Martin Armstrong: Wrong on Gold
(Is he a Charlatan or an Ignoramus? That's not the point.)
Silver Stock Report
by Jason Hommel, June 19th, 2012
First, I will present two facts.
The first fact is that all dollars are a form of paper gold, since they used to be a promise to deliver silver or gold on demand. Today, dollars are a form of defaulted gold bearer bonds that paid zero interest. They are literally a substitute for gold, and can be redeemed for gold at any gold dealer. If all the US debt were to be backed by the US gold hoard, we can see what the value would be. $16 trillion divided by 261 million OZ. = $61,000/OZ. which is not far off the number that Armstrong ridicules.
Second. An ounce of gold was not worth "a man's suit" in most of human history, unless you counted it as the most expensive suit possible, such as a suit of armor. The most expensive suits today range from $40,000 to $100,000 to even $1 million. Link: http://most-expensive.net/mens-suits
In 1441, a suit of squire's armor cost 5-6 pounds sterling in the 1500's.
In responding to Martin's comments, I will reply in ALL CAPS. I'M NOT SHOUTING, IT'S JUST EASIER TO READ WHO IS SAYING WHAT, IN THE EVENT THAT YOU READ THIS IN A TEXT ONLY FORMAT WITH COLORED TEXT REMOVED. JASON: REPLIES IN ALL CAPS.
Here is Martin's report:
I'M REFUTING A PART OF THE REPORT, STARTING ON ABOUT P. 20. YOU MIGHT WISH TO READ ARMSTRONG'S PIECE IN FULL, FIRST, BEFORE MY REBUTTAL, WHICH INTERRUPTS HIS FLOW.
Gold v Paper Gold
The one piece of propaganda about gold that has gained a lot of traction is it would be worth more than $50,000 an ounce if the “Paper Gold” was eliminated for that is the conspiracy that keeps gold down.
JASON: IT'S NOT PROPAGANDA TO SAY GOLD IS GOING UP VERY HIGH. PROPAGANDA IS WHEN YOU WRITE STUFF THAT THE GOVERNMENT WANTS PEOPLE TO BELIEVE. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS WHEN YOU WRITE STUFF THAT EXPOSES GOVERNMENT'S LIES, SUCH AS THEIR PROPAGANDA. WHILE ARMSTRONG APPEARS TO BE FOR GOLD, HE REALLY WRITES AGAINST GOLD.
A typical comment I receive:
This argument is just nuts and so insane it is hard to grasp who even makes up this shit.
JASON: PLEASE NOTE THE LANGUAGE HE USES, IT SHOWS HE IS NOT RATIONAL, AND HE ADMITS HE CANNOT GRASP IT, INTELLECTUALLY.
ALL commodities trade in futures and physical.
JASON: NOTE, GOLD IS NOT LIKE OTHER COMMODITIES IN MANY WAYS, ABOUT 9-10 AS I COUNT THE MAJOR WAYS. GOLD IS MONEY, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
1. THE ABOVE GROUND SUPPLY OF GOLD IS VERY LARGE RELATIVE TO NEW SUPPLY. 5 BILLION OZ. VS. 80 MILLION NEWLY MINED OZ. THIS RATIO IS 5000/80 OR 62.5:1, OR INVERSELY, NEW SUPPLY ADS 1.6% TO THE OLD GOLD. NOTE THE FOLLOWING 9 ATTRIBUTES, IN 3 MAJOR CATEGORIES. THIS NEXT SECTION IS A CUT AND PASTE FROM MY LETTER: http://silverstockreport.com/2012/know-gold.html
Precious metals are a great store of value:
To be a store of value:
1 * It should be long lasting, durable, it must not be perishable or subject to decay. Gold does not decay, not even in seawater. Silver may tarnish and react with sulfur, but the tarnish is very thin and acts as a protective patina that prevents further decay. This is why food items, expensive spices, or even fine silks or oriental rugs, are not generally suitable as money.
2 * It should have a stable value. Gold and silver values do fluctuate, but their value has never gone to zero value, like paper money often does.
3 * It should be difficult to counterfeit, and the genuine must be easily recognizable. Paper money is rather easily counterfeited, and good counterfeits are very hard to detect.
