Gold - Commodity or currency?

Gold - a commodity or currency?

  • It's a commodity

    Votes: 21 39.6%
  • It's a currency

    Votes: 25 47.2%
  • other

    Votes: 7 13.2%

  • Total voters
    53
Give it time - if it is first you are hearing it put in these terms - it may still sink in. Otherwise our views not too far apart other than words and symantics.

I didn't invent it to be honest - it's how we were taught or perhaps how I understood it back in the 80s. (y)

If you think my views are almost the same as yours then you don't understand my views. The central point of my argument and the gold standard argument is that money should return to being what it once was, a commodity with intrinsic value instead of fiat currency which is intrinsically near worthless. You on the other hand are saying that money is a commodity because it is fiat currency. I honestly can't see how our views could be any more different.

I said it before and I'll say it again, by your reasoning, a country like Zimbabwe should be as wealthy as China and the USA if all it took was government regulation or law to create value out of thin air. I feel like I'm just going in circles with you now...so, let's just call it a day. If you think our views are similar, fine.
 
Subscribed
 

Attachments

  • TFRFA%20(1040).gif
    TFRFA%20(1040).gif
    2.9 KB · Views: 345
If you think my views are almost the same as yours then you don't understand my views. The central point of my argument and the gold standard argument is that money should return to being what it once was, a commodity with intrinsic value Yes because it was scarce with limited supply

instead of fiat currency which is intrinsically near worthless. This is only because governments have been printing excess amounts Supply > Output of Goods n Services.

You on the other hand are saying that money is a commodity because it is fiat currency. No. I'm saying everything is a commodity in the economic sense including money. But remember money is the label for the purpose it servers. Different currencies are all money. Money is just a name. Currencies are the commodity so they can exchanged once a certain price is established for any other commodity. Think of it as bartering one commodity for another. ie cigarettes for sheep. etc etc... I honestly can't see how our views could be any more different.

I said it before and I'll say it again, by your reasoning, a country like Zimbabwe should be as wealthy as China and the USA if all it took was government regulation or law to create value out of thin air. I feel like I'm just going in circles with you now...so, let's just call it a day. If you think our views are similar, fine.


You obviously do not understand supply and demand if you insist Zimbabwe should be / could be as wealthy as China or USA.

Reason why Zimbabwe just can't print as much of its currency as it likes is because there is no demand for it. Even Zimbabweians prefer to hold savings in foreign commodity(currency). Why is that? Why wouldn't you hold their currency? Or rather why wouldn't you want to swap your commodity that you hold ie Sterling or Dollar for theirs? WHY?

Same reason government can't make toilet paper valuable or be eaten. You need to get real. Supply and Demand!

Do you trade Forex? Why do you sell one currency for another?

Do you understand 2nd life game?

Do you understand what futures or derivative markets are? They are all pigment of our creative imagination. Are you saying there is no value in them. Why do people part with their hard earnt cash?

I do understand your point but you are narrow minded and blinkered. Perhaps I may say you are very tight with your mind and your brain. Not being rude but you can't seem to let go of this intrinsic value business.

What intrinsic value is there in a painting?

Come to think of it - is it not better to have a photograph enlarged and touched up and reproduced one that you don't have to secure and protect and keep in certain temperature and humidity. Why does one insist on the original painting? What intrinsic value does it have to cost millions? Supply and Demand.

Why does the same looking banana cost 50p at Pret and 18p at Tescos 100 yards apart in centre of town.
 
Last edited:
Yes I see oil going higher. It is also based on a dollar crash.

If the Fed continues printing dollars - you will see oil rising.

Inevitably that will happen, but I get the sense that it is all a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy. In the sense that when oil was at $10 a barrel 12 years ago, it was presumably regarded as a cheap and plentiful resource and nobody bothered about it too much. In the last decade it seems like the excessively risk averse (yes, risk averse, if you don't believe me look at the obsessive re-packaging of debt and any other liability, they fear losses so much that they have made them an inevitability) people in the financial system have used commodities as a way to hedge against inflation. So there were all these funds, long only in some cases, buying oil as a way to keep pace with the rising cost of living, in the process they boosted demand for it and the price rose, reinforcing their belief that it is necessary to own oil in order to be protected from price rises.

Atilla said:
The prospect of ME disruption is ever present imo.

Yep. I never thought I'd rejoice in death and suffering, but if I take out a long position on oil I'll switch on the news & secretly pray for turmoil and disruption to supplies :sneaky:, a perfect recipe for a spike in oil prices.

