they do this if gold were simply something precious? If that were the case they could also use diamonds, paintings, rare baseball cards, antique chairs, expensive cars, domain names, designer purses, old postal stamps,.... in reserve.

Gold is still a form of money. The fact that gold is not being used in day-to-day transactions in stores, at the bakery etc is simply because the government prohibits people from doing so. (legal tender laws)

A shovel can be used for digging holes in the ground. If one day the government makes a new law prohibiting people from using shovels to dig holes in the ground and from that day on only government officials will be allowed to use shovels to dig holes in the ground, then that doesn't mean that your shovel suddenly ceases to be a shovel just because you are no longer allowed to use your shovel to do what you would normally (be free) do with a shovel.

The fact that the government prevents ordinary people from using gold as a medium of exchange does not change the fact that
- it is still being used by the government (and central banks) as money.
- it would again be used as a medium of exchange if the government restrictions were to be lifted. (either in physical form or a kind of promissory note or its digital equivalent)
- it is still being used as a store of value (even in countries that have legal tender laws).
- it is still being used as money in other parts of the world.

agreed. It is not currency (a monetary unit).

The fact that it is not currency and not legal tender does not mean it is not money. Why do people who buy gold buy gold? Because they want to start making their own jewelry? they buy it for its exchange value.

nothing is preventing a merchant from taking payment in gold, wheat, oil whatever. nothing illegal about that.

Most people would consider "money" to be legal tender. Meaning I can take this "money" and exchange it for goods and services. You can't do that with gold ergo it's not money.

Here's a correct definition from an unbiased source: http://www.economist.com/research/ec...letter=M#money

Wives used to be money as well. Huge rocks, too. Tobacco. Fur. And landmarks. I could go on forever. The essence of money is to be found in the following function: unit of account.

I do not see how wives, huge rocks, tobacco, fur, landmarks, sea shells et cetera (or gold for that matter) functions as a unit of account today.

The only thing gold has in common with money is that it functions as a store of value, just like many other commodities. Gold is however extremely suitable for this purpose as it is highly fungible.

Gold dollar coins would only be used if the USD was still on the gold standard. In that case 1 USD gold coin would be worth 1 USD.

The use of gold was what prevented them from inflating the money supply. Even the Keynesians, monetarists, pro-central bankers etc all acknowledge this. That is why they don't want a gold standard (or even free competition of currency).

u-bob is right. woj you're still a smart mofo. no hate. :)

legal tender laws: the courts will not enforce contracts (debts etc) if the seller asks for gold (or silver or anything else) instead of legal tender.

so basically, you could draw up a contract: you sell you car to X in exchange for Y amount of gold. You and X both sign the contract. X takes possession of the car but then refuses to pay you your gold. The courts will rule in his favor.

There's also a few cases of the IRS going medieval on people's asses because they paid their employees in silver.

money still entails an asset. an asset can be traded just like currency. money is used as an asset and even in some form a currency.

when you talk about worth ie. assets, cash value etc are all included. gold is 100% money.

Go buy a TV at wal-mart with gold and tell us how that works out. Wal-mart accepts money don't they?

So if I walk into a wal-mart in LA with a bag full of Euros and they do not accept that, then that means Euros are not a form of money?

Best part is at the very end:

"Why don't banks store diamonds?"

"Uh...........well, it's tradition."

OMG

Gold, BTW, IS money. Want proof? Take your Gold coin, or Gold bracelet, to your beat-ass, broke-down neighbor who's been trying to sell his Jet Ski for eight months. Hand him the gold - he will hand you the Jet Ski.

(Oh - another "BTW" here: ANYTHING can be money. I give you a loaf of bread for six cucumbers. The bread = money. Or, bread. LOL)

Of course, another definition of "money" is that which the Government backs. So whatever, somebody fuck me, it's Saturday night.

Gold is not money, it can be used to trade for something of equal or greater value.
If you use the idea of gold=trade=money then EVERYTHING can be considered money.

You could trade a horse="money" trade a car="money" etc etc much as you would go in and trade gold...

yes gold is an asset, but so is your car, horse, house and so on.

money is the recognized currency of a given government. It is the only thing that can directly exchanged for itself wherein the value is automatically known and not perceived.

For example you could go in and exhange a gold bar for gold coins but you are not going to get the original value back, you will pay some kind of fee for the exchange based upon it's value at the time.

yes the dollar's value fluctuates but you are always getting the same amount back i.e. if you change a 100 dollar bill for 20 5 dollar bills its exactly the same.

Therefore gold itself a "precious metal" and not money, and currently a metal whose value has been grossly inflated and of which will be eventually corrected.

so you mean to tell me, i walk into walmart. i grab a manager. i hand him 1000 dollars worth of gold, i cant buy 1000 dollars worth of stuff?

you sure on this? something tells me with gold skyrocketing in price right now some form of agreement would be reached.

and with that same thought, so in a nutshell, what everyone in this thread is saying is that walmart decides what is money. god bless sam walton.

And most people would be wrong.

Seriously?

He warned everyone about the recession/depression we are in now well before it arrived. People called him crazy, but even though his message seemed to fall on deaf ears at first he stuck to his guns and was ultimately proven correct. Had people listened to his warnings and done what he said we would not have the economic problems we have right now.

