Fiat Money Is Terminally Ill... High Time For Precious Metals!
Thanks to converting into "fiat money" currency in 1913-1914, our U.S. Dollar is now worth less than 1/20th of what it was worth back then. Yet, during a continuous gold standard, the 1913 Dollar was still worth 90% of the mid-1770s Dollar buying power, almost 150 years later. In other words, when people hear a phrase like "cost of living adjustment" or similar, that is the annual rate of inflation, which is actually the rate of how fast our Dollar is losing value, which happens 20X-50X times faster on fiat money than on precious metals currency, i.e., 2-5% per year inflation, versus 0.1% per year.
As if not plenty enough insanity already, the very nature of fiat money mathematically guarantees that it absolutely shall result in hyperinflation, sooner or later (picture the 1923 German pushing a full wheelbarrow of fiat money to go buy a loaf of bread), and it is always only a matter of time. In fact, ALL attempts at fiat money have eventually crashed, and the sheer number of nations collapsed from fiat money should frighten any sane person. Indeed, the whole point of fiat money is to be able to spend future money, i.e., for government to "loan" itself extra money now, by using future inflation with corresponding future depletion of the overall wealth of that nation and its people.
More details coming soon, but hence the reason why the still-pending federal lawsuit described upon most of this website includes various economic demands, including a rephasing back onto a modernized "gold standard" in two time steps about 3-4 years apart, first using seven (7) selected precious metals as the new Dollar currency base, and then adding five (5) selected "rare earth" metals into that base a few years later.
The entire federal lawsuit is vast and involved (the court classified it as a Track Three case, i.e., "complex litigation"), but the single document filing regarding the proposed modernized gold standard can be reviewed/downloaded here (PDF format - 9 pages).
By the way, the constant volatilities in modern precious metals is due to the constant instabilities of different nation's fiat monies, as are compared to each other on a daily basis, at least in significant factor. So, in the chart below, under the proposed metals standard, those four precious metals (along with rhodium and iridium, which are also already traded as money on the metals markets, and titanium, the seventh precious metal within this currency base) would all retain a flat line in price, being fixed by law towards their respective value shares of our U.S. Dollar, of which the entire world will follow in suit, to also benefit from stable prosperity, stronger credit ratings, and etc.
However, our coinage metals must remain the same, i.e., copper, nickel, zinc, and aluminum, because they simply cannot be the same metals as your actual currency base, itself, or you run very high risk of mathematical recursion loss when trying to use the same metals for your currency base as the same metals for your coinage in public usage. It's complicated, but just trust that you must use different materials, between your currency base and your regular everyday coinage metals used by 98% of the public, although you can get away with limited use of gold and silver coins in larger denominations, without inducing more than negligible recursion loss damage.
These total of twelve (12) metals, the seven precious metals and the five rare earth metals, are to be fully treated as national strategic metals, protected by laws to U.S. interests, and is purposefully one of the "infrastructure" realms to be included in the welfare-to-jobs national system overhaul detailed upon our Jobs, Jobs, Jobs page.
For the past 15+ years, the author has been a constitutional law scholar and litigator, assisting clients in the courts of 30 some States, top to bottom, in some 2/3rds of the nation's 90 federal court Districts, in all 11 of the numbered federal Courts of Appeal, and in the U.S. Supreme Court several times on constitutional issues from either state or federal courts, presently there again on the right to jury trial in real estate disputes.