Do you believe the stuff about oil hitting $200 a barrel if Saudi goes the way of Libya et al? I think that if it did then it would be a fairly temporary thing, and the consumer would just have to slow down the consuming and dig a little deeper for a few months; in the end politically stable places such as the US & Canada have billions/trillions of barrels of shale oil deposits which they can extract and sell for a considerable profit with prices well below $200.

I think Middle Eastern countries will fight market forces and do anything within their considerable power to keep the export contracts for oil fulfilled and to keep them at reasonable prices, if they don't then they will find that they have competition from abroad. Who knows, perhaps they would turn on the spigots full blast to put the high-cost oil producers out of business in such a scenario, oil prices would be back in two figures. Maybe that guy who predicted $5 a barrel in 1998/1999 will be proven right after all?

BTW could someone who is clued up about oil tell me whether it is really true that lifting costs (not exploration/security costs) are as low as $1 a barrel in Iraq? I read that even Saudi Arabia is running out of the really easy stuff and is having to use water injections to keep their oil flowing? I saw a program which said that some of the new reserves they are developing are unprofitable at below $55 a barrel! :-0

Atilla said:
You need to ask the question if oil is $100 in a recession what will it be in recovery.

True, but long range price predictions lose a lot of meaning thanks to inflation. Oil will be at the $200+ per barrel barrel level constantly, or so they say, by 2020. Indeed the fact we will be using 120mmbod by then will contribute to a real price rise, but much of that extra $100 a barrel will be made up for by inflation.

So, if we say oil will be at $150 a barrel in 3 years does that mean we are predicting a real price rise or inflation? If you say $150 a barrel this year then that means something in real terms.

Atilla said:
If gas prices are rising - complementary energy source to oil - oil prices will rise if produces switch.

Nope predictions remain put especially gold and oil and the dollar. Twin defecits are here to stay. Nothing has changed. Simply that markets have deteriated imho.

Refined product prices are a bit harder to nail down aren't they? As I understood it they vary considerably from region to region i.e. if a hurricane takes a lot of US refineries offline then US refined product prices will rise but European or Asian refined product prices won't rise (at least not immediately, perhaps if the US has to start buying European/Asian oil products then there will be a price increase there).
 
Every currency should be pegged to something of value.............That is why the USD is being devalued as I type this message..................The Fed figures that because we owe the world 15 Trillion dollars,,,,,,,,,,,,If they can devalue the USD by 50% then we only owe the world 7.5 Trillion Dollars..................
 
The only problem for the Fed is that interest rates in the US are zero, and banks are not lending and people here do not want to borrow, so they can't get the extra dollars into circulation..............This equates into deflation which is the opposite of what they want..................I am leaning towards the deflation camp for the next several years followed by some years of hyper-inflation...............I may be wrong but I will be watching the markets and will be able to adjust accordingly..............
 
Slowly but surely...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...he-Gold-Standard-as-world-order-unravels.html

"I feel terribly sorry for anybody on fixed incomes tied to a fiat currency because they are not going to be able to buy things with that paper money"

Correct, anyone who understands economics knows that paper money is intrinsically worthless.


Xia Bin, an adviser to China's central bank, said in June that the country's reserve strategy needs an "urgent" overhaul. Instead of buying paper IOU's from a prostrate West, China should invest in strategic assets and accumulate gold by "buying the dips".

Correct, anyone who understands economics knows that fiat currencies are nothing more than a worthless IOU.
 
Every currency should be pegged to something of value.............That is why the USD is being devalued as I type this message..................The Fed figures that because we owe the world 15 Trillion dollars,,,,,,,,,,,,If they can devalue the USD by 50% then we only owe the world 7.5 Trillion Dollars..................

This is pretty much the crux of it. This will happen sooner or later. Probably much sooner than most think.
 
By pegging currencies you lose the free market in currency trading. Lose that and the ripple affect on economies and other markets would be in orders of magnitude.
 
Slowly but surely...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...he-Gold-Standard-as-world-order-unravels.html

"I feel terribly sorry for anybody on fixed incomes tied to a fiat currency because they are not going to be able to buy things with that paper money"

Correct, anyone who understands economics knows that paper money is intrinsically worthless.


Xia Bin, an adviser to China's central bank, said in June that the country's reserve strategy needs an "urgent" overhaul. Instead of buying paper IOU's from a prostrate West, China should invest in strategic assets and accumulate gold by "buying the dips".

Correct, anyone who understands economics knows that fiat currencies are nothing more than a worthless IOU.

Pretty much sums the situation up right there. :confused:
 
By pegging currencies you lose the free market in currency trading. Lose that and the ripple affect on economies and other markets would be in orders of magnitude.