Precious metals are a great unit of account:
To be a unit of account:
1 * It should be divisible into small units without destroying its value; precious metals can be coined from bars, or melted down into bars again, with a low percentage cost. Actually, gold gets more valuable when made into smaller tenth ounce coins, which carry a higher premium, or price percentage over spot. Furthermore, gold, when distributed to the people, creates monetary demand, and a higher value for the remaining gold in the world. Animal skins, or live animals, are not suitable as money, because they are not easily divisible, nor can they be put back together when taken apart. If an item can be divisible, it can be fungible, which is the next point.
2 * It should be fungible: that is, one unit or piece must be equivalent to another, which is why diamonds, works of art, or real estate are not suitable as money. If an item is fungible, then it can be countable, which is the next point.
3 * It must be a specific weight, or measure, or size to be verifiably countable. You must be able to weigh, measure, and count, your unit of account! And this is why paper dollars are not suitable as money any longer. What are you counting? What are you measuring? Dollars are nothing but promises to pay in more dollars.
Precious metals are a great medium of exchange:
To be a medium of exchange:
1 * It should be cheaply and easily tradeable, with a low spread between the prices to buy and sell, in other words, a low transaction cost, and be able to be quickly and easily bought and sold anywhere in the world. Land is not transportable. Even US cash is not accepted everywhere in the world anymore.
2 * It should have a high value to weight ratio, and thus be easily transportable, and cheap to store away. Precious metals have a high value to weight and size ratio. This is why oil, coal, or water are not suitable as money even though they are valuable. It's why real estate is not money, it's not portable at all. It's why copper is not money, nor is wheat, nor balloons. While even air is valuable and necessary to live more than 5 minutes, and while air can also fungible, air is neither rare nor valuable enough by any significantly measurable units to be useful -- unless perhaps you are a scuba diver under water.
3 * It should be durable. Gold does not decay. Silver tarnishes a bit, but it's negligible. Coins are often mixed with 10% copper to improve hardness and durability, and coins are made with ridges around the rim to prevent coin shaving or debasement. Paper money, surprisingly, is actually expensive as money, because paper wears out quickly, and it costs money to have to re-print the paper.
END CUT AND PAST FROM JASON'S LETTER.
BACK TO ARMSTRONG:
ALL commodities trade in futures and physical. This has been going on since Babylon who invented futures markets.
JASON: WELL, JUST BECAUSE IT'S BEEN HAPPENING FOR A LONG TIME, DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT. CAIN MURDERED ABLE IN THE BEGINNING. DOES THIS MEAN MURDER IS OK? USURY GOES BACK TO THE ANCIENT BIBLE CODE AS WELL, WHICH IT CONDEMNS, AND IT'S NOT OK. NEITHER IS SLAVERY. THE BIBLE LAW MAKES PROVISION FOR EACH, BUT CONDEMNS BOTH.
Farmers borrow today to plant their crop. To guarantee a profit, they sell it forward.
IN WHAT WORLD IS BUSINESS GUARANTEED A PROFIT? PROFIT IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE GUARANTEED IN CAPITALISM, BUT ONLY CRONY SOCIALIZED CAPITALISM. IN REAL CAPITALISM, BUSINESSES MUST BE ALLOWED TO FAIL. IN THE REAL WORLD, PROMISES MADE OF PAPER DO FAIL; AND THIS IS THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAPER AND GOLD.
BUT THE OTHER POINT, FUTURES ARE "JUSTIFIED" BECAUSE FARMERS HAVE A HARVEST SEASON. MINERS HAVE NO SUCH HARVEST SEASON, THEY PRODUCE YEAR ROUND, AND THUS, HAVE A MUCH LESS NEED, OR NO NEED AT ALL I'D ARGUE, FOR FUTURES TO LOCK IN A PRICE.
So yes, there is now paper wheat rather than physical. So what? This is not a conspiracy that just hatched. This is how markets have been trading for at least 5,000 years.
NO; "SO WHAT?" IS MY ARGUMENT. LONGEVITY OF FINANCIAL CRIME DOES NOT JUSTIFY CRIME. PROSTITUTION IS LIKELY OLDER THAN PAPER MARKETS; AND IT'S ALSO NOT OK.
The statement presumes there is a conspiracy that all of these people have sold “paper gold” they do not have and that suppresses the price.
