We Are On the List

Posted: September 24, 2016 in Uncategorized


Dr. Paul Connett breaking it down against New Zealand’s Prof Mike Berridge about the factual realization that the ingestion of any fluoridated substance for the prevention of tooth decay is medically and ethically wrong.


Authored by Brooklyn, NY police officer Jay Stalien (via Facebook),

I have come to realize something that is still hard for me to understand to this day. The following may be a shock to some coming from an African American, but the mere fact that it may be shocking to some is prima facie evidence of the sad state of affairs that we are in as Humans.

I used to be so torn inside growing up. Here I am, a young African-American born and raised in Brooklyn, NY wanting to be a cop. I watched and lived through the crime that took place in the hood. My own black people killing others over nothing. Crack heads and heroin addicts lined the lobby of my building as I shuffled around them to make my way to our 1 bedroom apartment with 6 of us living inside. I used to be woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of gun fire, only to look outside and see that it was 2 African Americans shooting at each other.

It never sat right with me. I wanted to help my community and stop watching the blood of African Americans spilled on the street at the hands of a fellow black man. I became a cop because black lives in my community, along with ALL lives, mattered to me, and wanted to help stop the bloodshed.

As time went by in my law enforcement career, I quickly began to realize something. I remember the countless times I stood 2 inches from a young black man, around my age, laying on his back, gasping for air as blood filled his lungs. I remember them bleeding profusely with the unforgettable smell of deoxygenated dark red blood in the air, as it leaked from the bullet holes in his body on to the hot sidewalk on a summer day. I remember the countless family members who attacked me, spit on me, cursed me out, as I put up crime scene tape to cordon off the crime scene, yelling and screaming out of pain and anger at the sight of their loved ones taking their last breath. I never took it personally, I knew they were hurting. I remember the countless times I had to order new uniforms, because the ones I had on, were bloody from the blood of another black victim…of black on black crime. I remember the countless times I got back in my patrol car, distraught after having watched another black male die in front me, having to start my preliminary report something like this:

Suspect- Black/ Male, Victim-Black /Male.

I remember the countless times I canvassed the area afterwards, and asked everyone “did you see who did it”, and the popular response from the very same family members was always, “Fuck the Police, I ain’t no snitch, Im gonna take care of this myself”. This happened every single time, every single homicide, black on black, and then my realization became clearer.

I woke up every morning, put my freshly pressed uniform on, shined my badge, functioned checked my weapon, kissed my wife and kid, and waited for my wife to say the same thing she always does before I leave, “Make sure you come back home to us”. I always replied, “I will”, but the truth was I was never sure if I would. I almost lost my life on this job, and every call, every stop, every moment that I had this uniform on, was another possibility for me to almost lose my life again. I was a target in the very community I swore to protect, the very community I wanted to help. As a matter of fact, they hated my very presence. They called me “Uncle Tom”, and “wanna be white boy”, and I couldn’t understand why. My own fellow black men and women attacking me, wishing for my death, wishing for the death of my family. I was so confused, so torn, I couldn’t understand why my own black people would turn against me, when every time they called …I was there. Every time someone died….I was there. Every time they were going through one of the worst moments in their lives…I was there. So why was I the enemy? I dove deep into that question…Why was I the enemy? Then my realization became clearer.

I spoke to members of the community and listened to some of the complaints as to why they hated cops. I then did research on the facts. I also presented facts to these members of the community, and listened to their complaints in response. This is what I learned:

Complaint: Police always targeting us, they always messing with the black man.


Fact: A city where the majority of citizens are black (Baltimore for example) …will ALWAYS have a higher rate of black people getting arrested, it will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks getting stopped, and will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks getting killed, and the reason why is because a city with those characteristics will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks committing crime. The statistics will follow the same trend for Asians if you go to China, for Hispanics if you go to Puerto Rico, for whites if you go to Russia, and the list goes on. It’s called Demographics


Complaint: More black people get arrested than white boys.