The Fiat Money Hook Written by Daniel M. Ryan
Sunday, May 29, 2011

Federal Reserve Notes have lost more than 95% of their purchasing power over the lifetime of the Federal Reserve. It's quite clear that Federal Reserve monetary policy has had inflation as its centerpiece. Despite lip service being paid to price stability, the Fed always tilts towards inflation. If price stability were held to strictly, the central bank would view 2% inflation with the same alarm as it does 2% deflation. The same goes for 10%.

Obviously, the Fed and other central banks are far more tolerant of inflation than deflation. The reason given is that deflation means another Great Depression, while high inflation means only economic difficulties. Inflation means pain, but deflation means serious injury. We tend to accept that rationale because the Great Depression was the last time that deflation appeared, with the exception of miniscule and ephemeral episodes. Since we don't want to run that risk, many shy away from supporting the gold standard. The false belief that the gold standard was the cause of the Great Depression – now debunked because of all-fiat Japan's Lost Decades – still holds sway.

Never mind that the deflation rate was higher in the 1920-21 recession, which cleared up on its own and relatively quickly.

Of course, holes in the official mythology don't imply that there won't be pain if inflation stops. We’re discovering the hard way that fiat money is addictive.

George Washington knew well what our great-grandparents forgot. In http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/constitution/1787/bowen.html a letter to Jabez Bowen, he wrote: "Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have, to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open the door to every species of fraud and injustice."

We now know it too, not from foresight but from hard experience. We're now living in the “New Normal," and the honest are oppressed. We have seen new breeds of fraud and injustice. The question is: how did fiat money get accepted despite George Washington's warning, and more recent warnings that compared fiat money to an addictive narcotic?

The answer is: fiat money pushers held themselves up as doctors. Fiat money and central-bank inflation were compared to medicinal narcotics. This portrayal is easy to buy into, especially for someone who's been injured. When I smashed my forearm and wrist in a way that presented a complex challenge to a surgeon, I availed myself of all the medical morphine that was offered. After I got out of the hospital, there was a time when I literally could not get to sleep without a dose of Percocet.

The fact that a lot of narcotic addicts started off with medical narcotics, prescribed to relieve or lessen excruciating pain, went by the board. Fiat money was accepted as a needed painkiller.

Another selling point of fiat money, heard more in the 1950s and '60s, was that fiat money can be used to generate "good" inflation. Back then, it was widely believed that a little inflation was a good thing. By lowering real interest rates, consumption was stimulated and so was investment: inflation, in moderation, was good for growth. This claim, which depended upon savers and bondholders being bled for the sake of GDP growth, spoke to the times. The '50s and '60s, of course, were the decades when American growth seemed unstoppable.

Given that claim, and its plausibility, another analogy comes to mind: inflation is like smoking.

One of the mysteries of tobacco smoking is why so many people indulge in the habit despite the associated dangers. Recent medical research has found that http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1034701/Smoking-good-memory-concentration.html smoking cigarettes improves memory and concentration.

In other words, smoking cigarettes can temporarily improve productivity at the long-term cost of lung cancer. The analogy fall into place easily: just as cigarettes give a temporary boost to concentration, fiat money gives a temporary boost to productivity. If both lag, another dose will get us running closer to our potential. It is a fact that in an economy with fast broad-based growth, like America in the '50s and '60s and mainland China now, smoking is popular. Some people take up smoking because their memory and concentration have been wrecked, like post-traumatic stress syndrome sufferers; they use cigarettes to self-medicate, just as central banks use inflation to self-medicate an economy that keeps putting along sub-normally.

The analogy doesn't stop there. Just as long-term cigarette smoking eventually triggers the unchecked growth of cancer cells in the lungs, fiat money over the long run triggers the unchecked growth of prices.

Also, quitting smoking is notoriously hard. Fiat-money proponents never tire of pointing out that going back to the gold standard will mean a lot of pain and wrecked performance, which is similar to the reasons smokers give for not giving up the smoking habit. "I can't quit; I'll be a wreck." "I won't be able to do my job." "I'll be in a daze for months." "I'll be a zombie."

"We can't go back to gold – there'll be more busts." "A gold standard means no credit." "A gold standard means no monetary stimulus, which will wreck our growth." "Going back to gold means a wholesale credit collapse – a zombie economy." Not unlike dedicated smokers, dedicated fiat mavens say that we're hooked on fiat and there's nothing we can do about it.

Given that we're habituated to fiat money, and the government deficits that fiat has made possible, going back to gold will involve certain dislocations. If we're willing to tough it through, we'll have a healthier economy and the risk of commerce-ruining inflation will be gone. There's never been serious inflation with a gold standard, only with fiat. It's not a stretch to say:

"WARNING: Sound Economics Has Determined That Fiat Money Causes Inflation."
 