YES, THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING OUR ARGUMENT; YES, PAPER SUBSTITUTES THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT TRUST DO SUPPRESS THE PRICE OF GOLD.
When the 1987 Crash took place, I had enough of government and came to the realization that they were morons. When we received a request for help, I was loath to even get involved. They began calling friends to persuade me to help because I turned my back on them in 1985 and wrote to the White House telling them they would increase volatility and crate a crash within 2 years. They were morons. They actually thought lowering the value of the dollar by 40% would increase exports with NO other consequence! The foreign investors sold creating the 1987 Crash. If a country is going to devalue their currency you get the hell out of their quick. These morons do not even understand that. Just Amazing!
YES, GOVERNMENTS OFTEN DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THEIR ACTIONS, I AGREE.
The first statement I was hit with was how the investigation would uncover that mythical person who sold in effect PAPER STOCKS they did not own to force the market down. I asked how is it possible for any short to ever outnumber the longs?
IT'S NOT THE PERSON'S BODY WHO IS SHORTING THAT IS IN GREATER NUMBER THAN THE LONGS, IT'S THE NEW SUPPLY OF THE THING BEING SHORTED OR SOLD THAT IS INCREASING IN SUPPLY, THAT OTHERWISE WOULD NOT BE SOLD, THAT BECOMES PRICE SUPPRESSIVE DUE TO BASIC SUPPLY/DEMAND DYNAMICS. MORE SUPPLY CAUSES A LOWER PRICE!
If at the time he borrows shares from a long and sells then to another person creating a second long, how does he outnumber the longs? He is at best outnumbered two-to-one.
ARMSTRONG IS MAKING A NONSENSICAL ARGUMENT. NOBODY HAS EVER SUGGESTED, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT WHEN WE SAY, "SHORTS OUTNUMBER THE LONGS" THAT WE ARE REFERRING TO BODIES OF PEOPLE SHORTING; BUT RATHER, IT'S ALWAYS ABOUT THE INCREASED SUPPLY OF THE THING BEING SHORTED. ARMSTRONG'S MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE BASICS OF THE ARGUMENTS HERE IS REALLY TELLING ABOUT HIS LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF THIS DISCUSSION.
Now let’s take futures or naked shorts in stock. In order for some player to sell, there has to be a buyer. Everything is always evenly matched. So again, neither side can out-number the other.
AGAIN, ARMSTRONG MAKES A SILLY, BUT LONG STANDING ARGUMENT. YES, THERE IS A SELLER AND A BUYER IN EVERY TRANSACTION. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT SUPPLY AND DEMAND DYNAMICS ARE NOT TAKING PLACE. PRICE IS SET AT THE MARGIN OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. IF THERE IS MORE SUPPLY THAN DEMAND, THEN PRICE GOES DOWN. THUS, IF THERE ARE MORE AGGRESSIVE SALES THAN BUYS, THEN PRICE GOES DOWN.
So why has this argument gotten any traction? The PRESUMPTION is that those buying PAPER GOLD are “real” and the shorts are all just a conspiracy and if they were not there, then the longs would drive the price up dramatically to $50,000+.
IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT PAPER SHORTS. ALL PAPER IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOLD; INCLUDING PAPER DOLLARS, PAPER BONDS, FUTURES ON BONDS, OPTIONS ON FUTURES ON BONDS, INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES, INFLATION INDEXED BONDS, CDO'S, MORTGAGES, AND ON AND ON IT GOES.
You could say that about every future contract from oil to wheat.
OIL IS NOT GOLD. WHEN INFLATION HITS, NOBODY, I MEAN NOBODY, IS GOING TO TRY TO PROTECT $10,000 BY BUYING 100 BARRELS OF OIL AT $100 EACH TO STORE ON THEIR FRONT LAWN, AND CERTAINLY NOBODY IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL DO SO. OIL IS NOT MONEY, AND CANNOT BE MONEY, DUE TO THE EXTREMELY HIGH, RELATIVELY SPEAKING, STORAGE COSTS, COMPARED TO THE EXTREMELY CHEAP, RELATIVELY SPEAKING, STORAGE COSTS FOR GOLD.
WHEAT IS NOT GOLD. WHEAT IS EXTREMELY BULKY AND HEAVY FOR THE VALUE, AND IS NOT EASILY TRANSPORTED ON A PERSON'S BODY. IN THE YEAR 2000, AN $8 BAG OF WHEAT WAS 80 POUNDS, AND COULD NOT BE USED TO BUY LUNCH!
Hell, life insurance is a futures contract. A number of people can take a life insurance policy on you from yourself, family, or your employer. There is only one life, but there can be numerous policies. So?
ARMSTRONG, THIS IS A NONSENSICAL ARGUMENT, AND NEEDS NO REPLY. NEVERTHELESS, I WILL ADDRESS IT. PERSONALLY, I THINK ALL INSURANCE IS A SCAM, AND IS LIKE COMMUNISM. IT POOLS RISK, AT A COST THAT IS NOT NEUTRAL, BUT TENDS TO BE PROFITABLE TO THE ONE DOING THE INSURING, OTHERWISE, THEY WOULD NOT UNDERWRITE IT. AND IF IT IS NOT PROFITABLE, THEN THEY PURPOSEFULLY ARE NOT INTENDING TO PAY OUT, BUT GO BANKRUPT IN THE MEANTIME, AND MERELY PLAY WITH THE MONEY BEFORE THEIR OWN FINANCIAL DOOMSDAY. THE POINT IS THAT YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY A SCAM WITH THE EXISTENCE OF ANOTHER SCAM, DESPITE YOUR ATTEMPTS TO DO SO. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME YOU HAVE TRIED THIS LINE OF REASONING. FIRST, YOU SAID THAT PAPER IS OK, BECAUSE IT'S NOT NEW.
EVEN SO, YOU ARE COMPLICATING THE ESSENTIAL FAILURE OF YOUR COMPARISON WITH THE FACT THAT THERE CAN BE MULTIPLE LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES ON ONE LIFE. THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT'S OK TO SHORT AN OUNCE OF GOLD NUMEROUS TIMES. IF YOU OWE 6 PEOPLE 1 OUNCE OF GOLD, BUT ONLY HAVE ONE OUNCE, (AND NO OTHER ASSETS) THEN TECHNICALLY YOU CAN BE BANKRUPTED, AND FAIL TO DELIVER, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE WARNING ABOUT WHEN WE SAY THAT PAPER GOLD CAN DEFAULT AND FAIL TO DELIVER, WHICH MAKES IT HIGHLY UNLIKE REAL GOLD.
IT'S ALSO WHY WE SAY THAT PAPER GOLD IS FRAUD, AND THAT FRAUDS TEND TO DIE OFF, FROM TIME TO TIME, AS THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM CLEANSES ITSELF OF FRAUD BY GOING BACK TO GOLD, FROM TIME TO TIME. AND IT'S TIME.
The FREE GOLD arguments today are similar to the FREE SILVER arguments of the 1890s that virtually bankrupted the USA in 1896 claiming silver should be raised in value and FREE SILVER will save the day.
NO FREE MARKET GOLD ADVOCATE TODAY IS ADVOCATING THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT SETTING OF PRICES AND PRICE FIXING THAT WAS THE PROBLEM OF THE BIMETALLIC STANDARD OF HISTORY. ARMSTRONG IS MAKING THIS ARGUMENT BECAUSE HE WAS LIKELY TAUGHT THE "GOLD DOES NOT WORK" VERSION OF HISTORY. THE REAL TRUTH IS THAT THE US GOVERNMENT WAS BANKRUPT BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS WHY THEY CONVENED THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT WAS IN DEBT AND COULD NOT PAY IT'S DEBTS. ANYWAY, LET'S NOT GET SIDETRACKED.
PAPER GOLD by no means is suppressing the price.
OK, THAT'S JUST AN EMOTIVE REPETITION, NOT AN ARGUMENT.
The longs do not have to roll their futures. You can let your contract do to the end and take delivery!
YES. THANK YOU. THIS IS WHAT WE ADVOCATE. LONGS, TAKE DELIVERY. THAT'S OUR POINT; THAT THEY SHOULD GET OUT OF PAPER, STOP USING LEVERAGE, AND JUST HOLD THE REAL METAL. THERE IS LEVERAGE ENOUGH IN THE HOLDING OF REAL METAL, BECAUSE THE PAPER IS FAR TOO LIKELY TO DEFAULT, AND BE DEVALUED RELATIVE TO REAL METAL. BUT, LONGS CANNOT TAKE DELIVERY OF WHAT IS NOT THERE. HOW CAN SILVER LONGS TAKE DELIVERY OF $200 BILLION WORTH OF SILVER WHEN THE WORLD ONLY PRODUCED $10 BILLION OF SILVER PER YEAR WHEN SILVER WAS AT $15/OZ.? ACCORDING TO THE BIS, THERE WERE $200 BILLION IN OTHER PRECIOUS METALS LIABILITIES WHEN SILVER WAS $10/OZ. SEE HERE:
The longs are no more “real” than the shorts. This is a trading market. Sorry – that’s it. The so-called shorts are by NO MEANS suppressing the price of gold.
OK, THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT, IT'S JUST AN EMOTIVE STATEMENT. SORRY, I JUST PROVED THAT THEY ARE SUPPRESSING THE PRICE OF GOLD.
If all the longs went to delivery, which they have the power to do not a short, then the “conspiracy” would be broken.
OK, THIS IS FUNNY. NEITHER THE LONGS, NOR THE SHORTS, CAN CONJURE UP THE METAL TO MAKE THE DELIVERY OF 20 YEARS WORTH OF ANNUAL SILVER PRODUCTION. THIS, AGAIN, IS THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAPER AND GOLD. PAPER CAN BE PRINTED ENDLESSLY. NOT SO WITH GOLD.
AND YES, WE WANT TO BREAK THE CONSPIRACY -- BY ADVOCATING THAT THE LONGS TAKE DELIVERY. THE ATTEMPT OF THE LONGS TO ASK FOR DELIVERY OF UP TO 20 YEARS OF ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF SILVER THAT THEY HAVE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR WOULD INDEED REVEAL THE FRAUD IN THE PAPER SILVER MARKET, AND GOLD IS SIMILAR ENOUGH.
Gold is just not ready for price time – IT WILL BE! JUST NOT YET! If all this nonsense would stop, a lot more people would buy gold.
I THINK YOU ARE WRONG. IT'S NOT MY TRUTH TELLING THAT NEEDS TO STOP TO GET PEOPLE TO BUY GOLD. I THINK THAT IF YOU STOPPED YOUR NONSENSE, THAT A LOT MORE PEOPLE WOULD BUY GOLD.
Right now, far too many assume to buy gold is a religion that makes no sense. I also get emails asking am I really serious and think gold would rise absent all the nutty scenarios?
RIGHT NOW, LESS THAN $3 BILLION PER YEAR IS BUYING PHYSICAL SILVER IN THE USA. AND MAYBE ANOTHER $3 BILLION IN GOLD. THE STATS ON GOLD AND SILVER EAGLE COINS, AND STATS ON SALES FROM A REAL BULLION DEALER, PUTS IT INTO PERSPECTIVE.
THE POINT IS THAT WITH LESS THAN $6 BILLION, OUT OF MAYBE ABOUT $2500 BILLION IN BONDS, ACTUALLY GOING INTO REAL METAL ANNUALLY, THAT OF COURSE THOSE WHO ADVOCATE REAL METAL ARE IN THE EXTREME MINORITY, AND ARE GROSSLY MISUNDERSTOOD, AND ARE OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM, AND ARE RIDICULED, BUT MOSTLY IGNORED, TO THIS DAY.
Gold is not going up because of all the conspiracy claims not because the real gold will conquer the paper gold. This is all about reality. Gold standards do not work because you cannot fix the price of money regardless what you call it. To try to do is communism where the real attempt to eliminate cycles.
