Uncle Sam’s Mysterious Hoard

[n2doc]

In lean times, why is $300 billion worth of government treasure simply sitting in vaults?


By JAMES PICERNO

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK, a neo-Florentine fortress of sandstone and limestone in Lower Manhattan, covers a city block. A battery of structural and technological defenses makes it perhaps the world’s most secure bank; it can be sealed off in less than 25 seconds. On a recent visit to its subterranean vault, beneath 80 feet of bedrock, I walked along a narrow passageway through a 90-ton steel cylinder that can create an airtight and watertight seal. On the other side was a vault with neatly stacked walls of 27-pound yellow bricks—one of the largest collections of gold in the world.

Standing next to this mass of concentrated wealth all but paralyzes one’s sense of financial proportion. But after the initial awe of this King Midas moment, a question nagged: what’s the point?

Nearly 40 years after President Nixon suspended the dollar’s link to gold, the United States still sits on far more of it than any other nation: official holdings total 8,965 tons, or roughly 260 million troy ounces, according to the Treasury Department. (Most of it is stored in Fort Knox, Kentucky; the New York Fed holds about 11 million troy ounces, along with gold reserves from other countries and international organizations.) Gold is easily convertible into cash, and America’s mountain of metal is now worth more than ever: assuming the recent market price of $1,200 a troy ounce, the value of the federal stock exceeds $300 billion. Yet in an age of soaring deficits, our gold reserves earn no income, incur huge storage and security costs, and serve no practical purpose, short of a politically unthinkable renaissance of gold-based money (see “The Tea Party’s Brain,” page 98). Why?

Getting straight answers (or any answers at all) from Washington about our hoard of gold is weirdly difficult. Yes, the government can downsize its holdings, said Congressman Brad Sherman, a member of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, through a spokesman. No, it’s not a good idea, he added, offering no elaboration. When I called to interview the subcommittee’s chairman, Representative Mel Watt, his office begged off in an e-mail, advising only that he “hadn’t studied this particular issue as of yet.”

more

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/uncle-sam-s-mysterious-hoard/8254/

[hunter]

1. It's not "wealth" it's just gold.

...sigh...

[Uben]

2. "our gold reserves earn no income,"

Untrue. In fact, our gold reserves have earned a better return than any other government investment of late. What propmpted this guy to even think that? China and Saudia Arabia both have significantly increased their holdings of gold in the past five years and continue to do so. Selling off our gold reserves is about the most idiotic idea I have heard to date.

[ret5hd]

3. Well, not as idiotic as England selling their gold off at somewhere around $200/oz

[Uben]

4. Who made that decision?

Sounds like my former investment counselor!