Fact: Black People commit a grossly disproportionate amount of crime. Data from the FBI shows that Nationwide, Blacks committed 5,173 homicides in 2014, whites committed 4,367. Chicago’s death toll is almost equal to that of both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined. Chicago’s death toll from 2001–November, 26 2015 stands at 7,401. The combined total deaths during Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2015: 4,815) and Operation Enduring Freedom/Afghanistan (2001-2015: 3,506), total 8,321.


Complaint: Blacks are the only ones getting killed by police, or they are killed more.


Fact: As of July 2016, the breakdown of the number of US Citizens killed by Police this year is, 238 White people killed, 123 Black people killed, 79 Hispanics, 69 other/or unknown race.


Complaint: Well we already doing a good job of killing ourselves, we don’t need the Police to do it. Besides they should know better.


Fact: Black people kill more other blacks than Police do, and there are only protest and outrage when a cop kills a black man. University of Toledo criminologist Dr. Richard R. Johnson examined the latest crime data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports and Centers for Disease Control and found that an average of 4,472 black men were killed by other black men annually between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2012. Professor Johnson’s research further concluded that 112 black men died from both justified and unjustified police-involved killings annually during this same period.

The more I listened, the more I realized. The more I researched, the more I realized. I would ask questions, and would only get emotional responses & inferences based on no facts at all. The more killing I saw, the more tragedy, the more savagery, the more violence, the more loss of life of a black man at the hands of another black man….the more I realized.

I haven’t slept well in the past few nights. Heartbreak weighs me down, rage flows through my veins, and tears fills my eyes. I watched my fellow officers assassinated on live television, and the images of them laying on the ground are seared into my brain forever. I couldn’t help but wonder if it had been me, a black man, a black cop, on TV, assassinated, laying on the ground dead… would my friends and family still think black lives mattered? Would my life have mattered? Would they make t-shirts in remembrance of me? Would they go on tv and protest violence? Would they even make a Facebook post, or share a post in reference to my death?

All of my realizations came to this conclusion.

Black Lives do not matter to most black people. Only the lives that make the national news matter to them. Only the lives that are taken at the hands of cops or white people, matter. The other thousands of lives lost, the other black souls that I along with every cop, have seen taken at the hands of other blacks, do not matter. Their deaths are unnoticed, accepted as the “norm”, and swept underneath the rug by the very people who claim and post “black lives matter”.


I realized that this country is full of ignorance, where an educated individual will watch the ratings-driven news media, and watch a couple YouTube video clips, and then come to the conclusion that they have all the knowledge they need to have in order to know what it feels like to have a bullet proof vest as part of your office equipment, “Stay Alive” as part of your daily to do list, and having insurance for your health insurance because of the high rate of death in your profession. They watch a couple videos and then they magically know in 2 minutes 35 seconds, how you are supposed to handle a violent encounter, which took you 6 months of Academy training, 2 – 3 months of field training, and countless years of blood, sweat, tears and broken bones experiencing violent encounters and fine tuning your execution of the Use of Force Continuum.


I realized that there are even cops, COPS, duly sworn law enforcement officers, who are supposed to be decent investigators, who will publicly go on the media and call other white cops racist and KKK, based on a video clip that they watched thousands of miles away, which was filmed after the fact, based on a case where the details aren’t even known yet and the investigation hasn’t even begun.


I realized that most in the African American community refuse to look at solving the bigger problem that I see and deal with every day, which is black on black crime taking hundreds of innocent black lives each year, and instead focus on the 9 questionable deaths of black men, where some were in the act of committing crimes.


I realized that they value the life of a Sex Offender and Convicted Felon, [who was in the act of committing multiple felonies: felon in possession of a firearm-FELONY, brandishing and threatening a homeless man with a gun-Aggravated Assault in Florida: FELONY, who resisted officers who first tried to taze him, and WAS NOT RESTRAINED, who can be clearly seen in one of the videos raising his right shoulder, then shooting it down towards the right side of his body exactly where the firearm was located and recovered] more than the lives of the innocent cops who were assassinated in Dallas protecting the very people that hated them the most.


