This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Stunner: Gold Standard Fully Supported By... Alan Greenspan!?
You read that right. After such establishment "luminaries" as World Bank president Robert Zoellick, Warren Buffett's father Howard, Jim Grant, and, most recently, Kansas Fed president Thomas Hoenig, all voiced their support for a return to a gold standard, the most recent addition to the motley group of contrite voodoo shamans is none othe than the man who is singlehandedly responsible for America's addiction to cheap toxic credit, who spawned such destroyers of the middle class as the current Chaircreature, and who currently is the chief advisor in John Paulson's crusade to gobble up every ounce of deliverable physical in the world: former Fed Chairman - Alan Greenspan! In an interview with Fox Business, the man who refuses to go away into that good night: "We have at this particular stage a fiat money which is essentially money printed by a government and it's usually a central bank which is authorized to do so. Some mechanism has got to be in place that restricts the amount of money which is produced, either a gold standard or a currency board, because unless you do that all of history suggest that inflation will take hold with very deleterious effects on economic activity... There are numbers of us, myself included, who strongly believe that we did very well in the 1870 to 1914 period with an international gold standard." And a further stunner: Greenspan himself wonders if we really need a central bank. Now our only question: why couldn't the maestro speak as clearly and coherently during his tenure which resulted in our current near-terminal financial state. And as a reminder, courtesy of Dylan Grice, if and when we do get a return to a gold standard there would be a need to reindex the monetary base to a real time equivalent price of gold, putting the price of the precious metal at about $6,300: "The US owns nearly 263m troy ounces of gold (the world's biggest holder) while the Fed's monetary base is $1.7 trillion. So the price of gold at which the US dollars would be fully gold-backed is currently around $6,300." And here you have people worried about day trading volatility...
h/t Mike Krieger
»
- 64979 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Yes, I read that yesterday and couldn't believe it. Greespan? Alan Greenspan?? Mr. Adrea Mitchell Greenspan???
He must have re-read his old essay and discovered it made more sense than he does now.
Here's another flash: Silver in Backwardation-- a year out! James Turk @ KWN
My Blog
.
Turk is fantastic.
James Turk - Silver in Backwardation, Set to Explode
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2011/1/21_Ja...
From "Gold and Economic Freedom" a 1966 Essay by Alan Greenspan
Fuck you Alan and your protégé Ben.
Could we get some clarification on when this actually happened? Some of the web references go all the way back to 2007. And I can't find anything on Fox Business (not that I looked very well).
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgnopi_gold-standard-now-supported-by-alan-greenspan-fed-2011_news Here is the interview.
That's a video from 2007, not 2011. It's just a repost. Here's the 2007 one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5MVsm2cpc0
Replacing one zio-scam (debt as money) with another (a scarce metal as money).
Should people with multiple personalities be in charge of anything?
Alan needs to wear a 2nd "depends" on his face.
Good essay here on Greenspan's past shapeshifter position on the Gold Standard. Smells like problem-reaction-solution and one is left with the sinking feeling that the new standard he is promoting will not be that high.
http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=arti...
[snip]:
Thirty years after Young Greenspan wrote his essay extolling a gold standard as not only the best form of global, economic stability, but also the best means of maintaining global, economic sanity; an older Alan Greenspan wrote a new essay: this time from his position as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. We are led to believe that this older, Greenspan must have 'forgotten' everything he every knew about gold, and a gold standard.
Instead of extolling the virtues of gold as the tool for both global economic stability, and for maintaining our own “economic liberty” as individuals, an older Greenspan had somewhat different priorities on his mind. He went into a lengthy analysis of how the price of gold could be manipulated in order to maintain “confidence” in the worthless paper of the bankers – and thus preserve their mountains of debt (i.e. their financial empire).
One can only speculate as to the hidden details of the probable hybrid he is floating today...
[Edit: and by today, of course I mean 2007]
This article is a terrific read.
Greenspan. Two things come to mind.
First, Greenspend I mean Greenspan, in this interview is simply trying to save his own legacy. He's hoping Bernanke will be the bad guy in the history books of tomorrow. He, Greenspan, knew all the answers, but as fate would have it his tenure pre-dated the economic/financial meltdown.
Second, because Greenspan is talking to the authors of tomorrow's history books, he tells of the total and complete failure of fiat currency as well as the Fed. And, he knows the gravity of the economic catastrophe unfolding. No doubt ending the Fed will be part of the solution, obvious to all in the future. Greenspan is trying to get on the right side of the future today. What a monster.
That's my thoughts exactly.
"As fate would have it..."...my ass; stop trying to morph causation into correlation.
When Greenspan turns his back on the US Dollar, you know it is toast. Expect currency crisis in 3..2..1..
I don't understand. When was this "Greenspan" interview? Recently? Can't find it.
It's not recent, it's from 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5MVsm2cpc0
I find it annoying that it was presented as something new. Not cool.
The referenced interview took place in 2007.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwu5FiT-fOY
2011 when adjusted for inflation....
Alan, you're a worthless POS. Pleez, just STFU. Your cred is as dead as your legacy. You caused a lot of misery. You sold out your ideology, your supporters, free markets and the widows and orphans. Take the 30 pieces of silver and crawl back under your rock. I hope your Creator forgives you because the rest of your fellow citizens who have a clue will be pretty pissed. You stand for little besides power trip.
Big deal. The problem isn't lack of gold backing, the problem is interest on the dollar.
Unreal
1869–70 recession, −9.7%
Panic of 1873and the Long Depression, −33.6%
1882–85 recession, −32.8%
1887–88 recession, - 14.6%
1890–91 recession, -22.1%
Panic of 1893, −37.3%
Panic of 1896, −25.2%
1899–1900 recession, - 15.5%
1902–04 recession, -16.2%
Panic of 1907, -29.2%
Panic of 1910–1911, -14.7%
Recession of 1913–1914, -25.9%
Yeah, "Maestro", it was smooth sailing...fucking idiot.
+1 junker who can't defend his thesis about why a deep recession every few years is a good thing.
They didn't junk you because you were wrong. They junked you because it devestated thier arguement. If you want to know why there was so many devaluations and recessions during that period it was to manage an out of control need for labor.
I forgot who laid this down here first but read this. I found it amazing.
http://www.enterprisecorruption.com/?page_id=39
He's a bit of an oddball, but he's also very prescient. I think his obsession with legatus is off. I can't imagine that Legatus and the Catholic Church are actually controlling North Korea, Russia, and China, all of whom make moves that impact us tremendously. Nor do they control oil.
Still, he has many insightful and timely observations.
You have to be very careful with east west connections.
For instance right now priests all over china are hammering into peoples heads that you will burn in hell forever if you commit suicide to try to stop the suicides at foxcon and the sweatshops. They also teach heavily in vietnam that if you aren't buried you can't be at rest and peace.
The soliders in vietnam would kill some people in a field and then pick off people trying to drag the bodies out. One kind of bullshit hand washes the other kind of bullshit hand. Not sure if it's connected or if it's just one set of sick bastards using another set of sick bastards control mechanisms against each other.
One man's recession is another man's sheep shearing.
[Context: Tho the Federal Reserve Act was not established until 1913, the effect of the influence of the private central Bank of England in domestic US markets cannot be underestimated. In fact it is consistent with economic history that 1913, the Great War and the removal of the Gold Standard in 1971 was the basis of turbo charging the ponzi of the shareholders in global fiat currency to launch the USD as the global reserve currency to the point now that they have abandoned the corpse of the whore and have attached themselves to the jugular of their new zombie drone, the PRC. Paging Dr. Van Helsing.....]
Seems like yesterday.
@snowball777
A few remarks:
- The biggest economic recession presented above is the Long Depression, which was only a stagnation, and was mostly due to a German government decree (Germany stopped silver coinage to finance a war with France).
- The other "recessions" and panics were very minor, and only speculators were hit.
- Nobody said a gold standard was to completely eliminate adjustments ("panics", "recessions", "depressions"). For completely eliminating those unfortunate events, you would have to eliminate fractional banking.
PS: I did not junk you.
