Gold As A Medium Of Exchange After Fiat Money Destruction

[hyperdimension]

premium is 100 baht a coin also have 1/2 baht and 1 baht bars and coins at several places

100 baht premium per 1/4 baht weight coin sounds like a good deal in comparison to the premiums of other small coins mentioned earlier.

[hyperdimension]

I see gold as intergenerational/portable wealth rather than a barter item. Still, if you're concerned about bartering with gold, maybe look into buying a chain where you can remove individual links.

Not far from the truth

I remember reading about Argentina during their collapse.

There was an interesting account from someone living through it. What you mentioned

is very close to what he said. He said that they dealt with junk gold not gold coins.

smaller items like rings, thin chains etc.

It was an interesting read

Yes, people will use whatever they have that is of value. The problem with using gold jewelery to buy things could be in the valuation of the jewelery when you try to buy something - you may not get as fair an exchange as if you had instead used gold coins, particularly well-known coins.

I am particularly against wearing jewelery, as it increases the chances of robbery or extortion.

Edited May 13, 2012 by hyperdimension

[hyperdimension]

It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so.

Yes, that is the case of any physical thing, whether it be gold, fiat money, antiques or works of art. Something has value because it is perceived by others to have it.

The problem though with fiat money is that central banks play around massively with its value (such as increasing the supply of it by creating it out of thin air, or altering interest rates). The more people who lose confidence in a currency and consider it to have no value, the less it can be used as a store of value, because either fewer people would accept it in an exchange or more people would demand more of it in an exchange.

Edited May 13, 2012 by hyperdimension

[brit1984]

It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so.

Yes, that is the case of any physical thing, whether it be gold, fiat money, antiques or works of art. Something has value because it is perceived by others to have it.

The problem though with fiat money is that central banks play around massively with its value (such as increasing the supply of it by creating it out of thin air, or altering interest rates). The more people who lose confidence in a currency and consider it to have no value, the less it can be used as a store of value, because either fewer people would accept it in an exchange or more people would demand more of it in an exchange.

Endure made a very good point

The market (or it's participants) play around with the value of gold just as much (eg 300% increase in last few years)

There is no good way to assess the value of gold (other than the market) as there is no stream of future cash flows to be estimated (and discounted to today) hence we can never know if the market price of gold equals (or is even close) to its intrinsic value

Sent from iPhone; please forgive any typos or violations of forum rules

[hyperdimension]

It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so.

Yes, that is the case of any physical thing, whether it be gold, fiat money, antiques or works of art. Something has value because it is perceived by others to have it.

The problem though with fiat money is that central banks play around massively with its value (such as increasing the supply of it by creating it out of thin air, or altering interest rates). The more people who lose confidence in a currency and consider it to have no value, the less it can be used as a store of value, because either fewer people would accept it in an exchange or more people would demand more of it in an exchange.

Endure made a very good point

The market (or it's participants) play around with the value of gold just as much (eg 300% increase in last few years)

There is no good way to assess the value of gold (other than the market) as there is no stream of future cash flows to be estimated (and discounted to today) hence we can never know if the market price of gold equals (or is even close) to its intrinsic value

Value, even "intrinsic" value, depends on who the item is perceived as valuable to. Would a dog perceive a 100 US Dollar Federal Reserve note as valuable? I think what is truly of "intrinsic" value for dogs, humans or other animals is food.

The market (or it's participants) play around with the value of gold just as much (eg 300% increase in last few years)

You need to think about what you are valuing something against, as value can be a relative term. If you value gold relative to fiat money (i.e. "spot price"), then yes, it has increased in value, largely because the fiat money has devalued (or has perceived to be worth less by participants of the fiat money market).

Value can also be based on usefulness (e.g. in industrial applications) or necessity (for survival, like food). So if a new industrial application is been found for gold (e.g. like how gold was introduced into dentistry), then gold would be perceived to be more valuable by those in industry and the gold market.

There is always the possibility that one day gold will not be perceived by us humans as being valuable. But based on history, I think it's less likely than fiat money becoming perceived as less valuable or worthless. So gold remains a primary "store of value" for many, including central banks.

[brit1984]

hyperdimension... I agree with your argument that gold has a value but we will never be able to assess that value independently of the market price, hence endure's point stands that gold's value is set by perception (as with fiat money)

Sent from iPhone; please forgive any typos or violations of forum rules

[Naam]

Endure made a very good point

The market (or it's participants) play around with the value of gold just as much (eg 300% increase in last few years)

There is no good way to assess the value of gold (other than the market) as there is no stream of future cash flows to be estimated (and discounted to today) hence we can never know if the market price of gold equals (or is even close) to its intrinsic value

the intrinsic value of gold or anything else is zero if there is no demand. the only exceptions are food and shelter for which there will be always demand.

[starrdog]

I've always thought "intrinsic value" was related to the cost of manufacturing something. So in gold's case that would include the cost of mining and refining regardless if anyone actually had a demand for gold.

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[endure]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

I think those that hold gold as more than a hedge....meaning the types you are speaking of....see Fiat as an IOU where as gold

is nobody's marker.

As to which will fill your belly.....yes neither is edible but one can be traded for food after monetary collapse & one cannot.

That's only if the people you're trading with want gold. If the world's gone to hell in a handcart I would imagine gold would be the last thing on their mind.

[brit1984]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

I think those that hold gold as more than a hedge....meaning the types you are speaking of....see Fiat as an IOU where as gold

is nobody's marker.

As to which will fill your belly.....yes neither is edible but one can be traded for food after monetary collapse & one cannot.

That's only if the people you're trading with want gold. If the world's gone to hell in a handcart I would imagine gold would be the last thing on their mind.

I assume some of the more nervous posters on this thread have also invested in their own bomb shelter, well stocked with bottled water and baked beans, in preparation for the (inevitable) collapse of society

[flying]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

I think those that hold gold as more than a hedge....meaning the types you are speaking of....see Fiat as an IOU where as gold

is nobody's marker.

As to which will fill your belly.....yes neither is edible but one can be traded for food after monetary collapse & one cannot.

That's only if the people you're trading with want gold. If the world's gone to hell in a handcart I would imagine gold would be the last thing on their mind.

Like I told the other guy....buy bullets

That kidding aside it is not something I am worried about but as I did mention...it has been shown before.

Places like Argentina & others before them. The world never went to hell in a handcart but economies,societies have failed in the past. Things have their way of working out...Again look at Argentina, Zimbabwe, Germany during hyperinflation etc etc etc

Yes of course other things are on folks mind. Then at some point they need things others have.

There is barter & there is bullets.....Not something I am just saying...just how it is & how it evolves.

Where do you think money currency came from? It was a need to have a medium of exchange

gold..... & silver for that matter..... has been a medium of exchange for thousands of years.

These fiats...lets say Euro & USD, GBP etc have how many years behind them? Someone once said this is just the latest in a long line

of failed experiments & this fiat will end as all that came before them ended.

Again let me say I am not a survivalist nor a preper type. I mention these thing only

as a comment

Edited May 13, 2012 by flying

[endure]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

I think those that hold gold as more than a hedge....meaning the types you are speaking of....see Fiat as an IOU where as gold

is nobody's marker.

As to which will fill your belly.....yes neither is edible but one can be traded for food after monetary collapse & one cannot.

That's only if the people you're trading with want gold. If the world's gone to hell in a handcart I would imagine gold would be the last thing on their mind.

I assume some of the more nervous posters on this thread have also invested in their own bomb shelter, well stocked with bottled water and baked beans, in preparation for the (inevitable) collapse of society

Baked beans in a bomb shelter? That's a recipe for disaster

[gregb]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

I think those that hold gold as more than a hedge....meaning the types you are speaking of....see Fiat as an IOU where as gold

is nobody's marker.

As to which will fill your belly.....yes neither is edible but one can be traded for food after monetary collapse & one cannot.

That's only if the people you're trading with want gold. If the world's gone to hell in a handcart I would imagine gold would be the last thing on their mind.

But the world never goes to hell in a hand basket, simultaneously absolutely every where. There are always wealthy people in relatively safe areas behind castle walls with good defences who have a surplus, and looking to trade that surplus. What else would a wealthy person is such a situation accept if not gold? He already has all the food he can use, and as we've discussed before expanding your land exacts a cost for defence of it. One of the reasons why peace is considered so valuable an asset to have. It subsidizes the cost of defence making land and transport, and everything that comes from land and transport, appear cheaper. It is a primary driver behind why simple feudalism will nearly always evolve into a kingdom over time.

There will always be people who want gold, because it is the only thing you can really accumulate in unlimited quantities without ever worrying about having too much. Nobody ever has too much gold. If there is no fiat currency because most governments are in chaos, almost nothing else on the planet fits that niche.

People need to wake up and realize Mad Max was a movie. That is not what we are facing in the future. There are many historical examples of what really happens, of which the fall of the Roman empire is probably the one closest matched to us that most posters here would be familiar with. That took between 2 and 8 centuries, depending on if you are looking only at the west or if you consider the eastern empire as well. And despite many people's individual lives and communities going rapidly to hell in a hand basket, gold was still considered universally valuable.

Ignore history at your own peril.

[Naam]

I've always thought "intrinsic value" was related to the cost of manufacturing something. So in gold's case that would include the cost of mining and refining regardless if anyone actually had a demand for gold.

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

sorry, but that's a partly wrong assumption as far as the cost of "manufacturing" is concerned. intrinsic value fluctuates as all values do according to offer and demand. most hardcore gold aficionados claim and believe that gold has a natural high intrinsic value but forget that this value is perceived too.

being stranded on an unihabitated remote island the owner of a spear, a fishnet and an axe will put a high intrinsic value on his survival tools and will consider a big heap of gold bars as worthless because it's rather difficult to kill a goat or a wild boar, catch a fish or fell a tree to build a hut with them.

[hyperdimension]

hyperdimension... I agree with your argument that gold has a value but we will never be able to assess that value independently of the market price

Gold could be valued based on whatever quantity of food that could be exchanged for it. e.g. for those Zimbabweans in the video earlier in this discussion thread, 0.1g buys a loaf of bread. 0.1g of gold in fiat money is actually around 50 USD, but that's irrelevant for those Zimbabweans in that video.

gold's value is set by perception (as with fiat money)

I didn't disagree with that. If someone with bread demands 0.1g of gold for a loaf, and another person is willing to pay that, then those market participants perceive the value of a loaf of bread being worth 0.1g of gold, and conversely that 0.1g is worth a loaf of bread.

[Naam]

hyperdimension... I agree with your argument that gold has a value but we will never be able to assess that value independently of the market price

Gold could be valued based on whatever quantity of food that could be exchanged for it. e.g. for those Zimbabweans in the video earlier in this discussion thread, 0.1g buys a loaf of bread. 0.1g of gold in fiat money is actually around 50 USD, but that's irrelevant for those Zimbabweans in that video.

gold's value is set by perception (as with fiat money)

I didn't disagree with that. If someone with bread demands 0.1g of gold for a loaf, and another person is willing to pay that, then those market participants perceive the value of a loaf of bread being worth 0.1g of gold, and conversely that 0.1g is worth a loaf of bread.

and if another hungry person with a big stash of gold is willing to pay 10g then the value of that loaf is 10g. that's why "value based" does not work because a "base" does not exist.

[g00dgirl]

A note aside: The Thai word for money is "ngern" which also means silver.

You can also get a type of gold bar where you can break off individual pieces, see here: http://www.goldbarren.de/goldbarren-groessen/goldtafelnTM/

[hyperdimension]

hyperdimension... I agree with your argument that gold has a value but we will never be able to assess that value independently of the market price

Gold could be valued based on whatever quantity of food that could be exchanged for it. e.g. for those Zimbabweans in the video earlier in this discussion thread, 0.1g buys a loaf of bread. 0.1g of gold in fiat money is actually around 50 USD, but that's irrelevant for those Zimbabweans in that video.

gold's value is set by perception (as with fiat money)

I didn't disagree with that. If someone with bread demands 0.1g of gold for a loaf, and another person is willing to pay that, then those market participants perceive the value of a loaf of bread being worth 0.1g of gold, and conversely that 0.1g is worth a loaf of bread.

and if another hungry person with a big stash of gold is willing to pay 10g then the value of that loaf is 10g. that's why "value based" does not work because a "base" does not exist.

For any item, different people will have different perceptions of value from one another. It is when any two parties agree to the same value, one of whom would like to obtain the item and the other offering it, that a transaction can take place.

e.g. what is the value of Leonardo Da Vinci's Mona Lisa? The answer depends on the one offering it, the person who would want to obtain it, and also what each would agree to conduct the exchange with (whether it be fiat money, gold or food). A Zimbabwean would probably perceive the Mona Lisa as being of very little or no value, whereas a billionaire art collector may highly value it in terms of his fiat money.

Edited May 13, 2012 by hyperdimension

[Naam]

For any item, different people will have different perceptions of value from one another. It is when any two parties agree to the same value, one of whom would like to obtain the item and the other offering it, that a transaction can take place.

e.g. what is the value of Leonardo Da Vinci's Mona Lisa? The answer depends on the one offering it, the person who would want to obtain it, and also what each would agree to conduct the exchange with (whether it be fiat money, gold or food). A Zimbabwean would probably perceive the Mona Lisa as being of very little or no value, whereas a billionaire art collector may highly value it in terms of his fiat money.

that goes without saying and nobody challenges that fact but

Gold could be valued based on whatever quantity of food that could be exchanged...

does not apply because that value fluctuates and might not apply a minute later making the earlier valuation null and void. we are now back to square one but can conclude that the "intrinsic" value of gold is a fairy tale. period!

[midas]

For any item, different people will have different perceptions of value from one another. It is when any two parties agree to the same value, one of whom would like to obtain the item and the other offering it, that a transaction can take place.

e.g. what is the value of Leonardo Da Vinci's Mona Lisa? The answer depends on the one offering it, the person who would want to obtain it, and also what each would agree to conduct the exchange with (whether it be fiat money, gold or food). A Zimbabwean would probably perceive the Mona Lisa as being of very little or no value, whereas a billionaire art collector may highly value it in terms of his fiat money.

that goes without saying and nobody challenges that fact but

Gold could be valued based on whatever quantity of food that could be exchanged...

does not apply because that value fluctuates and might not apply a minute later making the earlier valuation null and void. we are now back to square one but can conclude that the "intrinsic" value of gold is a fairy tale. period!

kind of like what happened to your beloved fiat currency in Zimbabwe

"

Staggering increases in the price of bread and cereals were the main reason for the jump from the June rate of 11.2 million percent, the Central Statistical Office said.

Shortages of wheat are driving up bread prices, the paper said, compounding the struggle to avoid hunger in a country where the United Nations estimates more than five million people -- nearly half the population -- will need food aid.

On a monthly basis, prices skyrocketed by 2,600.2 percentage points in July, compared to 839.3 percent the month before. "

http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/inflation197.18861.html

[farang000999]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

This is more sillyness.

Apocolypse? No. Do you want to know what gold bought when hyperinflation hit Germany? I will give you a hint, it bought substantially more than paper money. Do you want to know what gold bought in Argentina? In Russia when the Soviet Union collapsed? So no, when the shit hits the fan gold and paper money are not the same. Well, maybe if Aliens are invading but otherwise no. And I am not saying I expect there to be chaos or hyperinflation.

Gold's intrinsic value has stood the test of time throughout history. Every civilization has valued it and it has been used as money for thousand of years up until last century.

One last point, many people like to mention gold's crash in 1980. But remember why it crashed, interest rates were raised drastically. They can't do that now. Back then the USA was a surplus nation with very little debt.

[farang000999]

If central banks had 100% confidence in the power and longevity of the fiat money that they magically create out of thin air, then they wouldn't need to be holding any amount of such a barbaric relic as it would be such a waste of space and manpower.

If central banks had 100% confidence in the power and longevity of gold, then they wouldn't need to be holding any amount of "worthless fiat money".

an interesting fact is that a bankrupt country like Greece holds 81%, the semi-bankrupt country Portugal holds 89% and shaky Italy holds 73% of its reserves in gold. that indicates that those central bankers know their jobs.

seemingly stupid are the policy makers of the Chinese central bank which only holds ~2% of its reserves in gold and 98% in "worthless fiat money". but then those of us who live in Asia, especially in Thailand, are well aware that the Chinese have no idea how to do business. in our host country ethnic Chinese are mostly doing low paid menial jobs, such as gardeners, cleaners, helpers on construction sites, dishwashers in restaurants and soi dog chasers. the economies of mainland China, Taiwan and Singapore have been, are and will always be in shambles because Chinese lack any business acumen. is this perhaps caused by is a genetic defect?

If central banks had 100% confidence in the power and longevity of the fiat money that they magically create out of thin air, then they wouldn't need to be holding any amount of such a barbaric relic as it would be such a waste of space and manpower.

If central banks had 100% confidence in the power and longevity of gold, then they wouldn't need to be holding any amount of "worthless fiat money".

an interesting fact is that a bankrupt country like Greece holds 81%, the semi-bankrupt country Portugal holds 89% and shaky Italy holds 73% of its reserves in gold. that indicates that those central bankers know their jobs.

seemingly stupid are the policy makers of the Chinese central bank which only holds ~2% of its reserves in gold and 98% in "worthless fiat money". but then those of us who live in Asia, especially in Thailand, are well aware that the Chinese have no idea how to do business. in our host country ethnic Chinese are mostly doing low paid menial jobs, such as gardeners, cleaners, helpers on construction sites, dishwashers in restaurants and soi dog chasers. the economies of mainland China, Taiwan and Singapore have been, are and will always be in shambles because Chinese lack any business acumen. is this perhaps caused by is a genetic defect?

Nice trolling Nam.

If the Chinese are so brilliant why did they adopt communism? How many millions of people died during that? Why isn't there any freedom of speech in China? What about one-child per family? How did that work out for them?

And what a great investment the Chinese have made accumulating all that valuable foriegn paper.

Let's see... Europe and the USA has massive paper debts and all the gold. Hmm... I wonder what they may possibly have in mind for the future. Interesting that non of these struggling nations have decided to sell up their barbelic relics to help deal with their paper debt crisis.

Anyways I know you are a smart guy and this last post you made was pure trolling so I will give you a pass.

[farang000999]

http://www.constitution.org/mon/greenspan_gold.htm

[endure]

As far as finance goes I'm a complete simpleton but one thing has always puzzled me. People talk about gold as though it has some intrinsic value whilst paper has none. They're both just physical things. It seems to me that the only reason gold is more valuable than paper is because people believe so. If Apocalypse arrives which is more likely to fill your belly - paper or gold? Or neither?

This is more sillyness

It's not silliness at all. As I said I'm not au fait with these things. I asked a simple question.

[flying]

You can also get a type of gold bar where you can break off individual pieces

You know that is about the best form of gold I have seen.

It is 100% logical if gold is being looked at as a back up currency

You know in places like Rome the gate-keepers/tax men would snip off pieces of a coin

[endure]

You can also get a type of gold bar where you can break off individual pieces

You know that is about the best form of gold I have seen.

It is 100% logical if gold is being looked at as a back up currency

You know in places like Rome the gate-keepers/tax men would snip off pieces of a coin

Coin clipping occurred in the UK but you took your nuts in your hands...

http://guernsey-gold...-castration

[flying]

You can also get a type of gold bar where you can break off individual pieces

You know that is about the best form of gold I have seen.

It is 100% logical if gold is being looked at as a back up currency

You know in places like Rome the gate-keepers/tax men would snip off pieces of a coin

Coin clipping occurred in the UK but you took your nuts in your hands...

http://guernsey-gold...-castration

Page not found?

But sounds painful

[endure]

You can also get a type of gold bar where you can break off individual pieces

You know that is about the best form of gold I have seen.

It is 100% logical if gold is being looked at as a back up currency

You know in places like Rome the gate-keepers/tax men would snip off pieces of a coin

Coin clipping occurred in the UK but you took your nuts in your hands...

http://guernsey-gold...-castration

Page not found?

But sounds painful

Strange. Google led me to that link. Here's the start of the article:

"efore William the Conqueror’s invasion, Anglo-Saxon England had one of the best economies in Europe thanks to the stability of the nation’s coinage. Her prosperity was the envy of the civilized world and this was no doubt a factor in William’s desire to take control.

By the time his descendant Henry II had reached the throne the value of the currency was fading fast. The various Mints across the country were substituting the Silver in the coin with Tin. The base metal was being removed hence the term of the coins being de-based came into being. This is a phrase that is still used for today’s money during a currency crisis.

Up until the last century, coins had a value in their own right thanks to their precious metal content whereas nowadays we simply have promissory notes. Another method of making money illicitly was to clip off the edges of many coins in order to use the silver to produce new ones, hence creating money out of thin air. The inevitable happened and during Henry II’s reign a period of inflation set in as the coins’ value dwindled and hence prices rose. In other words, in order to get the same quantity of silver in exchange for your goods, you needed to receive more coins and charge higher prices.

By 1124 Henry had had enough of this abuse and summoned the various Mints to Winchester (then the capital of England) in what was called the ‘Assize of Moneyers’. Two thirds of them were found guilty of debasing the currency and either had their right hands cut off or were castrated. History does not record as to whether they were given a choice between the two options. Even this was not enough to prevent further abuses but later that century all coins were recalled and replaced by the Short Cross penny which lasted nearly 70 years in its true form."

[farang000999]

It's not silliness at all. As I said I'm not au fait with these things. I asked a simple question.

My apologies. It is a common response towards "gold bugs" that they would be better off with bullets and canned fruit because if there are currency crisis in the West that means it will be "Armageddon" and gold will have no value because people will be canabalizing eachother in the streets. In reality, it will not be Armageddon. It will be like Iceland where the currency was devalued by 75%. But now consider how much bigger the Usa is than Iceland. However, I still say that there will be no sudden event but rather just 5-6+% price inflation, which might not seem like a lot but really does eat into the purchasing power of your money especially with a stangant stock market and 1% bank rates.

[farang000999]

ps Nam... you and i do not know how much gold China has exactly. Remember, the last time they updated their books they did so by saying

"Oh Hi there. Update, we have added this much gold over the previous X years. We don't like telling people we are buying gold because it drives the price up".

the above is a direct quote from the BoC chairman.