I realized that they refuse to believe that most cops acknowledge that there are Bad cops who should have never been given a badge & gun, who are chicken shit and will shoot a cockroach if it crawls at them too fast, who never worked in the hood and may be intimidated. That most cops dread the thought of having to shoot someone, and never see the turmoil and mental anguish that a cop goes through after having to kill someone to save his own life. Instead they believe that we are all blood thirsty killers, because the media says so, even though the numbers prove otherwise.


I realize that they truly feel as if the death of cops will help people realize the false narrative that Black Lives Matter, when all it will do is take their movement two steps backwards and label them domestic terrorist.


I realized that some of these people, who say Black Lives Matter, are full of hate and racism. Hate for cops, because of the false narrative that more black people are targeted and killed. Racism against white people, for a tragedy that began 100’s of years ago, when most of the white people today weren’t even born yet.


I realized that some in the African American community’s idea of “Justice” is the prosecution of ANY and EVERY cop or white man that kills or is believed to have killed a black man, no matter what the circumstances are.


I realized the African American community refuses to look within to solve its major issues, and instead makes excuses and looks outside for solutions. I realized that a lot of people in the African American community lead with hate, instead of love. Division instead of Unity. Turmoil and rioting, instead of Peace.


I realized that they have become the very entity that they claim they are fighting against.

And ultimately, I realized that the very reasons I became a cop, are the very reasons my own people hate me, and now in this toxic hateful racially charged political climate, I am now more likely to die… and it is still hard for me to understand… to this day.

Onward Toward Bullion Bank Collapse - Craig Hemke
By Craig Hemke 

The events of Friday not only speed the eventual collapse of the Bullion Bank Paper Derivative Pricing Scheme, they also highlight the fraud of this current system and shine light upon the utter desperation of these Banks to maintain it.

We’ve written about this countless times over the past six years. Here are just two recent examples:

In short, as a measure of controlling the paper prices of gold and silver, The Bullion Banks that operate on The Comex act as de facto market makers of the paper derivative, Comex futures contract. This gives them the nearly unlimited ability to simply conjure up new contracts from thin air whenever demand for these contracts exceeds available supply and, almost without exception, these Banks issue new contracts by taking the short side of the trade versus a Spec long buyer. Never do these Banks put up actual collateral of physical metal when issuing these paper derivative contracts. Instead, they simply take the risk that their “deep pockets” will allow them to outlast the Spec longs and, without the risk of having to make physical delivery, The Banks almost always win. Eventually, an event like the runup to the Brexit vote or all of the Fed Goon jawboning of May will spook The Specs into selling and this Spec selling is used by The Banks to buy back (cover) their ill-gotten naked shorts and lower total open interest back down. (If you’re confused by this, please click the second link listed above for a more detailed explanation of this process.)

How this influences price is simple. If the supply of the paper derivative futures contract was held constant on a daily basis, then price would have to rise or fall based upon simple supply/demand dynamics. When the amount of buyers exceeded sellers, price would have to rise to a point at which existing owners would be willing to sell. But this is NOT how the Comex futures market operates! Because the market-making Banks have the ability to create new contracts from whole cloth, they can instead flood the “market” with new supply whenever it’s necessary. This mutes potential upside moves by imparting fresh new supply for the Spec buyers to devour. Price DOES NOT have to rise to a new, natural equilibrium. Instead, price equilibrium is found where demand meets this new supply.

As a case in point, simply study the “market” impact on gold “prices” in the hours that followed the Brexit decision in the UK. As turmoil shook the global markets, gold shot higher and, at one point, was up nearly $100. However, within hours it had given back nearly half of those gains and then spent the remainder of the day in am unusual and very tight trading range while virtually every other “market” was rocked with volatility throughout the trading day. See below:

The all-important question of the day is: How and why was this done?