He is the reason why so many people are against the Federal Reserve. He nearly pushed through a full audit of the Federal Reserve, but even though his specific bill did not pass large parts of it were used in the final bill that did pass forcing the Federal Reserve to become at least somewhat more transparent.

He's introduced millions to the Austrian School of Economics. This will be important when we are picking up the pieces of what's left from this sick neo-keynesian experiment we are all stuck in.

He is largely, if not entirely, responsible for the current "Liberty" movement happening in the US.

Serious question: If you were in his position, what would you do differently?

"Now what?" is up to us. Ron Paul isn't an comic book superhero that can single-handedly fix what ills us.

It's really easy to talk shit about people trying to make a difference when you are doing absolutely nothing of any significance with your life.

What are you doing to change things? Well?

You do realize that ~40 years ago most of the world was on a gold standard, right? To so confidently proclaim that we will never be on a gold standard again just shows your ignorance of history.

Fiat currencies all eventually die and when it happens again people will only trust a currency that has an intrinsic value (e.g. gold standard).

Here is a recent headline for you:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/swi...k=MW_news_stmp

I would love to see what specific bills he did not vote on. My guess is that it's unconstitutional bullshit that was guaranteed to pass and he was going to vote no on anyways.

What would you have asked if you had his 5 minutes?

you mad that someone doesn't like your boy and backed up their opinion with facts, bro! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

talk shit about a career politician whose *impressive* record of politiking is simply being a pied piper yapping doom & gloom? lolz, there's about 10 ron pauls right here at gfy.

now what? exactly. ron paul is not a super hero and that's exactly my point. he's far from it in fact as his actual voting record proves. perhaps if he did his fucking job consistently and PARTIPATED in the job he is paid to do- vote on the issues, and not just go around hating on the fed and asking loaded questions about going back on the gold standard, which is about as far-fetched a plan as i've ever heard anyone with a higher education yap about, and i can even point out myself that there is NOTHING backing up the validity of such a plan in the 21st century.

and what have i done to change the process? well, 1st off, it is beyond idiotic to make this about me v. a CAREER POLITICIAN whose job it is to at least try and do the job he is paid for. but that just shows you are butt hurt because i think your boy is a fucking hypocrite career politician.


but since you have asked, i have done the most viable action i can think of to foster change- i assume responsibility for MYSELF and my actions going forward and i've created 2 mainstream businesses that provide value to individuals and a local community that have already helped people change their lives, do better and be more prepared for the 21st century. change will happen 1 person at a time, it won't be because we get rid of the fed or go back to a gold standard, i can assure you of that.

How are we going to solve our problem of too much debt by taking on even more debt? Please enlighten me on this...

Compromise on this issue is why we are as fucked as we are.

yeah, let's not have politicians that can actually be deal makers- meet in the middle & compromise on some issues to make a deal.

let's just have deal breakers that stubbornly hold on to their own view and refuse to budge, that will work. jeezzzz

And because he has money he's automatically suspect in your eyes? Are you seriously saying that he is rich because he's a corrupt politician and because he has been pocketing campaign contributions? Wow, you really are an idiot :2 cents:

Few things happen in politics without broad support. Nothing happens on the most politically charged issues without compromise. What is totally bizarre about Paultards is that they somehow think a president can somehow be a dictator and force his will on the house and senate. He can't. Thats not the system of government we have. He has to work with them. And he has to work with both parties as Obama is being continually forced to learn the hard way.

The problem is not "the president". The problem is a general tendency of government to spend too much as well as deficit spending.

There is a time for compromise and a time to take a stand on principle.

:thumbsup:thumbsup

He might. Would he still take the gold when it tanks? At one time, people would also trade houses for expensive goods, would they today? Doubtful, the value of houses is fluctuating too much and in many places houses have no value at all.

If gold was worth today what it was five years ago, would we be having this discussion? $1000 in cash five years ago is still worth somewhere around $1000, take away a little bit for inflation, sure. $1000 of gold five years ago is worth something completely different today and will be worth something completely different in five years from now, whereas $1000 in cash will still be in the same ballpark (minus financial Armageddon, which many of you seem to fear.)

Over and over in this thread I'm seeing people say that money only has value because a government says so. Okay, so why does gold have value? Could it be... supply and demand?

oh wow, calling me an idiot on gfy because i disagree with your view. i expected more from you, at least an intelligent reply.

but i am going to go easy on you today because it is sunday and i am in a good mood as i will be going to the beach shortly, so i will explain my reply.

i originally said

mr maxwell replied with
i relied with

i.e., for a career politician worth many millions of dollars ($5 million is/was leftover campaign money) voting against a pay raise is not an example of changing the system.

yeah... another glaring flaw in the argument of course is that gold has no fixed value. you can't buy a tv with something (even if everyone agrees its "money") when the value of that so called "money" is in flux or indeterminate at the time of purchase.

damn etherstnc, for a ron paul groupie, i'd a figured you would of already known he had $5million in leftover campaing dollars, but you are emotional right now. so, no worries.

another obvious flaw in the "is gold money" discussion and peoples bizarre insistance that you can walk into Wallmart and buy a tv with gold... is "why gold"? If you can argue that gold is money... then why isn't silver money? bronze? copper? platinum? diamonds? bags of rice? barrels of oil?

Some of you fucking geniuses seem to think a retail store is a commodities exchange.