[e-gold-list] This one needed posting in full

[Patrick J Kobly]

James M. Ray wrote:
> Even so, salary cuts are not something most Americans would readily 
> accept today.
Heh.  Salary cuts are precisely something most Americans are accepting 
today, as a result of inflation.  They just don't know it.
> Another practical consideration is where to set the gold price... when 
> the price was set at $35 an ounce,
This is so backwards.  It seems odd that we should talk about where to 
set the gold price in terms of paper chits, rather than where to set the 
price of paper chits relative to gold price.
> That may go a long way to explaining opposition to Paul's plan from a 
> very unlikely source: the gold industry itself.
Or it may just be that the gold industry has gotten used to the 
increased demand for their product caused by the mis-perception that 
gold is a growth investment (caused by the decrease in value of the 
dollar relative to gold).
> Although Lassonde doesn't elaborate, one other problem might be the 
> lack of gold itself. If the $5 trillion of global central bank 
> reserves was backed by the 1 billion ounces of gold they owned, then 
> the price would end up at $5,000 an ounce, compared to around $650 an 
> ounce today, explains CPM's Christian.
hmmm...  What does this say about the true value of fiat currencies?
> "If the government gave over the management of the currency to the 
> banks, then the conspiracy theorists would have a field day," says 
> Christian, as now they'd have "evidence" that the banks had the 
> government in their pocket.
That's a nice circular argument.

PK