It is and will always be a currency. When paper money becomes worthless, gold will always carry value due to it's many properties and forms of usage. If I could store it safely, I'd have all my paper money converted. I strongly recommend smaller pieces such as grams and single ounces though, that way if world gets in turmoil, you can barter. It's easier to give someone a gram than to have to try and cut off an ounce of a 100 ounce brick.



Look matey's - listen up!

Any commodity with the decent properties of what a currency is deemed to require can be a currency.

Gold is simply just another commodity which happens to possess those properties.


Now if you wish to vote for gold to be currency and I would also vote for it likewise then it can become a global defacto standard currency and everything would be simply just great. As it was for many 000s of years.

But to say gold is currency is incorrect. It is just another commodity FFS.


Why didn't Latin American Indians value it as such but other than a piece of shiny rock? Think about it.



Any half baked student of economics should be able to explain this. People are so into their trumped up egoistic points of view they are blind to what is and what is not.

I'm not arguing just stating a blinding obvious fact. (Perhaps not so obvious to those who think they can see)
 
It is and will always be a currency. When paper money becomes worthless, gold will always carry value due to it's many properties and forms of usage. If I could store it safely, I'd have all my paper money converted. I strongly recommend smaller pieces such as grams and single ounces though, that way if world gets in turmoil, you can barter. It's easier to give someone a gram than to have to try and cut off an ounce of a 100 ounce brick.

(y)

“Gold has worked down from Alexander’s time...when something holds good for two thousand years I do not believe it can be so because of prejudice or mistaken theory”

-Bernard M. Baruch, American Financier and Statesman.
 
5 Signs Gold Has Peaked

http://financialedge.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0611/5-Signs-Gold-Has-Peaked.aspx

My gold target is still 1650 - financial crises is not over by far. On the contrary consequences about to hit us with inflation / stagflation.

Talk of rise in interest rates somewhat funny - how will governments finance their debt otherwise.

Inflation is about the only solution with long term negative interest rates.


Soros - has got it badly wrong this time. Somebody should tell him. Or better if we don't. What goes round comes round... :cheesy:



Soros made headlines late last year when he called gold “the ultimate bubble” and by early this year he had sold most of his firm’s stake, all while gold was still on the upswing.

Brilliant guy Soros and very clever. Did say his call on gold bubble was wrong and proven correct. 1600-1650 will come of the highs to test strength and take a breather. Not 1400 or even 1500s.


All those calling the gold bubble repent now! :cheesy:
 
An excellent article from someone who understands sound economics and sound money.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/gold-standard-or-bust_577314.html?page=1


"Still, this much is true for those who hold dollars, both U.S. citizens and central bankers around the world. Whether it’s the cash distributed to community banks by the Federal Reserve or the trillions in Treasury obligations peddled at home and abroad​—​it’s all U.S. government IOUs. Everyone who holds dollars is hurt when the U.S. government debases its currency."


"Gold convertibility ensures that the money supply expands or contracts based on the collective assessment of market participants​—​as opposed to the less-than-omniscient hunches of central bankers."


"Under a gold standard, money regains its primary purpose as a vital tool of free markets instead of serving as a corrupted instrument of government policy. Genuine economic growth​—​as opposed to the money illusion of artificial wealth reflected in bloated equities or housing prices​—​is no longer sacrificed to monetary policy encumbered by the fiscal failures of government."
 
Another good article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/your-money/in-golds-popularity-shades-of-1980-strategies.html?_r=1

"While there may be what he calls a “relief rally” if the immediate crises seem to be resolved, he says that there has been a “general loss of confidence in the ability of central banks and governments to manage the economy.”



"Lewis E. Lehrman, a friend and ally of Mr. Bell’s, says a gold standard would require the government to balance its budget and its current account. He says that, among other things, it would have made it impossible to accumulate the enormous private-sector debt load that led to the financial crisis of 2007."
 
If there were any doubts about the likelihood of QE3, the awful GDP figures released today should have put them to rest.

Get some Gold while it's still cheap.
 
Welcome to the Twilight zone.

Now the Swiss want to devalue their currency.

Great idea. Take the one thing that every Swiss citizen is in possession of, that their assets are denominated in, and destroy its value.

So just about everyone wants to weaken their currency now. It really is the race to the bottom and why we have to own precious metals.
 
If there were any doubts about the likelihood of QE3, the awful GDP figures released today should have put them to rest.

Get some Gold while it's still cheap.

There never were any such doubts, unless they existed in the minds of the mainstream media and financial commentators.
 
Top