as suggested by Lexys, I have decided to celebrate my four thousandth post
by offering a thought-provoking topic to you, which I have called
‘The case for gold’.
In the last two years, I have been listening to various speakers from
the Mises Institute appearing on Power Trading Radio, the latest of
which was last weekend, in this episode with Dr. Mark Thornton:
This has led me to appreciate how fiat currencies, especially the US Dollar since
president Nixon separated it from the gold standard in the 1970s, have become the
plaything of central banks and lost any real value.
As argued by the Mises Institute (and the so-called ‘Austrian’ economists)
the pursuit of central bank money-printing has led to the very thing that
they seek to avoid: deflation and a slack in consumer spending.
Also, I have been listening to and reading Jim Rickards, who
has recently published a book entitled ‘The New Case for Gold’; his
point of view is argued in this recent article:
This is a similar argument to the one made by the aforementioned
Dr. Thornton, in this recent article:
Trading aside, or rather treating XAU/USD as an expression of
a world view on what gold means in the age of the Federal Reserve
(rather than seeing XAU/USD price as influencing the fundamental
view on the gold standard), I would like to hear what views you
may have on the case for gold and the return to real value of
currency and the disentanglement of central banks from currency
value (meaning: value should be decided by free market rather than
by a central bank).