First, the “how”. At the end of each trading day, the CME Group issues an update that details total open interest changes for both gold and silver. Friday’s preliminary totals can be found here: http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/metals/precious/gold_quotes_volume_voi.html What does the data show? On Friday, with global markets in turmoil and precious metals markets rallying significantly, The Bullion Banks on the Comex issued brand new supply of nearly 60,000 new paper gold contracts! At 100 paper gold ounces per contract, this represents a potential future obligation to deliver almost 6,000,000 ounces of gold, should the Spec long buyers ever stand for delivery (which they won’t). So, ask yourself these questions:

  • Did the world’s gold producers all suddenly decide to forward sell and hedge 186 metric tonnes of future production yesterday, just as the most significant economic event in eight years was beginning to unfold?


  • Did the Bullion Banks suddenly put up a few million ounces of their own gold and then lever it up a few times and issue 60,000 new contracts based upon this collateral deposit?

Obviously, the answer to both questions is a big, bold NO! Instead, the market-making and price manipulating Banks simply played their usual game, writ large. In a desperate attempt to contain price, they simply issued these 60,000 new contracts and fed them to the Spec buyers. So next, ask yourself these vital questions:

  1. Without this added supply…which grew total open interest by over 10% in one day!…how much further would the paper price of gold have risen yesterday?
  2. If a natural equilibrium was forced to be found between buyers and sellers of existing contracts, would price have settled even higher?
  3. And how much higher? Gold was up nearly $60 yesterday. But without the paper derivative supply increase of 10%, would it have risen $100? $200??

So now let’s address the more important part of the question: “why”.

Simply put, these Banks are desperate and on the run. However, in their arrogance, they are still flailing away and attempting to postpone their demise. The minimal amount of physical gold that they do hold and utilize to backstop the paper derivative market is shrinking rapidly as investors and institutions around the globe seek gold as a safe haven against the financial devastation of negative interest rates.

But not only are The Banks attempting to reverse this trend that is rapidly deleveraging their system, they are also desperate to protect their established NET short positions from additional paper losses. Recall that the CFTC generates something that it calls The Bank Participation Report every month and we write about this report almost every month, too. Here’s the latest: http://www.tfmetalsreport.com/blog/7675/latest-bank-participation-report

So let’s cut to the chase…

With gold at $1060 back on December 1, 2015, the 24 Banks covered by this report were NET short just 30,757 Comex gold contracts. After running this NET short position all the way to 195,262 contracts on May 3, 2016, the report for June showed a NET short position of 133,396 contracts. However, data for this latest report was surveyed on June 7, with price at $1247 and total Comex open interest of 496,330 contracts. By this past Tuesday, in the days before the Brexit total were announced, price had risen to $1318 and then fallen back to $1270. However, total Comex open interest had risen to 571,517 contracts and, by analyzing the latest CFTC-generated Commitment of Traders Report, we can safely estimate that The Banks were likely NET short at least 180,000 Comex gold contracts.

Putting this all together, while price rose from $1060 to $1270, these 24 Banks added about 150,000 contracts of NET short liability to their Comex trading operations. So, with a NET position of 180,000 contracts short and with every contract representing 100 ounces of paper gold, the paper losses to these Banks for every $10 move in the gold price amounts to about $180,000,000. Multiplying that out…When gold was up nearly $100 early Friday, these Banks were on the losing side of a $1,800,000,000 move. Even for the likes of JPM et al, that’s a lot of fiat!

So, what did they do? Like any arrogant and addicted gambler, they doubled-down! They put “good money after bad” and, in doing so, likely increased their NET short position to nearly 250,000 contracts! All of this in order to suppress price and get it back under their control. This also allows them to somewhat control the message gold was sending. Can you even imagine the headlines if gold was up $200 yesterday? By holding the gains to just $50, The Banks hope to:

  • Manage the increased physical demand these higher prices are causing AND
  • Mitigate their paper losses. All of those new shorts lowered price by nearly $50 and nearly cut their one-day paper losses in half.