"The US owns nearly 263m troy ounces of gold (the world's biggest holder)..." is a bald-faced lie.
The Vatican is BY FAR the largest holder of gold in the world which is why I would never support a return to the gold standard.
This video clip of Alan Greenspan on Fox Business News inaugural day in from October 15, 2007. This is not news it is history. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjMQG3qUFKo
reindexing the monetary base sounds like a recipe for a stable currency to me.
Arhg, Freeboooty
Modern humans are 100% total, utter, complete frauds.
Modern humans will say whatever gets them what they want.
When they work for AynRand, they say "gold is great".
When they work for FederalReserve, the say "gold is barbarous relic" and actively suppress the price in private.
When they work for a physical gold/silver ETF, they say "gold is great and central banks suck".
Ditto for just about everyone.
Put a cop uniform on an average modern human, and they run around searching for ways to violate individual rights, abuse their neighbors, and act like the jack-booted thug they're paid to be.
Do any honest humans exist today? I am one, and I assume a few other humans have identified the value and benefits of honesty.
But honest humans are nearly extinct. Fairly soon in the grand scheme of things, I suspect, honest humans will literally become an extinct phenomenon.
Once I was interviewing for a job with a company that handled top secret government projects. As part of the interview process I had to take a test and one of the questions on it was: "Do you ever lie"?
I thought at the time, being just a little stupid---maybe a lot----and naive, that I should answer the question with: "No". So I did. I didn't get the job.
Big mistake.
I ask you the same question with all due respect: Have you ever lied? Will you lie in the future?
I'm going to answer the questions for you: Yes and Yes. By all means correct me if I'm wrong.
Now that we've established that you are not an honest man, basically a liar
(sometimes), can we agree that lying is not only a part of the human genome, but that an 'honest human being' never did exist and therefore never became nearly extinct?
If a jack-booted thug knocks down my door and asks "Where's your spouse or boyfriend or parent", I will not say "second door on the left"... if that's what you mean by "honest".
I hope that's not what you mean, because that trivializes the issue we were talking about. At least I believe so.
First and foremost, I believe a human should never lie to himself. Perhaps you think that's a stupid statement... that people never lie to themselves. If so, I claim you are very, fatally wrong, and that most people lie to themselves many times per day. When a human says to themself "taxes are not theft", they lie to themself. When a human says "the government exists", they lie to themself (and even ignore the fact that fundamental law clearly states that organizations of all kinds are in fact "fictitious entities", not to mention the obvious fact that organizations ARE in fact fictions and do not exist.
People "go along" with endless lies every day... lies that very much impact their life in many significant and fundamental ways. So, do I ever lie to myself? My answer is never. And yes, I am painfully aware how extremely rare I am in that regard. Probably the last time I lied to myself was when I was about 4 years old. That's when I put my foot down, and decided I must believe nothing that others say, no matter who they are (or claim to be), and instead I must observe and infer for myself. Or in other words, be honest with myself. My reason for doing this was simple. I often got wildly different (and contradictory) answers from different adults to the same question. Therefore, it was obvious, even to a 4 year old, that if I jammed the answers other people told me into my head, that I'd be destroying my own mind... by lying to myself (some large portion of the time).
So that's the first part of my answer, and the most crucial part, because when a human lies to himself, that human is a fraud, a totally fundamental fraud. To be clear, I do not include "mistakes" as dishonesty, but I do include purposely turning your attention away from any issue because you sorta get the feeling some kind of deception is involved, and you don't want to see it.
So, to the next part of the answer. Do I ever lie to other people? Answer, well, in the uncommon kind of situation that I described at the top, I am totally happy to "lie" to mislead the predator-destroyer-thug. You betcha! However, to make an issue about that is PRECISELY equivalent to calling me a murderer or killer if I shoot and kill some thug who broke into my house and comes after me with a big honking knife. So my answer is this. If someone calls me a murderer (or even killer) because I defended myself, then fine... and I'll call them an blatant asshole, because they are trying to lie and destroy by the same kind of predatory language manipulation that would label me a liar because I saved an innocent human from destruction by a predatory human. Any "honest" and ethical human would praise me for defending myself, while anyone who claims I am a murderer, a killer, a liar... is a predator.
