Quadaffi Killed Trying to Establish an African Currency?

a reply to: Dwoodward85

diff between US Government doing stuff, and US businesses / citizens.
I don't think its so much USA based, as a cabal pulling the strings, working out of the US since its the alpha male of the world economy. if there is a cabal--and I wouldn't deny the existence--its international / stateless.

somebody said, I'm not denying the existence of a network of powerful people pulling the strings behind the scenes; my problem is, they aren't doing a very good job of it.

I don't know if the takedown of Qadaffi was any more than Hillary sharpening her resume. 'Bush got Saddam, I got Qaddaffi'.
if there is a cabal I have no doubt Bill/Hillary do their bidding.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
ISIS didn't exist when the West assassinated Gaddafi

Don't let facts get in the way of your narrative, ISIS formed is 1999 while Gaddafi died in 2011.

ISIS: en.wikipedia.org...
Gaddafi: en.wikipedia.org...

Originally they were Daesh and certainly not ISIS in 2001, according to the BBC it was only until 2014 before they became well known:

www.bbc.co.uk...

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
What an ignorant comment, how the hell do you know what the majority of Africa thought?

Try and keep it civil.

Gaddafi positioned himself as the "leader of Africa", and in so doing supported range of pro and anti-democratic causes. He was all for the United States of Africa - one military, one currency, one leader. That was the problem. He wanted to be leader. That's the fruitcakedness. All current African leaders - many democratically elected - cede their sovereignty to Gaddafi. Think it through.

That's a highly debatable and subjective opinion, and the West still had way more influence over elections in Africa than Gaddafi ever did

ISIS as an idealogy and group formed in 1999. The group has changed names a few times but it's the same group.

Claiming they formed in 2014 is like people that say a polar vortex is a recent creation of weather stations.

a reply to: opethPA

Claiming they formed in 2014 is like people that say a polar vortex is a recent creation of weather stations.

That's like someone claiming someone claimed something, when they didn't

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: opethPA

Claiming they formed in 2014 is like people that say a polar vortex is a recent creation of weather stations.

That's like someone claiming someone claimed something, when they didn't

Just like how the wiki page and every other source shows them active since 1999.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

And my point is there isn't enough gold to back any currency.

Yeah, you said that. If you can say there isn't enough gold to back any currency then the implication is that theoretically there is and amount that would be sufficient, it just doesn't exist on Earth.

I asked you how much would be theoretically needed and you said "trillions of dollars worth of gold". It would be generous to call that a nebulous answer because I don't know of any scientist that measures an element in dollars. No chemistry book says you need to mix three dollars worth of hydrogen with two dollars worth of oxygen to get five dollars worth of water.

But let's go with that "trillions of dollars worth of gold" for a moment.

A quick Google search says that there are 147.3 million ounces of gold in Fort Knox, let's assume that's accurate. Since the value of a "dollar" (Federal Reserve Note) varies daily in relation to other things, we can define a different currency and call it a Gold Dollar. Then all we have to do is determine how many trillions of US Notes we need. Let's say twenty trillion dollars. Then it's a simple matter of dividing the 147.3 million ounces into 20 trillion to get 0.000007365 ounces per Gold Dollar, or one ounce of gold costs 135777.325178 dollars.

So even using your "trillions of dollars worth of gold" answer, it could be done.

A gold-backed currency is limited by the finite quantity of gold available. Once you've reached a certain point where the value of the gold backing the currency is worth more on the open market the currency becomes stagnant as it is converted to gold and then sold off in another currency.

As long as you maintain the ratio of currency to gold reserves, then by definition the value of the gold could never be worth more than the currency, since they are interchangeable. As long as you can get a fixed quantity of gold for the currency, there is no reason to exchange that currency for another if you want gold, unless you're speculating that the other currency might be worth more gold in the future, which is a gamble, and a poor one from an historical perspective. Fiat currencies tend to be worth less as time goes on.

Funny people arguing for gold backed currency when the price of gold continues to fall. If you invested in gold instead of the stick market your losing money. Today currencies are based off market value. The stronger your economy the more your currency is valued.

As for using gold there isnt enough gold to handle transactions. In fact there isn't enough gold to handle just california much less the US trades. Most currencies in the globe are actually backed by the US dollar. Its simple you create a currency based off your countries market value. If your currency demand becomes to great you print more lowering the value against the US dollar. If your currency starts to drop you buy back your currency removing it from the market. This is why foreign banks have other countries currency.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Then it's a simple matter of dividing the 147.3 million ounces into 20 trillion to get 0.000007365 ounces per Gold Dollar, or one ounce of gold costs 135777.325178 dollars.