NO SPECIE ADVOCATE IS ADVOCATING PRICE FIXING. AGAIN, YOU ARE MISUNDERSTANDING THE ENTIRE POINT AND POWER OF SIMPLY TAKING DELIVERY. A FREE MARKET THAT USES GOLD OR SILVER AS MONEY IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF FIXING THE PRICE OF MONEY. THE FEDERAL RESERVE FIXES THE PRICE OF MONEY VIA MANIPULATED INTEREST RATE SETTING. FUTURES FIX THE PRICE OF MONEY, AS THEY "LOCK IN" GOLD PRICES. PEOPLE WHO FREELY USE OUNCES OF GOLD IN TRADE ARE NOT ENGAGING IN PRICE FIXING. MARTIN ARMSTRONG HAS THIS ALL BACKWARDS, AND IS USING THE OBVIOUS FAILURES OF PRICE FIXING TO BASH A FREELY CHANGING VALUE OF SILVER TO GOLD.
Gold is a viable part of the portfolio. It will rise to the occasion when the timing is right. The very people accused of keeping it down are the very people who will turn around and send it up as well. This is just about time. Nothing more! When the time is right and people realize that the Governments have no Clothes, look out – there will be a stampede at that time.
FINALLY, WE AGREE. BUT IT SEEMS YOU ARE SIMPLY A WOLF TRYING TO WEAR SHEEP'S CLOTHING, OR A DEVIL TRYING TO APPEAR AS AN ANGEL OF LIGHT. YES, THESE ARE RELIGIOUS METAPHORS, SORRY ABOUT THAT. YOU ARE A GOLD ADVOCATE ON ONE HAND, BUT RIDICULE GOLD ADVOCATES ON THE OTHER HAND. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, IN MY OPINION, BUT RATHER, YOU BETRAY YOUR OWN VALUES, AND EXPOSE YOURSELF AS EITHER A CHARLATAN, OR IGNORAMUS.
NOW, TO MY READERS. I HONESTLY DO NOW KNOW WHETHER ARMSTRONG IS A CHARLATAN OR IGNORAMUS. I DO NOT USE THOSE WORDS TO CALL HIM NAMES OR BE RUDE, BUT TO SHOWCASE MY OWN IGNORANCE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ARMSTRONG IS BEING DUMB ABOUT GOLD ON PURPOSE WITH A SECRET INTENT TO PURPOSEFULLY DECEIVE (A CHARLATAN), OR WHETHER HE IS BEING DUMB ABOUT GOLD BECAUSE HE IS GENUINELY DUMB (AN IGNORAMUS). I TEND TO BELIEVE THAT HE IS SIMPLY GENUINTELY DUMB, AND NOT TRYING TO DECEIVE ON PURPOSE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE ABOUT PEOPLE IN GENERAL. ALSO, ARMSTRONG REPEATS A FEW ANTI GOLD ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR YEARS THAT HE LIKELY DOES BELIEVE, LIKELY BECAUSE HE HAS NEVER FULLY THOUGHT THEM THROUGH, AND LIKE MOST PEOPLE, HE SIMPLY REPEATS WHAT HE HAS BEEN TAUGHT AT HIS WASTEFULLY EXPENSIVE UNIVERSITY. I BELIEVE ARMSTRONG IS SIMPLY A PRODUCT OF THE AGE OF PAPER IN WHICH WE ALL LIVE.
I WAS TAUGHT BY A DIFFERENT SOURCE, THE BIBLE AND BY REASON. THIS IS PERHAPS PARTLY WHY HE MOCKS THE VIEW I ADVOCATE AS BEING "RELIGIOUS" IN NATURE. BUT NOT EVERYONE WHO THINKS THAT PAPER CAN GO TO ZERO VALUE ARE RELIGIOUS EXTREMISTS LIKE ME, EITHER. IN FACT, THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAS OPENLY ADMITTED THAT THE VALUE OF THE DOLLAR IS BASED ENTIRELY UPON BELIEF, MAKING THEIR SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT THE RELIGIOUSLY BASED ONE, NOT MINE.
I BELIEVE THAT EVEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE DOING EVIL THINGS, LIKE REPEATING EVIL PROPAGANDA ABOUT FUTURES MARKETS, THAT PEOPLE DON'T GENERALLY PERCEIVE THEMSELVES TO BE EVIL. JUST AS GOVERNMENT'S MISTAKES ARE MOSTLY IN IGNORANCE, LIKEWISE, ARMSTRONG IS PROBABLY JUST IGNORANT. I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO HOLD PAPER ARE DOING THAT FOR NEFARIOUS PURPOSES WITH EVIL INTENT EITHER, BUT RATHER, BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT GOLD.