Skip to content

Why Bankers love Gold

by on December 27, 2011

One of the more persistent memes circulating the internet is the idea that Bankers, or the Powers that Be, hate Gold.

The idea is much plugged, but it is a strange notion.

After all, we lived under a Gold Standard (true, a very strange one) up to 1971, when Nixon ended Bretton Woods.

Surely, TPTB are in charge much longer than that? The Money Power has ruled through Gold for a very long time. So why would they hate it?

Just like with today’s paper, they ruled through interest and boom/bust cycles.

No, the Bankers love Gold and in fact, there is every reason to believe they are working hard to reinstate it as the monopoly currency of their choice. In fact, this is probably the real fundamental driving Gold prices up. It’s not just a hedge against inflation: if Gold becomes the standard again, it will become very, very expensive. And more and more of the smart money is betting on this.

Here are a few more of the reasons why Bankers want their Gold Standard back:

1. Gold is de facto World Currency.
Of course, every nation, or even private entities, could coin their own. But an ounce is an ounce is an ounce. If Gold as currency is used everywhere, they basically have what they want. It would be much easier to control for a Global Central Bank than all sorts of paper currencies with wildly varying exchange rates.

2. With Gold, Interest is more difficult to explain away.
When you lend Gold you can say: I need interest, I can’t use the Gold myself while you use it.
When you just print the money when you lend it out at interest this doesn’t add up. The money didn’t exist when it was lent out, will cease to exist after it has been repaid.

3. They own it all.
And the little they sold us they will regain quickly when compound interest mops up the rest, after which their monopoly will be completely restored.
The fact is, nobody knows where most of the Gold is, and that in itself is a clear sign we shouldn’t use it as money: we can’t control it’s supply.
In the mean time, while Gold appreciates, so do their reserves.

4. They prefer deflation over inflation
Interestingly, under Gold deflation is the norm and under paper inflation.
Both see the boom/bust cycle, but each with it’s own ‘natural’ condition.
Paper sees continuous ‘mild’ inflation alternated by deflationary busts.
Gold sees structural deflation, alternated by asset bubbles.
Bankers prefer deflation. It makes their Gold and the interest they rake in with it worth more. It hinders economic growth, keeping the middle classes small. This is so because deflation invites hoarding currency (the currency is appreciating against other assets)  instead of investing it.
Under inflation, everybody is getting rid of their paper because it is losing value, promoting both consumption and investment.

5. But surely, they suppress Gold, don’t they?
Of course they do. They have their mouthpieces explaining it’s just ‘a barbarous relic’. They have their banks suppress it’s price.
By doing so, over the years they have convinced many to surrender whatever stash they had, greatly enhancing their grip on it. To them it is just another dialectic: paper versus gold.
When the time comes to release the valves, Gold will appreciate further and further. Greatly enhancing the value of their own Gold holdings, probably more than enough to compensate them for any paper losses.

That’s basically more or less their style, isn’t it?
Whether they will succeed this time is another matter, though.

So there are plenty of reasons to assume the Banking Fraternity would be quite pleased with a new Gold Standard.
A Gold Monopoly Standard, that is. In a free currency market Gold would play no role.

The basic thing to keep in mind is that they control Gold and are capable of creating the boom/bust cycle with it. History shows this without a shadow of a doubt. Worse still: we’d be paying interest over the money supply and this is the most important way the plutocracy drains our wealth from us.

Do you know of more reasons why the Banking Fraternity loves Gold? Feel free to comment!

This article was written for Henry Makow.

the Daily Bell: wrapping up
Discussing Gold and Interest with the Daily Bell
the Daily Bell: Response to Anthony Migchels regarding Gold at Henry Makow’s website
What Gary North is not telling you about Interest
On Interest


  1. Regarding Lincoln being in control of the money power, I think your source is correct regarding Lincoln’s early career, but incorrect later. First the information provided, although of some possible merit, is too meager, but more importantly, there is no explanation why Lincoln was murdered by the Jesuit-Rothschild cabal of the time, if he was still in the power of the cabal?

    I’ve researched some of the Lincoln history and he was allegedly of the Rothschild bloodline, which would not surprise me, but like JFK he eventually followed his own course. At the time of the civil war the Rothschild-Jesuit cabal were planning to split the US and control it through division, their historical ploy (divide & conquer). In fact, the British were ready to attack the eastern seaboard and I believe the French from the South. Hence, Lincoln’s keeping the union together prevented that along with his agreement with the Russian Tsar Alexander II of the time that he would defend the US if Britain attacked (which later lead to the Rothschild initiated Bolshevik revolution in revenge).

    The Rothschilds controlled the banking at the time so I find it incredible, given that they wanted to take over the US, they would offer 6% to Lincoln, particularly since he was trying to keep the US together and they would certainly make it difficult for anyone else to do so. Furthermore, the Rothschilds would not have been happy with Lincoln’s issuance of Greenbacks, in effect, acting like a national bank and his treaty with the Russian Tsar Alexander II. Moreover, Lincoln’s plan to rebuild the south was diametrically opposed to the Rothschild carpetbagger plan.

    Robert E. Lee was Rothschild controlled as was Davis. Controlling both sides is their forte.

    You can research this yourself:

    Tsar Alexander II saved the Union by threatening intervention if Britain or France joined the CONfederates.

    One of the most powerful Rothschild bloodline families in America are the Springs. The Springs were originally the Springsteins when they came to America in the mid-I 1700s and settled in NY. and NJ. They later changed their name from Springstein to Springs to hide their identity. Leroy Springs was hired by LC. Payseur. Now most American’s have to ask, who is L.C. Payseur? One of the most secret and most powerful families in North America has been the Payseurs. They have been so powerful that they could hide their wealth and power, and use other Satanic families as proxies. …Leroy Springs father was A.A. Springs and A.A. Springs was the secret father of Abraham Lincoln.

    • Thank you Glenn.

      I hear what you’re saying. But I don’t think the Rothschilds wanted to destroy the US. I think powercentralization was alwas the aim.

      Henry Makow has this article on the backgrounds of the US:

      It says the US was built from scratch to basically dominate Europe and conquer the world for the Money Power/Illuminati.

      The story of the Greenbacks is nasty: I always thought they were interest free government paper, but it transpires the Republic has been paying 6/7 percent over them for 40 years. So the Greenbacks were not debt free/interest free.

      So the agenda of strong centralized goverment, hiding as ‘saving the union’, served a long term Illuminati agenda and the greenback brought eternal indebtedness, notwithstanding its reputation.

      These are serious red flags concerning Lincoln. His family lineage, which I also have seen was Rothschild confirms this.

      He did seem to have gone his own way in some respects: the agenda was even more severe than he implemented and maybe this got him killed.

      It is all difficult to pinpoint exactly of course, but it seems Lincoln is overrated by the anti Money Power populists.

    • >>>> “Lincoln’s issuance of Greenbacks,”
      Could you offer anything, to support this often regurgitated figment ?
      The fact is: other than signing the Act, Lincoln had not much to do with issuing U.S. notes; if the money power had opposed the legal-tender clause there would not have been greenbacks. Samuel Hooper, John Sherman (and a few fellow travellers) gave you the greenbacks; if John Sherman, Charles Sumner, Henry Wilson had voted against the legal-tender clause there would have been no greenbacks:–

      The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted –yeas 17, nays 22; as follows:

      Yeas– Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Collamer, Cowan, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Kennedy, King, Latham, Nesmith, Pearce, Powell, Saulsbury, Simmons, Thomson, and Willey –17.

      Nays [the greenbackers in the Senate]– Messrs. Zachariah Chandler (R) against for, Daniel Clark (R) for, Garrett Davis (U) for against, James Dixon (R), James Doolittle (R) for, James Harlan (R), Ira Harris (R), John Henderson (U), Jacob Howard (R) … for, Timothy Howe (R) against abstain, Henry Lane of Indiana (R) for, James McDougall (D) for, Lot Morrill (R) for, Samuel Pomeroy (R) for, Henry Rice (D), John Sherman (R) against for, Charles Sumner (R) for for, John Ten Eyck (R), Benjamin Wade (R), Morton Wilkinson (R), Henry Wilson of Massachusetts (R) for for, and Robert Wilson of Missouri (U) –22.

      So the motion to strike out the legal tender clause was not agreed to.