In the end, what’s the point of this post? First and foremost, it’s simply the latest installment of our efforts to shine the light of truth upon the incredible fraud and sham that is the current paper derivative pricing scheme. The Comex-derived price is not at all related to the price/value of true physical gold. Rather, the price discovered on Comex is simply the price of the derivative, itself, with the price of this derivative determined by changes of supply and demand of the derivative. Barely any physical metal ever exchanges hands on Comex so it is entirely inaccurate to say that the price discovered there has any connection at all to the underlying physical.

That said, though, we’ll leave you with one last link that you simply must read. Mark O’Byrne at Goldcore is closely-connected on the ground in London. In all of the hubbub of the Thursday and Friday, you may missed his daily report. If Mark and his sources are correct, we may be rapidly approaching the demise and destruction of these criminal Bullion Banks and their fraudulent pricing scheme. Demand for unencumbered, true physical gold is the key to ending this system and finding justice for gold holders, miners and producers around the globe…and this link may prompt you to think that we are closer to The End than at any other time in the past 40 years: http://www.goldcore.com/us/gold-blog/gold-lower-despite-panic-due-to-supply-issues-in-inter-bank-gold-market/

Friday’s Brexit vote truly was a game-changer and the single most important financial event since 2008. That it might accelerate the death throes of the Bullion Bank Paper Derivative Pricing Scheme is not something that is fully appreciated by the global gold “community”. Hopefully, this post has helped you to understand where we are at present, the reasons behind the price action of Friday and the significance of global physical supply/demand versus paper price going forward.


Coming to America?

Posted: July 2, 2016 in Geopolitics

Are you ready for the truth?

Posted: June 10, 2016 in Uncategorized

Love it or Hate it, the train has left the station.

The Truth Will Set Us Free

Posted: April 22, 2016 in Geopolitics

When the 911 Truthers told you there was more to the story, they were following the facts. Anyone who believed the official story were the true conspiracy theorists.

Gold and Economic Freedom

Posted: January 19, 2016 in Economics

Gold and Economic Freedom

by Alan Greenspan

Published in Ayn Rand’s “Objectivist” newsletter in 1966, and reprinted in her book, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, in 1967.

An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense — perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire — that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other.

In order to understand the source of their antagonism, it is necessary first to understand the specific role of gold in a free society.

Money is the common denominator of all economic transactions. It is that commodity which serves as a medium of exchange, is universally acceptable to all participants in an exchange economy as payment for their goods or services, and can, therefore, be used as a standard of market value and as a store of value, i.e., as a means of saving.

The existence of such a commodity is a precondition of a division of labor economy. If men did not have some commodity of objective value which was generally acceptable as money, they would have to resort to primitive barter or be forced to live on self-sufficient farms and forgo the inestimable advantages of specialization. If men had no means to store value, i.e., to save, neither long-range planning nor exchange would be possible.

What medium of exchange will be acceptable to all participants in an economy is not determined arbitrarily. First, the medium of exchange should be durable. In a primitive society of meager wealth, wheat might be sufficiently durable to serve as a medium, since all exchanges would occur only during and immediately after the harvest, leaving no value-surplus to store. But where store-of-value considerations are important, as they are in richer, more civilized societies, the medium of exchange must be a durable commodity, usually a metal. A metal is generally chosen because it is homogeneous and divisible: every unit is the same as every other and it can be blended or formed in any quantity. Precious jewels, for example, are neither homogeneous nor divisible. More important, the commodity chosen as a medium must be a luxury. Human desires for luxuries are unlimited and, therefore, luxury goods are always in demand and will always be acceptable. Wheat is a luxury in underfed civilizations, but not in a prosperous society. Cigarettes ordinarily would not serve as money, but they did in post-World War II Europe where they were considered a luxury. The term “luxury good” implies scarcity and high unit value. Having a high unit value, such a good is easily portable; for instance, an ounce of gold is worth a half-ton of pig iron.

In the early stages of a developing money economy, several media of exchange might be used, since a wide variety of commodities would fulfill the foregoing conditions. However, one of the commodities will gradually displace all others, by being more widely acceptable. Preferences on what to hold as a store of value will shift to the most widely acceptable commodity, which, in turn, will make it still more acceptable. The shift is progressive until that commodity becomes the sole medium of exchange. The use of a single medium is highly advantageous for the same reasons that a money economy is superior to a barter economy: it makes exchanges possible on an incalculably wider scale.

Whether the single medium is gold, silver, seashells, cattle, or tobacco is optional, depending on the context and development of a given economy. In fact, all have been employed, at various times, as media of exchange. Even in the present century, two major commodities, gold and silver, have been used as international media of exchange, with gold becoming the predominant one. Gold, having both artistic and functional uses and being relatively scarce, has significant advantages over all other media of exchange. Since the beginning of World War I, it has been virtually the sole international standard of exchange. If all goods and services were to be paid for in gold, large payments would be difficult to execute and this would tend to limit the extent of a society’s divisions of labor and specialization. Thus a logical extension of the creation of a medium of exchange is the development of a banking system and credit instruments (bank notes and deposits) which act as a substitute for, but are convertible into, gold.

A free banking system based on gold is able to extend credit and thus to create bank notes (currency) and deposits, according to the production requirements of the economy. Individual owners of gold are induced, by payments of interest, to deposit their gold in a bank (against which they can draw checks). But since it is rarely the case that all depositors want to withdraw all their gold at the same time, the banker need keep only a fraction of his total deposits in gold as reserves. This enables the banker to loan out more than the amount of his gold deposits (which means that he holds claims to gold rather than gold as security of his deposits). But the amount of loans which he can afford to make is not arbitrary: he has to gauge it in relation to his reserves and to the status of his investments.

When banks loan money to finance productive and profitable endeavors, the loans are paid off rapidly and bank credit continues to be generally available. But when the business ventures financed by bank credit are less profitable and slow to pay off, bankers soon find that their loans outstanding are excessive relative to their gold reserves, and they begin to curtail new lending, usually by charging higher interest rates. This tends to restrict the financing of new ventures and requires the existing borrowers to improve their profitability before they can obtain credit for further expansion. Thus, under the gold standard, a free banking system stands as the protector of an economy’s stability and balanced growth. When gold is accepted as the medium of exchange by most or all nations, an unhampered free international gold standard serves to foster a world-wide division of labor and the broadest international trade. Even though the units of exchange (the dollar, the pound, the franc, etc.) differ from country to country, when all are defined in terms of gold the economies of the different countries act as one — so long as there are no restraints on trade or on the movement of capital. Credit, interest rates, and prices tend to follow similar patterns in all countries. For example, if banks in one country extend credit too liberally, interest rates in that country will tend to fall, inducing depositors to shift their gold to higher-interest paying banks in other countries. This will immediately cause a shortage of bank reserves in the “easy money” country, inducing tighter credit standards and a return to competitively higher interest rates again.

A fully free banking system and fully consistent gold standard have not as yet been achieved. But prior to World War I, the banking system in the United States (and in most of the world) was based on gold and even though governments intervened occasionally, banking was more free than controlled. Periodically, as a result of overly rapid credit expansion, banks became loaned up to the limit of their gold reserves, interest rates rose sharply, new credit was cut off, and the economy went into a sharp, but short-lived recession. (Compared with the depressions of 1920 and 1932, the pre-World War I business declines were mild indeed.) It was limited gold reserves that stopped the unbalanced expansions of business activity, before they could develop into the post-World War I type of disaster. The readjustment periods were short and the economies quickly reestablished a sound basis to resume expansion.

But the process of cure was misdiagnosed as the disease: if shortage of bank reserves was causing a business decline — argued economic interventionists — why not find a way of supplying increased reserves to the banks so they never need be short! If banks can continue to loan money indefinitely — it was claimed — there need never be any slumps in business. And so the Federal Reserve System was organized in 1913. It consisted of twelve regional Federal Reserve banks nominally owned by private bankers, but in fact government sponsored, controlled, and supported. Credit extended by these banks is in practice (though not legally) backed by the taxing power of the federal government. Technically, we remained on the gold standard; individuals were still free to own gold, and gold continued to be used as bank reserves. But now, in addition to gold, credit extended by the Federal Reserve banks (“paper reserves”) could serve as legal tender to pay depositors.

When business in the United States underwent a mild contraction in 1927, the Federal Reserve created more paper reserves in the hope of forestalling any possible bank reserve shortage. More disastrous, however, was the Federal Reserve’s attempt to assist Great Britain who had been losing gold to us because the Bank of England refused to allow interest rates to rise when market forces dictated (it was politically unpalatable). The reasoning of the authorities involved was as follows: if the Federal Reserve pumped excessive paper reserves into American banks, interest rates in the United States would fall to a level comparable with those in Great Britain; this would act to stop Britain’s gold loss and avoid the political embarrassment of having to raise interest rates. The “Fed” succeeded; it stopped the gold loss, but it nearly destroyed the economies of the world, in the process. The excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy spilled over into the stock market, triggering a fantastic speculative boom. Belatedly, Federal Reserve officials attempted to sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking the boom. But it was too late: by 1929 the speculative imbalances had become so overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp retrenching and a consequent demoralizing of business confidence. As a result, the American economy collapsed. Great Britain fared even worse, and rather than absorb the full consequences of her previous folly, she abandoned the gold standard completely in 1931, tearing asunder what remained of the fabric of confidence and inducing a world-wide series of bank failures. The world economies plunged into the Great Depression of the 1930’s.

With a logic reminiscent of a generation earlier, statists argued that the gold standard was largely to blame for the credit debacle which led to the Great Depression. If the gold standard had not existed, they argued, Britain’s abandonment of gold payments in 1931 would not have caused the failure of banks all over the world. (The irony was that since 1913, we had been, not on a gold standard, but on what may be termed “a mixed gold standard”; yet it is gold that took the blame.) But the opposition to the gold standard in any form — from a growing number of welfare-state advocates — was prompted by a much subtler insight: the realization that the gold standard is incompatible with chronic deficit spending (the hallmark of the welfare state). Stripped of its academic jargon, the welfare state is nothing more than a mechanism by which governments confiscate the wealth of the productive members of a society to support a wide variety of welfare schemes. A substantial part of the confiscation is effected by taxation. But the welfare statists were quick to recognize that if they wished to retain political power, the amount of taxation had to be limited and they had to resort to programs of massive deficit spending, i.e., they had to borrow money, by issuing government bonds, to finance welfare expenditures on a large scale.

Under a gold standard, the amount of credit that an economy can support is determined by the economy’s tangible assets, since every credit instrument is ultimately a claim on some tangible asset. But government bonds are not backed by tangible wealth, only by the government’s promise to pay out of future tax revenues, and cannot easily be absorbed by the financial markets. A large volume of new government bonds can be sold to the public only at progressively higher interest rates. Thus, government deficit spending under a gold standard is severely limited. The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit. They have created paper reserves in the form of government bonds which — through a complex series of steps — the banks accept in place of tangible assets and treat as if they were an actual deposit, i.e., as the equivalent of what was formerly a deposit of gold. The holder of a government bond or of a bank deposit created by paper reserves believes that he has a valid claim on a real asset. But the fact is that there are now more claims outstanding than real assets. The law of supply and demand is not to be conned. As the supply of money (of claims) increases relative to the supply of tangible assets in the economy, prices must eventually rise. Thus the earnings saved by the productive members of the society lose value in terms of goods. When the economy’s books are finally balanced, one finds that this loss in value represents the goods purchased by the government for welfare or other purposes with the money proceeds of the government bonds financed by bank credit expansion.

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.

Home » Money
Original URL: http://www.constitution.org/mon/greenspan_gold.htm


Posted: December 13, 2015 in Geopolitics, Videos

Refugees are guests within a Constitutional Republic’s borders, if the President has declared Emergency Powers, he must in Military Code not allow military age men from countries currently in hostile relations with the nation entry into the Homeland; the laws must be respected.