And would your decimal point to the millionths place of gold per dollar hold at that price or be impacted by the global price of gold and change thereby affecting the currency in a manner that would alter its value?

So even using your "trillions of dollars worth of gold" answer, it could be done.

If you thought it through you'd see it cannot.

As long as you maintain the ratio of currency to gold reserves, then by definition the value of the gold could never be worth more than the currency, since they are interchangeable

And how do you do that in a world market? Ask nicely?.

As long as you can get a fixed quantity of gold for the currency, there is no reason to exchange that currency for another if you want gold, unless you're speculating that the other currency might be worth more gold in the future, which is a gamble, and a poor one from an historical perspective. Fiat currencies tend to be worth less as time goes on.

Right, because speculating NEVER happens and no one tries to make a profit trading currency.

You know I don't think I will ever be able to erase the image of him getting stabbed up the ass from my brain.

You say Qadaffi all I see it knife being keistered.



HRC
"We came, we saw, he died"



que the hyena laughter

originally posted by: Lysergic

You know I don't think I will ever be able to erase the image of him getting stabbed up the ass from my brain.

You know, the way you worded that makes it sound like your brain did the stabbing.


Which, knowing you, is a likely possibility.

a reply to: opethPA
YOU did not know anything about a group called ISIS until 2014. You certainly were not aware of them in 1999 under whatever name a loosely affiliated former cell is being attributed to as the birth of ISIS. Much of ISIS in 2014 was actually formed by the former Sons of Iraq, who were persecuted by Iraqi President Al-Maliki after the fact that they helped to stabilize the country and reduce significantly the presence and influence of foreign fighters entering the nation. Maliki went this route, sectarian persecution, after continuously being snubbed by the Obama administration when he wished to speak with Senior staff (as he could get Bush on the phone in short order previously).

He took this to mean the US no longer had any interest in managing their state of affairs and began to take out the very guys who helped bring their country from the brink. It was no shock then that the inexperienced grovelling loyalists from his flavor of religion that he replaced the former with were easily defeated and ran away as they really had # for experience, and were just getting paychecks cushioned for them as a favor from their boss for being loyal to their sect.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Then it's a simple matter of dividing the 147.3 million ounces into 20 trillion to get 0.000007365 ounces per Gold Dollar, or one ounce of gold costs 135777.325178 dollars.

And would your decimal point to the millionths place of gold per dollar hold at that price or be impacted by the global price of gold and change thereby affecting the currency in a manner that would alter its value?

So even using your "trillions of dollars worth of gold" answer, it could be done.

If you thought it through you'd see it cannot.

As long as you maintain the ratio of currency to gold reserves, then by definition the value of the gold could never be worth more than the currency, since they are interchangeable

And how do you do that in a world market? Ask nicely?.

As long as you can get a fixed quantity of gold for the currency, there is no reason to exchange that currency for another if you want gold, unless you're speculating that the other currency might be worth more gold in the future, which is a gamble, and a poor one from an historical perspective. Fiat currencies tend to be worth less as time goes on.

Right, because speculating NEVER happens and no one tries to make a profit trading currency.

Then the original question remains. You say there is not enough gold for any country to use as currency, how much gold would be enough?

If possible, please state your answer in kilos or some other universally recognized unit of mass.

a reply to: ElGoobero

This all came out of Wikileaks... Daffy was going to build a currency that was backed by oil and gold.... Hillary stopped it.

She really helped to save the West for a little bit more.

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
That's a highly debatable and subjective opinion,

Actually, it's factual.

Besides, while Gaddafi may have had fantasies about him leading a single African currency called the Gold Dinah, (as per OP), which was primarily an Islamic idea, the other African countries in the African Union had already put in a roadmap towards a unified African currency called the Afro, following agreements in the early 1990s.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Then it's a simple matter of dividing the 147.3 million ounces into 20 trillion to get 0.000007365 ounces per Gold Dollar, or one ounce of gold costs 135777.325178 dollars.

And would your decimal point to the millionths place of gold per dollar hold at that price or be impacted by the global price of gold and change thereby affecting the currency in a manner that would alter its value?

So even using your "trillions of dollars worth of gold" answer, it could be done.

If you thought it through you'd see it cannot.

As long as you maintain the ratio of currency to gold reserves, then by definition the value of the gold could never be worth more than the currency, since they are interchangeable

And how do you do that in a world market? Ask nicely?.

As long as you can get a fixed quantity of gold for the currency, there is no reason to exchange that currency for another if you want gold, unless you're speculating that the other currency might be worth more gold in the future, which is a gamble, and a poor one from an historical perspective. Fiat currencies tend to be worth less as time goes on.

Right, because speculating NEVER happens and no one tries to make a profit trading currency.

Then the original question remains. You say there is not enough gold for any country to use as currency, how much gold would be enough?

If possible, please state your answer in kilos or some other universally recognized unit of mass.

Well using logic there is about 14.7 trillion US debt. Came up with a total of 120,049,020,000 ounces at the current price of gold . There is currently 147.3 million ounces of gold in Fort Knox meaning there is no chance this could ever happen.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Then the original question remains. You say there is not enough gold for any country to use as currency, how much gold would be enough?

If possible, please state your answer in kilos or some other universally recognized unit of mass.

For an economy the size of the United States it would be upward of $15trillion using the current spot price.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: opethPA
YOU did not know anything about a group called ISIS until 2014. You certainly were not aware of them in 1999 under whatever name a loosely affiliated former cell is being attributed to as the birth of ISIS. Much of ISIS in 2014 was actually formed by the former Sons of Iraq, who were persecuted by Iraqi President Al-Maliki after the fact that they helped to stabilize the country and reduce significantly the presence and influence of foreign fighters entering the nation. Maliki went this route, sectarian persecution, after continuously being snubbed by the Obama administration when he wished to speak with Senior staff (as he could get Bush on the phone in short order previously).

He took this to mean the US no longer had any interest in managing their state of affairs and began to take out the very guys who helped bring their country from the brink. It was no shock then that the inexperienced grovelling loyalists from his flavor of religion that he replaced the former with were easily defeated and ran away as they really had # for experience, and were just getting paychecks cushioned for them as a favor from their boss for being loyal to their sect.

Oh yeah, tell me what else I did and did not know.

That statement was made that there was no ISIS before 2014, it's wrong and I stated that.

I go with facts not the hyperbole and logic jumps CT's are prone to.

Gaddafi wanted a unified Africa and a gold backed currency for this union to use, he thought he could obtain this by complying with western countries needs in north africa like the UK and France. In the end he was used and and thrown to in the pan for his efforts like Saddam Hussein was. Both were allowed to be despotic with the backing of western powerhouses but when his use came to an end ths despotism was turned into his downfall and capatilised on by western media. All Gaddafis good and more noble ideas (that he started out with) were lost in his vilification. He started out by aiming for a more independent Africa that was not under the influence of Western military or banking systems, he was pushed towards becoming the dictator we know today because of the UK and Frances influence and and false intelligence that led to him committing some heinous acts that were later turned against him.

Don't mess with the west kids. They'll make you part of their gang and then steal your cut.

the Keynesian argument that "there isn't enough gold (or other commodity) to back a modern currency" is bunk.

Witness the BIS--the Bank for International Settlements. The central banks used it as process for Germany to pay off it's WW I reparations. The allies tried to shut it down in WWII. Keynes himself believed it keeping it running, and defended its existence as a way for different nations to pay their debts to each other.

BIS has a gold reserve. But it is fixed--the gold that was in it is officially the only gold that can be used to pay debts between nations. If Zimbabwe wants to repay its debt to the UK, for instance, they buy some of the BIS gold from a member state with a an excess, like Mexico, and the gnomes of Zurich actually push gold around on trolleys from one nation's vault to another's.

So Gold IS used as a medium of exchange, and legal tender for public debt, on a global level.

But not you. You carry slips of paper or zeroes and ones from your central bank's computer.

a reply to: tovenar
That is the point isn't it. To discourage the independent personal ownership of the money of our gods (banks and government).

The way you keep the gold-backed currency in competitive circulation is by requiring that obligations to the government (like taxes) be paid with the gold-backed currency.

I'd also issue gold bonds, to increase stability. The bond is issued today but is fully redeemable for gold of a certain amount in 20 years from this date.

The value of the bond rises and falls in accord with the current demand for gold.

Of course what would happened is that people world-wide would flock to that currency, blowing it up with more and more value, and devaluing all the fiat currencies of the world.

Charles DeGaulle almost succeeded at this, as president of France in 1965. He almost wrecked the US dollar. Every nation in the western banking system arrayed itself against France. Read all about it.