Now that I established the context, I can explain that no, I will never tell a lie to cheat or defraud or mislead any human in order to benefit myself or others. In other words, I will not lie in any sense that matters, or that gives "lie" a negative connotation. Sure, rarely but sometimes I might simply not answer a question to avoid hurting feelings, or more often take care with the tone of my voice and my formulations when I convey something that might hurt others. Though sometimes people benefit from being hurt in this way, to motivate them to change bad behavior. But lie? No. Why should I?
The fact is, lying is not part of the human genome. But I would say that lying is part of the predator genome. To lie is almost exactly the same as hiding in the tall grass to get close to your prey. The purpose of a "lie" is to "mislead"... to "lead" some other creature to behave in a way that benefits the liar and harms the mislead. Both serve the purpose of hiding the facts of reality from one being for the explicit purpose of harming or destroying that creature to benefit the predator.
The fact is, humans were predators for most of their history. They did not produce the goods they needed to survive, and wanted to enjoy comfort and entertainment. They chased and grabbed and clubbed their prey... they were predators, though they also simply took some goods that were just lying around (creek water, berries, nuts, etc).
Today, humans cannot live as predators, they can only live as producers. Naturally occurring processes are sufficient to support only 1 million humans or so, which is about 7000 time fewer than the current population of earth. So the only philosophy or ethics that CAN work for modern man is the ethics of production. Overall, modern humans must be producers... period. To produce requires knowledge of the real world, real materials, how those materials behave in various conditions, how things work (physics, chemistry, etc). Only HONEST answers to these questions let us produce goods that work, that serve the purpose of survival, security and enjoyment. To lie in any significant way is destructive, and the way of the predator. To be honest is the way of the producer.
No, I have no intention to lie. I haven't the least tiny inclination to lie. I refuse to lie, or even slightly mislead in order to gain anything from another human, because I consider predatory behavior revolting to the core of my being. I understand how destructive predatory behavior is, and how much of the pain, suffering and loss of potential in the modern world comes from lying, tricking, misleading, defrauding and other predatory behavior.
I am also painfully aware that "destruction is inherently and metaphysically massively more potent and powerful than production". The proof of that is almost too easy to bother stating, but I will anyway.
How much time, effort, thought, expertise and resources are required to build (produce) a nice home? Answer: lots, which is why you're willing to work for many years to pay for your home. How much time, effort, thought, expertise and resources are required to destroy that home? Answer: 5 minutes, $1.00 worth of gasoline, no expertise, and an IQ of 40.
Get the point? The world today is totally overrun by predators. That's why the world is headed into total disaster. The most egregious predators today become leaders and executives of countries, central banks and huge companies. They lie, cheat, steal, defraud and destroy on a scale never before imagined or possible. They print trillions of dollars, then hire millions of kids to go kill millions of innocents in foreign lands... just so their buddies in various defense contractors and the banking system can earn unlimited wealth... and kick back some to fund their campaigns.
So my answer is NO. I do not lie, and I will not lie... not in any sense that you might have a legitimate reason to call a lie (like to protect myself or an innocent friend from some enemy).
I believe you mean what you say. However, I can tell you that in my rather short lifetime of a few decades, I used to know quite a few people who were very serious about not lying... in my youth. And from what I am able to gather, people one or two generations further back were even more serious, on balance. To be sure, today I am unable to find another honest human being. I admit that, and therefore understand why you say what you do. But I find the current situation of the human race so outrageously revolting that I won't even try to address it further. Suffice it to say, from someone who is honest, and who values honesty above all, that the world damn well better return to honesty or the human race will almost surely perish. And I am not kidding, not exaggerating, and not lying. Lying is destruction, destruction is unhealthy in small quantities, and fatal in large quantities. And that's where the human race is headed, towards maximized dishonesty.
Homo-sapien == good riddens... unless they change their ways.
That was me junking you. Because anyone who parses lying as you do, is, well, a liar.
You lie, we know it, even if you don't.