      >>>>”in effect, acting like a national bank”
      what is the word ? cognative dissonance: somehow imagining that U.S. notes and National Currency Bank notes will peacefully co-exist (one money always drives out the other); greenbacks were issued to pave the way, and to serve as foundation, based on which four bank notes could be issued for each greenback in the bank; at the time of the organizing of the Federal Reserve system 750million bank notes were out, requiring ~200million greenbacks in the banks………

      >>>>”which later lead to the Rothschild initiated Bolshevik revolution in revenge”
      another floor in the conspiracist’s house of cards
      documents in the archive show the bolshevik revolution was initiated and financed by the German High Command (general Ludendorff was part of that high command) as a war measure; even the idea of leninism was given to Lenin by someone in Germany, during that train ride
      (oh, by the way, like my Lincoln assassination theory: ?)

  2. skullnboner permalink

    Reblogged this on Skullnboner's Blog.

  3. Hi Anthony,

    Take a walk on the wild side . . . you need to go to The Daily Bell sooner, rather than later . . . I’m going there myself very soon.

    How come you didn’t follow the bouncing ball the other day?

    (Posted by Agent Weebley on 12/22/11 11:21 PM)

    • Hi Agent Weebley,

      I did follow up, and really enjoyed Spinvis, more than once. Checked out a few more of his songs too. Hadn’t heard his music in years, but his music is really touching. Surprising an American should know him!
      I just didn’t want to bother the DB crowd with our conversation, which was getting a little off topic.

      I’ll be working on a response to the DB people this afternoon!

      • Hi Anthony,

        I’m glad you followed the links . . . I really like Spinvis . . . especially “Astronaut,” as it encapsulates what we are doing. We are Master Cerfers . . . we always seem to be able to find the most appropriate tunes for the moment . . . but we didn’t find you . . . you found us . . . and you are singing our tune.

        Oh, I’m actually an Englishman living in Canada right now. I’m half Canadian, half English, half Irish and half MetaPhorian.

        The Daily Bell readers do not seem to realize how “on topic” we really are. I’m glad you posted there, and await your comments with antici . . . . . . pation.

        We also have a need for your mind on our site, as Agent Pete 8 wants to know more about money, trading, and solutions to the world’s money vacuum. We could have an unbridled chat there. The conversation is drifting that way right now.

        We are also on a search for more Agents . . . Agents who must all agree when to print more MetaFlorin for free distribution. We need 7 Agents, but currently have only 3 . . . it should really be 4, but the 4th, Agent Sparky, is a wild card right now, as he thinks he is superior to us . . . not an equal, which does not make for a Truly Scrumptious Agent Of Peace.

        • Thanks for the job offer Agent Weebley!

          However, I’ve difficulty coping with my duties as it is. I’m not looking for more, I’d just disappoint both you and myself.

  4. a_reader permalink

    The DB published a detailed response to your article yesterday. It would be nice to hear what you have to say about it.

    • Thanks a_reader!
      Interesting, also your link the other day and your comments to DB’s article.

      I will certainly follow up later today or tomorrow!

  5. a_reader permalink

    Very interesting. I think you are probably right (I am also a reader of the Daily Bell and I am not in complete agreement with their views on gold).

    Do you know FOFOA’s blog? If not, you might want to have a look.

  6. Gold is money. It is intrinsic value and free of debt. Paper fiat currency is a debt instrument, borrowed into circulation. Even if governments print it, instead of private banks, they are still borrowing with the future as collateral. As long as people will give us real things in exchange for paper and plastic representations, it’s a medium of exchange. When that ends, it’s just paper.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Why Bankers love Gold
  2. Gold Over $2000, Silver Breaks Out: The Devil’s Favorite Money Will Soon Be Forced On Us | Real Currencies
  3. Why is Gold not rising? « Real Currencies
  4. The “French Connection” of Austrian Economics: Debunking Usury by applying Bastiat’s concepts « NESARA AUSTRALIA
  5. The “French Connection” of Austrian Economics: Debunking Usury by applying Bastiat’s concepts « Real Currencies
  6. The “French Connection” of Austrian economics: Debunking usury by applying Bastiat’s concepts « The Transparent Unicorn
  7. Subotaisbow
  8. Responding to Gary North « Real Currencies
  9. Real Currencies
  10. Top Ten Lies and Mistakes of Austrian Economics « Real Currencies
  11. The Daily Climb-Tuesday, Dec. 27th, 2011 | The Daily Climb-Daily Posting Of Relevant Content
  12. The Inflation vs. Deflation Dialectic « Real Currencies
  13. The Daily Climb « georgesblogforum

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: