News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by erikb on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:46AM (#14231286)
> Gold is money, which is based on physical ownership, not on trust in the willingness and ability of another party to honor their promises. If you have gold, but you do not have it under your control, it is almost pointless to have gold.

Really digging this one. That's why I proactively not listen to investors/consultants who suggest to buy some gold derivates for savety purposes.

In other regards: What's the point of the author? That's how the "king's peace" works since forever. Having the biggest stick and control over the valuable stuff makes you the king. And as long as you provide a stable leadership live of people is mostly peaceful. That's why people are willing to accept this trade. It's unfair but we actually want it that way. And what should the others do? Say "yeah, we totally accept that he has us by the balls"? No they act like it would be their decision so that they also keep some of their own power.

It seems the author is smart enough to know all this, so seriously: What's he attempting to achieve here?

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by ChuckMcM on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:58PM (#14232885)
My read on it was that the Author is saying that maybe there is more truth to the conspiracy theories that America has looted everyone's gold out of the Fed for its own purposes than you might think.

His reasoning appears to be, "If the world is, as the Fed presents it, then we should be able get our gold back. But we can't." and then notes agencies that the auditing agency that was aggressively pushing even an accounting of the available gold has gone silent implying they have been made complicit somehow in the conspiracy.

Here on the outside we can't really know what is going on of course. And frankly if it got out that 1200 tons of gold was on the move I could imagine that would be a tasty target even for nation-state level thieves. But I also found it interesting when the Economist and others reported that the Fed was refusing to let auditors verify their gold deposits. That is a question that really needs an answer and we haven't gotten it yet.

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by maxander on Sunday April 30, 2017 @03:08PM (#14233277)
Even if the Fed "lost" some of the gold (which would be a hilarious story), does it really matter? There has to be some liability clause in whatever agreement put the gold in the Fed's hands to begin with- if they lose track of Germany's property (or claim to have, or whatever), they're obligated to pay Germany back for it. Revealing that would be a gigantic embarrassment, sure, but primarily only concerning the American financial system's competence in running vaults. The U.S. budget could handle the payout in dollars, and Germany could take their payment and use it to buy another pile of gold if they like. Contrary to the ideas of the article author, ownership isn't a physical process, so all the speculation as to where some particular collection of element 79 resides should be irrelevant to the economic situation.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by BatFastard on Sunday April 30, 2017 @03:31PM (#14233390)
1200 tons of gold is worth around 44 Billion, a trivial amount of money as far the US government is worth. So the idea that it would be stolen by the government is ludicrous.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by chmod775 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:56PM (#14233782)
You can't just try to buy 1200 tons of gold and expect to get the current "exchange rate" for all of it. You will be paying massively more as you buy out the cheapest offers.

NASDAQ claims a gold market volume of barely 5 tons at this time. Good luck buying 1200 tons at a decent price.

Edit: Whoops. I meant to reply to your parent.

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by mcbits on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:11PM (#14233569)
$44 billion current US dollars worth of gold can back 10 to 100 times that amount of "money" (depending on how far you stretch the definition of money) in a fractional reserve banking system. It's no trivial amount.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thinkloop on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:30PM (#14233662)
That's already built into our understanding of what "$44b" is. If not, then all values should be inflated by 10x, which would keep the $44b at the same ratio of the total pie - which is to say nothing.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by mcbits on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:52PM (#14233767)
No, in fact it is not. To help you understand why, if the US were to switch back to a gold-backed currency and somehow do it relatively seamlessly, it would need to find enough gold to back a money supply of about $7 trillion dollars (or $20+ trillion, depending...). All the gold in the world is currently "worth" less than $7 trillion dollars, and the US would be lucky to land 15% of that, or about 25,000 tonnes. In this scenario, that 1,200 tonnes would be worth $336 billion, and probably a lot more because "seamlessly" is a huge assumption.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by xyzzyz on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:27PM (#14234716)
That's completely irrelevant. The issue at hand is whether the US is able to pony up 1200 tons of gold, not whether they can back their whole currency base with gold at current exchange rate.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by mcbits on Sunday April 30, 2017 @09:17PM (#14234880)
It's relevant to the hypothetical state stealing enormous quantities of gold from other states. They wouldn't do it to give all the citizens fancy necklaces and dental implants. The reason would be to shore up their currency. The economics of gold changes under that hypothetical scenario, and it's the current market price of gold that is completely irrelevant.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thesumofall on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:29PM (#14234721)
Replace "gold" in your statement by any other physical asset (silver, shells, rubies, ...) and you realize that this doesn't make much sense. If the world were to switch to a water-based currency and all other uses for gold would disappear 1200 tons of gold would be worthless
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by maxander on Sunday April 30, 2017 @07:16PM (#14234424)
Of course, but it's highly nontrivial for the individual humans who are responsible for it.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by JumpCrisscross on Sunday April 30, 2017 @12:48PM (#14232430)
Gold sort of works for sovereigns. It's crap for individuals. Any situation where you need to rely on physical gold is a situation where someone else will take it from you by force.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by erikb on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:35PM (#14232731)
Yes, the value is much smaller since your power to keep it is smaller. But the amount will also be smaller. And I would say there are still quite a few situations where having something of trade value is better than having nothing.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by JumpCrisscross on Sunday April 30, 2017 @02:59PM (#14233224)
> there are still quite a few situations where having something of trade value is better than having nothing

I struggle to think of ones where physically-held gold is better than cash. It only happens when your government fails. In that case (e.g. a Communist revolution or civil war) it's easier to kill you and take everything than negotiate. Where it might have had value, e.g. an American holding pounds sterling during the American Revolution, the old money held value. Selling gold to paranoid individuals is so profitable for a reason.

(The only time it may be useful is if you can tell someone about to harm you that you can pay them with something offsite. At that point, however, wired dollars are an easier sell than waiting for a gold shipment that may or may not be accompanied by Marines.)

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by Consultant32452 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @05:46PM (#14234023)
It's not necessarily negotiating, it's likely fleeing your home country to some other place and having an asset you can easily turn into the local currency wherever you wind up. And at $1,200/oz you can carry/conceal a sizable amount on the "personal money" scale.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by enimodas on Sunday April 30, 2017 @06:06PM (#14234115)
Qaddafi paid his mercenaries in gold near the end of his reign.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by ComradeTaco on Sunday April 30, 2017 @02:18PM (#14233015)
If we're in the kind of crisis where all fiat money is useless, gold will be useless too. The only kind of thing that will have value are things that help you survive. A crate full of gauze pads and bandaids would be better than a whole stack of gold bullion in that situation.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by umanwizard on Sunday April 30, 2017 @03:52PM (#14233488)
There is quite a continuum between fiat currency collapsing and the sort of zombie apocalypse you describe.

Fiat currency has become worthless many times in many countries without a total breakdown of civilization to the extent that gold no longer has any value (e.g., Argentina, Yugoslavia, Brazil, Weimar Germany, post-revolution France, ...)

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by ComradeTaco on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:15PM (#14233589)
I always imagined that if you were stockpiling large amounts of gold in your home it was more of a survivalist thing than a risk management thing.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by trhway on Sunday April 30, 2017 @03:23PM (#14233348)
You've never been through a country scale crisis.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by ComradeTaco on Sunday April 30, 2017 @03:40PM (#14233431)
In a country scale crisis people would be selling all their valuables for fire sale prices to pay for essentials, including gold. A fiat reserve currency, like the Swiss Franc or the Pound would be easier to use, less likely to be stolen and more valuable then gold shavings.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by wintersFright on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:15PM (#14233587)
Gold isn't going to save you from a zombie apocalypse, nor can you eat it. It will however transport your wealth from one side of a currency crisis to the other while retaining value - as opposed to plastic notes with arbitrary numbers of zeros printed on them.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thesumofall on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:09PM (#14234657)
There is plenty of physical gold in Germany's vaults: https://www.google.de/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/germany-p...
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by easilyBored on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:48PM (#14232827)
The same principal applies to states, and that's why they shipped the gold to USA to begin with...to save it from the Russians.

Gold is for when that stuff hits the fan: no one will take your paper money or if they do, you'll need 50lbs of trillion billion dollar bills to buy a loaf of bread. By noon the price will double.

If you're net liquid worth is well into millions, why not have a few hundred gold coins laying around? You might lose money (compared to the stock market returns) but so what. Peace of mind. Never know. All eggs in one basket and all.

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by erikb on Sunday April 30, 2017 @05:46PM (#14234021)
What I mean is that it doesn't really matter if the Russians or the Americans have it, at least from a German perspective. Whoever has it has quite some power over Germany. That we might consider US or RU the bad guys is more based on propaganda than on actual facts. Both can be quite bad as well as helpful allys. And both probably have smart enough leadership to use this kind of chip for bargain rather than total exploitation. So it's not like the Russian would have stolen it, it's more like that the cold war might have had a different winner and Germany would be a semi-independent partner as it is now, just to the Russians rather than the Americans.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by hueving on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:58PM (#14232880)
Gold coins so people can steal them from you in this doomsday scenario? Gold is about as useful as monopoly money when facing a gang of people that will just kill you and take whatever they can.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by easilyBored on Sunday April 30, 2017 @02:14PM (#14232988)
Still, better to have them than not. Of course you're not going to walk around with 3 kilo gold chains around or tell people how much gold you got.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thinkloop on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:37PM (#14233695)
With gold, you will be the gang.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by notahacker on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:43PM (#14233717)
Only if you can persuade the gang they can't get more gold from killing you than working for you.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thinkloop on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:57PM (#14233790)
To build the gang you must recruit where `new-recruit-power < total-gang-power`. Since to start you are the only gang member, you can only recruit one dude who is 0.75 your strength. Now the gang is 1.75 strength, so you can go after another dude who's really strong, say 1.25. Now your gang has a strength of 3. Eventually you will be able to swallow up whole other gangs.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by kakarot on Sunday April 30, 2017 @05:40PM (#14234000)
That is not at all how anything works. What is "gang power"? What factors contribute to it? Manpower, wealth, weaponry, or what?
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by thinkloop on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:43PM (#14234768)
Trust me it works.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by sdenton4 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:55PM (#14232865)
Eventually, hyperinflation causes money to be measured in a logarithmic scale... And it's fun to imagine the value if a dollar falling below the plank length.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by portent on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:45PM (#14233724)
I have been to the NY Federal Reserve Building and seen much of the gold - from the outside of the open door of the vault. This is the highlight of the public tour of the FRB in lower Manhattan. There are many different cages inside the vault - some containing just a handful of bars, and some with gold stacked near to the roof. But we are not told which cage corresponds to which country - that information is secret.

All the bars look identical, to me anyway - there are no stacks of coins or goblets etc. that I could see. (Not all the cages are visible from the vault entrance).

The Fed states in the tour that sovereign nations can keep their gold in the vault, virtually free of charge. And take it back at any time. This is basically a service to the world that the US has provided since the second world war, when much of Europe wanted - for obvious reasons - to move their gold to a safe haven.

As the Federal Reserve is a very secure place, and great value for money, I think most nations have been fine to use that - much cheaper and easier than building a facility that is equally secure.

So personally I'm not sure about the conspiracy theories saying that the Fed refuses to release the gold; to me that is easy for any nation to test - just ask for it, it could be done publicly except that you signal to any thief the date/time of when to attack :-)

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by coredog64 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @06:41PM (#14234274)
> the Federal Reserve is a very secure place

Until Simon Gruber shows up

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by sandworm101 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @11:34AM (#14232011)
Gold is no longer tied to power. Real estate now defines who is to be king. Look to the wealth funds of the middle east. They dont trade oil for gold these days. They buy land, the real international currency. The man with the most diversified land across many countries is king.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by comicjk on Sunday April 30, 2017 @12:18PM (#14232236)
In the past, diversified land holdings across many countries haven't been a great strategy, because they're too difficult for the foreign owner to hold on to politically and military. Land is expensive to protect.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by sandworm101 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:06PM (#14233546)
>> Land is expensive to protect.

So you use your wealth to ensure that local authorities protect your interests. You setup people in power, vassal kings, to protect land interests above all others. Who is in charge now? Who are their friends? Do they own property scattered all over the globe? Do any of them care about a box of gold?

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by xyzzyz on Sunday April 30, 2017 @08:34PM (#14234741)
Again, as the previous poster suggested, in the past it didn't work so well. The local authorities might want to own your land too, and you will clearly not pay more for its protection than it is worth. There's no need to theorize when the history provides so many examples of wealthy people losing their vast land holdings as a result of change in the political climate.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by erikb on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:38PM (#14232744)
So... McDonalds and the Pope?

I wouldn't agree with what you say completely. I wouldn't say gold is replaced by real estate. That doesn't mean that real estate can't be a source of power, though.

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by b5u on Sunday April 30, 2017 @11:51AM (#14232088)
Land may be valuable at the moment, but that will likely change in the future when fresh, clean water will be more scarce and climate changes will render parts of Earth uninhabitable.

I'd recommend you reading this interview with M. Burry (guy who foresaw the real-estate crises in '08): http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/big-short-geniu...

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by gumby on Sunday April 30, 2017 @12:48PM (#14232429)
That's still a real estate issue; you're just saying that the three important factors in real estate are "location, location, and location" and that those factors aren't stable over time. Tell that to the Carthaginians.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by sandworm101 on Sunday April 30, 2017 @04:19PM (#14233610)
>> fresh, clean water will be more scarce and climate changes will render parts of Earth uninhabitable.

If one wants to get all conspiracy-minded: Vancouver, Toronto ... not the warmest of cities. Neither are they in red zones for rising sea levels. And, being in Canada, have more fresh water per person than most anywhere on the planet.

Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by baursak on Sunday April 30, 2017 @02:23PM (#14233045)
As long as you can protect it when challenged.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by dualogy on Sunday April 30, 2017 @10:10AM (#14231567)
Well, for one he has some books to sell ;)
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by erikb on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:36PM (#14232732)
Yeah after reading more from his side, that's also what I'm guessing.
Re:Why Deutsche Bundesbank had to promise to leave 1200 tons... by easilyBored on Sunday April 30, 2017 @01:51PM (#14232845)
It seems the author is smart enough to know all this, so seriously: What's he attempting to achieve here?

Telling the truth. If there's a doomsday scenario USA might refuse to hand you the gold. He's saying that gold not in your hand is not really gold, because when you might need it everyone else will and they have it.