Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If we had $2.5 trillion of gold bars in the social security vault we wouldn't be discussing it's

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:23 AM
Original message
If we had $2.5 trillion of gold bars in the social security vault we wouldn't be discussing it's
Insolvency.

Instead it would be one of the hugest depositories of wealth we had ever seen.

We have been robbed by the geniuses who decided to put these funds in the general bank account and who spent it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. And the gold bars are backing the $2 trillion we owe the Chinese??
What's the difference?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleanime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. They intend to continue doing business with the Chinese...
their business with us is over.:hurts:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. You can sell gold. You can't sell non negotiable SS bonds.
And the US is not about to turn over it's entire gold supply to pay off bonds. The gold we currently hold gives confidence that in the end we have at least that liquidation value.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. So, what's the difference?
Between what we owe the Chinese and what we owe the SS fund??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alc Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. what we owe the Chinese is officially part of our debt
What we owe the SS is not. To pay the SS we need to get the money from somewhere. We will likely borrow it (with real bonds instead of "special bonds") and our official debt will increase by $2.5 trillion and our on-the-book liabilities will go up and credit rating could go down which increases the cost of the debt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. The funds are NOT in the general bank account.
No more or less than someone buying savings bonds puts their money in the general bank account.

Those funds are in Super Special Social Security Treasury bonds getting 5.5% interest. It sounds like a loan to me.

If the US government defaults on Baby Boomer American's Retirement funds, they should default on all American's treasury bonds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Indeed. Why not default on the Chinese first?
Oh, that's right. They have guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Because the Chinese own bonds that pay cash interest payments and mature
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 11:48 AM by dkf
With the entire face value paid out on that date. Our SS bonds are special non negotiable bonds that no one will buy on the secondary market that does not pay interest in cash but in more bonds. They never mature. That kind of bond can never default because it never promises payment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
8. Yes, but that means we would be on the gold standard, or owe Beck's advertiser...
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 11:52 AM by Ozymanithrax
a lot of money.

What if we have it as stock. Dooh! Mabe Tulip bulbs would be a good investment.

Social Security still takes in more than it spends. No matter what form of collateral you have in a vault to symbolize that amount, there is always a chance that the market for that particular sum will fall and suddenly we are holding on to worthless crap. The solution is to fix the U.S. economy so it is worth something. To do that, we ought ot cut something that is a real drain on the economy, say National Defense which is the single largest expense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anaxarchos Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. "We" would have invented alchemy...
... because that is more than all of the easily monetized gold in the world and just under half of all of the gold ever mined in human history.

So, maybe, you could supplement it with silver... but... but... that would lead to the dreaded "bi-metalism".

And, then in a few years, maybe we could have somebody give a "Cross of Gold" speech and we would have successfully cycled through an entire century with Ron Paul as our traveling companion.

The form of money, whether currency, debt or GOLD, doesn't matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. No that would have pushed the price up.
But having a hard asset would have shut this argument down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. Why wouldn't we?
Gold is only worth as much as someone thinks it is, just like paper money. If the economy declines, the value of gold declines along with it, and the money is worth less. Worse, when the economy grows, money is worth less, and deflation drives real wages down.

And gold is just an intermediary. It only has value because labor has value, anyway. Labor is the real base of money anyway, so putting gold between the value of labor and the dollar doesn't stabilize the dollar, it just limits the value of labor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Tell you what, I'll trade you
My 100 trillion dollar note from Zimbabwe, for your 10 ounces of .9999 fine gold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
13. That's exactly how the rich old men see it...
...and it's why they continue to steal from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC