If I loan creshal $5000 at %5 interest, I have basically a note on $500 worth of income a year. I can turn around an use that note to buy something. Now someone else owns the debt worth $500/yr. Until the crisis hits, creshal loses his job and flees to Argentina and now that note isn't worth diddly.
Short: Modern economies are rife with way to turn physical assets and rent streams into something akin to cash. So even if you think you're on a gold standard, you aren't really. Your on a gold + this bond entitles the holder to £500 per annum from the Village of Shlopshire. (Because in 1804 the village borrowed money to replace a bridge)
I don't see why you think that the link is relevant. It would apply if there were gold and silver standards simultaneously, for example, but that's not what is being discussed.
http://www.bradford-delong.com/2015/03/time-for-a-rant-why-o...
The short answer is a run on safe assets like gold creates a positive feedback loop. A demand short fall causes people to try to acquire safe assets like gold. Spending 'money' on gold means money not spent on real goods and services. Which results in a demand shortfall. And people wanting safe assets to park their wealth.
Rinse lather repeat till 1/4 of workforce is unemployed. A central bank can print or lend out any amount of paper money to satisfy investors craving for safe assets. It can't make more gold.
Why not have both? Problem: Trying to peg the money supply to the price of gold hamstrings the central banks ability to supply paper. Lesson learned 1929-1939. And learned again by Argentina in 2000 with a US dollar peg serving as a de facto gold standard.