FreeGold Debated by SMRI (Nov 2012 - Apr 2013)

Here is the original comment flow, which was removed from the other comments thread. Blogger is not exactly a powerful or flexible platform, but I've tried to retain the original flow and layout. The comments which SMRI deleted, were recovered from my email copies (and are marked). The opening comment (which was left intact on original) may serve as a good intro. MY reaction (right or wrong) to this can be viewed here. I have also removed, the comments related to verification link, as I said I would. --Warren

NOTE: I endorse the debate ONLY, not SMRI's assertions which unfold here.

This thread is on 'slow burn', a permanent page which won't get buried easily. We'll extend it as required based on content.

somanyroadsinvesting said...
Good analysis as usual. I like the way you guys analyse stuff. I would love a good debate/analysis on the whole "paper" gold trade as FOFOA refers to it. The LBMA gold trading mkt etc. I find it odd everyone gives FOFOA a pass in this area but make fun of all the easy silver targets on the web. In a recent video FOFOA asked if someone bought 'real' gold or 'GLD paper' gold. A basic underpinning of his Freegold theory is that somehow the price of gold now somehow does not reflect the true physical price and is obscured by massive amounts of paper trading. Yet there is almost no discussion of this on the FOFOA bog, seems to be taken as a given.

I like to keep an open mind and understand as much as possible. Over there I feel they have stopped inquiring, which I think is dangerous.

I have decided to stop posting comments or questions on FOFOA's blog. There does not seem to be any desire there to critically think about alterntive theories or ideas. It has become completely cult like.

I recently posted this comment and was immediatly made fun of. Despite the fact i never agreed or disagreed w the theories in the interview just thought it was an interesting discussion.


Listened to this recent podcast on Hyperinflation. The professor studied every known hyperinflation and even found some ones never before discovered. Was an interesting discussion. In regards to the US he doesnt think hyperinflation is a risk now, said when the time comes the fed will suck the liquidity out.

He also makes an interesting pt that people are focused on the growth in the Fed balance sheet which he calls 'state' money, but really only accounts for 15% of total broad money (refers to some M4 number). So while 'state' money has gone up(tripled since Lehman) it has been more than offset by decline in banking and shadow banking money creation so he actually makes the argument is the fed has actually been weak in their response when in context of overall broad money aggregates. And broad money creation has been anemic.
Considering the main outcome FOFOA predicts is hyperinflation in the US I would find it interesting to spend an hr and hear the views of probably the foremost expert on hyperinflations in the world. Probably can't hurt, right? But seems like they find no value in that over there.

Hope to have some good debates and intelligent discussions in the future here. Thx
Fri Nov 09, 03:36:00 PM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Maybe eventually I will get around to writing a post about it. However, that is why I was trying to address specific points of FG theory, ie. the 'paper' trading. Although I don't think it would do any good because his followers would just attack and hurl verbal attacks vs trying to engage in a real debate. Notice how FOFOA never addressed MA directly, just said he is confusing him w a goldbug. He will engage easy targets but any real debate he usually deletes the comments or ignores. I just dont find the debates there engaging. They are all circular self referencing. I mean FOFOA thought it was cool that 'Jeff' pretty much only comments with quotes from past FOFOA posts. Weird, how about thinking and coming up w your own thoughts.

I have read the whole trail, probably 60% of the FOFOA posts(i would say all of the ones that get referenced many times). I like reading them more for the monetary and economic insights vs FG theory per se.

I really feel there are many similarities to some christian cults. They always come back with the same stuff whenever you pose questions: 'you have too much baggage' love that one. Again without ever answering the specific points. Oh but if some silver fanatic comes on the blog they will address his pts all day long. Any real meaningful pts they sidestep and just say you dont understand. And then hurl some good goldbug insults for good measure to pump themselves up. Its just not intillectly enganging to debate them because instead of keeping an open mind they just always come back to some circular logic and say you havn't read enough, you dont understand etc.

I was pretty underwhelmed by the recent video series. These are the people attacking any non believers? most have zero investing experience. Its like they walked into this corner of the Internet with no frame of reference and now the word makes sense to them.

I personally think if there was ever a debate MA would destroy FOFOA. I was unimpressed listening to FOFOA in his interviews. He just acts like he has it figured out and everyone else is wrong. I didnt see anything that showed any special insight. Then he lost me when he asked one of the guys if his friend bought 'paper' gold or real gold. cont:
Fri Nov 09, 03:36:00 PM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
There are so many specific pts that I think should be addressed: a) 'paper trading' FOFOA references this all the time. Hey if people want allocated gold they can buy that, if they dont care and they want unallocated then hey thats their choice.

b) the govt wont charge cap gains taxes on the gains(if there is one thing I am confident on is that govt will continue to tax people on whatever they can).

c) 'gold must flow' somehow the powers that be have managed the gold price so that cheap gold can flow to where it needs. This is just so bizzare, i mean what would that imply that Saudi Arabia has like 20k tons of gold? India has been the biggest consumer for decades, no secret how much they import every yr. These rich arabs love to spend money, to think they have some giant unknown stash is not credible. They have huge social expenses now, they need 100 oil just to fund a the social programs, after the exorbidant expenses of the family and the social costs to keep the country from unrest I dont think there is much left over.

d) Decoupling of 'paper' gold price and physical. Listen to the Bron interview w Financial sense. Unless banks stop wanting to make money on arbitrage the chance there will be some decoupling is very remote.

Again i dont mean to say I havn't learned a lot from reading his posts, I have. FOFOA is a economic and monetary expert but I dont sense he has any experience on financial mkts and trading and how they work. I asked someone who has traded gold in London for over ten yrs about this idea of decoupling and he just said it doesnt make any sense.

I kind of make the analogy to a religion, hey whatever keeps you keeping the faith. I mean you can't have it both ways. The current 'paper price means nothing', but then he constantly shows tables of the annual prices of gold since the Euro was created as some evidence of FG emerging. So is the price real or just a 'paper' price. If the current paper price means nothing then you can't reference historical price movements as evidence of something. Remember in the Buffett article he says something like 'bubble in paper gold, sure, but in physical, never' I mean just bizarre. Why can't there ever be a bubble in physical gold?

I think he intentially makes his posts very complicated and opaque so as to divert criticism. I mean it was kinda of absurd to know that these guys shouting everyone down saying they dont understand anything are: ex cons, patent lawyers etc. Just bizarre.

I used to belong to VIC a website for serious value investors. You get very good intellectual informed debates there. On FOFOA site I see little that resembles a group of smart people hashing ideas around.

It pretty clear that Another and FOA thought with the EURO introduction that the world would eventually turn its back against the Dollar and eventually the Dollar would hyperinflate because all the dollars in the world would race back to the US to try to get real stuff before it collapses. Its been 15 yrs and it hasnt happended.

So where they right to buy gold in late 90's sure, but was their rationale right, hard to tell. There were also many others who bought back then for entirely different reasons(price approached production cost, stock mkt was in a bubble about to pop, concern over ever increasing debt and deficits, 9/11 and ensuing wars and how to finance them, historical price relationships w/ other asset classes became favorable etc).

Sat Nov 10, 04:01:00 PM GMT

doublesuited said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Sat Nov 10, 06:39:00 PM GMT

doublesuited said...
I too was disappointd with the video series. FOFOA and his "top" followers do not seem very intelligent or sophisticated. Although I agree with a lot of what FOFOA says re the economy and I like gold, I think he and most of his group come from pretty narrow backgrounds and their understanding of the world, markets, finance and investing is pretty limited. People like Faber or Rogers have experience in all markets and are much more sophisticated.
Sat Nov 10, 06:45:00 PM GMT

/SleepingVillage/ said...

One thing I have witnessed over the years; If your questions or complaints posted at FOFOA's blog are not answered, or at least not "answered with original thoughts"... well, it's because it has been covered before - hence the reposting... or possibly, it's because your complaints/questions are not worthy of a response. I've been there - no big deal. No hand-holding required...

You might not like to hear that, but you're free to do with it what you like. Nobody is forcing you to agree with anything presented there, here or anywhere else. Take it or leave it.

Now, please do a post of your own original thoughts against/for FG, or whatever? If it gets some response, then I guess you have succeeded:) You will get more respect either way, as opposed to cowardly badmouthing people in other venues...
Sat Nov 10, 07:09:00 PM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Here we go the FOFOA disciples are in attack mode. Cool. I just listed 4 pts I felt were implausable, unbelievable or unlikely. Feel free to respond to those pts.

Oh yeah I know I have too much baggage, I'm blocking the trail. Jaja you guys are too much.
Sat Nov 10, 07:26:00 PM GMT

/Sleeping Village/ said...
Attack mode! Wow. You're a sensitive fella.

I thought that's what you'd say, though. +1 for originality. Your "4 pts" have been addressed... a few times.

Do you want to hold hands now?
Sat Nov 10, 08:29:00 PM GMT

doublesuited said...
Oh right they probably have been addressed in the many opaque excerpts from scripture from people like another, foa or fofoa. I am sure you may do more than hold hands when you all get together in your spiritual retreats talking back and forth to each other in nebulous self referencing language.

The current proponent of this "belief" is an unidentified unemployed someone who re posts excerpts from some anonymous web postings many years ago and asks for donations to survive so he doesn't have to sell his gold. Seriously, what would he do if he didn't get any donations. He would have to sell all his gold before all the "paper" markets broke down and gold goes to 50k+.

This is very akin to a cult. You have some mysterious leader who quotes "the truth" from some other mysterious "gods" who has gathered a following by those who feel reassured and empowered by having discovered the truth. This leader then asks for donations so he can continue his "work" and is passionately defended by his followers from anyone that may question his teachings. One of his main followers even asked him for relationship advice??

The responses to simple questions like "you haven't read enough" or "you need to spend more time" or "you have too much baggage" is all very similar to fanatical religious cults where members need to pay to study more or take more classes so that they can obtain a higher level of understanding or enlightenment. They are all wrapped up in the supposed complexity which makes one feel reassured and empowered for having discovered "the truth" and anyone that asks reasonable questions is a heretic.

I think there is some good stuff in the fofoa posts. I think that a lot of the good work is overshadowed though by this fanatical obsession with another, foa,silver bug attacks and the general preaching like nature of the blog.
Sat Nov 10, 09:29:00 PM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Screwtape are you starting to see how unhinged these FG followers are. I actually would be really worried about holding my gold if I thought any significant amount of the gold is held for a FG theory rationale. I am starting to think they are just as unhinged as the Chris Duanes and Brother John’s of the world.

Thanks Sleeping Village for showing exactly the typical debate that goes on in the FOFOA site. Here is the typical scenario:

a) question posed by outsider
b) ridicule ensues by followers or FOFOA
c) outsider asks if they could please address the questions
d) followers respond its all been addressed already
e) outsider asks for specifics
f) links to pages and pages of opaque, anonymous and obscure posts with self referencing quotes which don’t answer the questions.
g) outsider says i don’t think my pts were addressed.
h) followers hurl endless insults and condescending comments at outsider that they are not smart enough to understand, have not spent enough time on the ‘trail’, or have too much ‘baggage’.

Sleeping if you feel you understand the FG concepts so well as to insult and ridicule anyone who dare questions its theory. Then please in your OWN words address my pts I posed in a reasonable space.
Sat Nov 10, 09:51:00 PM GMT

/Sleeping Village/ said...
Sure is a lot of animosity floating around these days...

The only reason I said anything in the first place was because I don't like your attitude, and I think it's cowardly to come here to whine about FOFOA's blog. Let it go, man. Your understanding of FG or anything else truly means fuck all to me.

Like I said, take it or leave it.

You obviously have your mind made up, and that's fine. Time to move on. We're not having a competition here, and I'm pretty sure readers can make their own decision on how "unhinged" the door might be:)
Sat Nov 10, 11:01:00 PM GMT

doublesuited said...
If you don't care then why are you defending someone other blog? It is hard to post on the fofoa blog when he deletes posts. Is that cowardly? You said "you have made up your mind". Actually it is quite the opposite. The fofoa group are the one not willing to discuss in an intelligent manner.

I too have been a part of stock/bond investment groups where membership is actually restricted to those who post good ideas. There are frequent vigorous debates but the discussion is nothing like the back and forth that goes on at fofoa.

A sign of an intelligent person is the realization that the world is inherently uncertain and the future is unknowable though we can make informed, educated and reasoned decisions based on what we know now. Most of the fofoa group do not exhibit these traits unfortunately. I think the blog would gain a lot more fans if it wasn't constantly inculcating its followers with such a convoluted ideology.
Sat Nov 10, 11:22:00 PM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Oh I forgot to put this part of the general FG dialogue into my post. Again when given the opportunity to respond to questions they say you have already made your mind up so move on.

Who said my mind was made up? If i was not interested I would not have posed the 4 questions I had. Again when given the opportunity you refuse to respond to specific concerns. Why not just respond to the pts I made? What is holding you up?

But hey the the F word was a nice touch of class. Would not expect anything else from a FG follower.
Sat Nov 10, 11:22:00 PM GMT

/Sleeping Village/ said...
Again, you haven't made any new points... okay? Please reread what I've already wrote.

Are you two for real? I feel like I've entered the Twilight Zone

I don't speak for FOFOA or anyone but myself, by the way.
Sun Nov 11, 12:20:00 AM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
The reason I posted here is because I am trying to start a real debate with honest back and forth discussion, something that is impossible on the FOFOA blog.

Again you have posted 3 times now since my original post which had posed 4 questions. Again its the same old thing: its all been addressed before, too much baggage, not smart enough, havn't read enough, move on you have made up your mind.

I am trying to hear genuine responses from people that can address these issues. If you cannot do that then probably no reason to keep responding to my comments.

Again no debate just pithy little comments that dont expand anyones knowledge.
Sun Nov 11, 12:28:00 AM GMT

Warren James said...
@SRMI, I have some questions I need you to answer - could you please get in touch by email [link removed]. Thanks.
Sun Nov 11, 05:54:00 AM GMT

somanyroadsinvesting said...
This comment has been removed by the author
Warren, I would prefer to keep any discussion online. If you prefer I don't pose questions about this theory here then I respect your decision. Its your blog. I only posted here because you guys seem to be the most intelligent, unbiased and logical of any blog in the metals sphere. Doesn't seem like its generated and real responses yet anyway.
Sun Nov 11, 10:53:00 AM GMT

---- comments are now closed on this, please use the new page.


milamber said...


Thanks for setting this page up. I too didn't like the turn the bars list post took (which is an outstanding post BTW).

I would love it for STF to give it a go at "debunking" Freegold, because if there are holes in the theory, I would love for someone to point them out.

The closest I have seen to someone credibly deconstructing FOFOA's arguments comes when FOFOA & Bron have debates. I think that Bron brings up very good points, but FOFOA's answers & explanations always make sense (not that Bron's don't; but I don't come away from those exchanges thinking that Bron has "won" the argument).

Here is my quandary though:

When it comes to the methods & operations of the LBMA, Central Banking, Geopolitics, etc, I have no frame of reference other than what I read. That is, I have no first hand experience with the subject matter that Freegold deals with. So then it becomes an issue of cutting through the chaff and finding the gold (no pun intended).

But what's real in this debate about oil, Central Banking, The Euro, The Dollar & gold?

"Secretary Kissinger: I am just totally allergic to unilateral European decisions that fundamentally affect American interests—taken without consultation of the United States. And my tendency is to smash any attempt in which they do it until they learn that they can't do it without talking to us."

"On the tape, Mr. Juncker says he has “had to lie” and, speaking about touchy economic topics, “When it becomes serious, you have to lie.”"

"In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies."
Winston Churchill

How does one figure out what is "correct"?
Or more importantly how does one use this information to protect (grow?) their wealth?

IMO, it would be a very worthwhile endeavor if STF would put the same intellectual rigor into Freegold as was put into unmasking WB (or Amber or whatever that person(s) name was).

If Freegold is a pile of huey, I would like to know. And I say this as someone who finds Freegold very credible (with just a few quibbles).


Bron Suchecki said...

Thanks Milamber.

I am particulary taken with the idea of separating the store of value and medium of exchange.

However I have a concern about the idea that everyone saves in gold. If everyone did that and did not save their excess in other people's credibility (ie productive enterprises) then we'd all be poorer.

I haven't the time at this point to reconcile these three things that have grabbed my imagination:

1. Freegold
2. George Selgin's Theory of Free Banking (
3. Antal Fekete's Wither Gold (

Lord Sidcup said...

I have the same desire as Milamber to see the idea of Freegold tested (at least by better argument than raging metal bugs have provided thus far).

I also appreciate and seek out Bron's comments on the subject. As Bron works in the gold industry, it would seem unusual that he has never had the slightest hint that there are in fact two separate global gold markets (as described by FOFOA here;

I am broadly convinced by the Freegold argument and am am happy to have made the switch to saving in gold/spending fiat, but before time reveals all, it is crucial that more intellectual processing power is applied to the idea (as with Free Banking).

Warren James said...

@Milamber - great missive and excelent points.

I first stumbled across in 2009 and I have read most of it. Freegold is amazing as a structure, it reminds me of software - I use that analogy because it helps highlight the complexity involved. Deconstructing and testing it requires both subject matter knowledge and high complexity analytical skills, i.e. only another software engineer with equivalent knowledge can really pick it apart into its various components or 'debug'. This (I think) is some of SMRI's concern, which is quite legitimate: at some level, people won't be able to absorb the FULL gamet of all the freegold components, which means that if they adopt or support it then they are doing so at a lower level of complexity - operating on gut feel, ring of truth, until such a time at least as they can understand it deeper. This possibly is the element that most offends our friends in the discussion above - the similarity of enmeshing religion (culture) and theology (theory). Separating culture from theory is the first step in breaking it down. I would hope that FOFOA would appreciate an attempt to address the theory (because the theory will either stand or fall on its own merit), but attacking the culture solves nothing and serves to alienate, as we've seen in the above exchange. *

I'll offer the following observations:

1. Milamber is correct - Freegold (and its implications) affects anyone with dollar savings, so if flaws exist then we ought to know (so that we can get on with life and not worry about the spectre of hyperinflation).

2. "What is the correct frame of reference?". My suggestion is that it's whatever is 'practical' in the real world. But even defining that is amazingly tricky though, because at different scales, things operate differently. A great example - average family worries about dollars coming in. Government doesn't worry about dollars - it can create them at will - what matters to them is national productivity. Nano-scale carbon tubes are stronger at the micro level than steel, that sort of thing.

3. Bron is correct – Freegold as an organism is not alone – there are many other 'super-entities' out there – some of which are competing (like the USG for example). How do they all mix? (what does the natural ecosystem of ideas look like?).

4. Freegold has an interesting ability to become more relevant over time (as opposed to fading into obscurity), for example many supporting historical references have been found and explored by VtC and Mortymer, etc. This is normally indicative of a solid idea.

If we use the software analogy again, then we have a good model to borrow from. Complex systems are often dependent on just a handful of components - in software, 99% good and 1% bad is enough to stop the thing from working. To find those faulty bits:

- An index of all the central ideas is required. e.g. 'topic:silver is covered in these posts 1,2,3...'

- The source documents need to be scrutinized. In my book, this means establishing the identity of Another and FOA, as Robert LeRoy Parker valiantly attempted here, and BTW don’t be offended anyone that I’ve stated this – it’s purely in the pursuit of scientific argument AND the fact that the discovery may lead to more clues which have been previously unconsidered. Different people require different levels of proofs, remember.

- and finally, it is necessary to explore the application to the real lives of people – just as software can be 100% perfect but if it cannot be used in the real world then it may as well not exist.

That’s all for tonight.

Lord Sidcup said...

It seems more important to establish if there really are two separate gold prices/market (one for super-giants, another for shrimps), rather than focussing on FOA and ANOTHER as individuals.

If, for example, we discovered that FOA was Alexandre Lamfalussy and ANOTHER was Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani that would prove a high-level intention to carry out the plan. However, human affairs are cmplicated, and any predictions / plans made decades ago might have hit unknowable obstacles.

As we are unlikely to be allowed access the inner-workings of the BIS, action in the gold and oil markets might prove that the plan is being executed.

This is why I find VictortheCleaner’s work (tending toward in examination of markets) more convincing than FOFOA’s (tending toward reliance on the testaments of FO/A.

In the comments above, I think Milamber and Bron address different issues.
Milamber wants to know (like I do) if the ‘conspiracy’ is real, while Bron addresses practical matters if/when Freegold is established.

In this way I don’t see that Warren's software analogy works.
Freegold contains both the story of historical events AND a description of a possible future economic system*.
These are separate things. Could one exist without the other?
Maybe it’s the difference between writing code that works, and writing a story that is true (despite having some details wrong).
Even if FO/A words are the rantings of a madman in a shack, that might not necessarily prevent freegold from coming into being.
The vision could come 'true'. although the history is false.

Also, I find it very odd that the idea of gold MtM as a reserve is not discussed more (esp. among gold bugs and Hard-Money types).

mr pinnion said...

@ Bron
"However I have a concern about the idea that everyone saves in gold. If everyone did that and did not save their excess in other people's credibility (ie productive enterprises) then we'd all be poorer."

The big wealth gains will be made during the transition to freegold.

It will be a lot harder for people to save wealth after freegold.
People will have to work more productively to get by.
That in itself will bring benefits to society.
Other people ,who have some savings to spare will want to invest some of their savings.Two different things, savings, investments.
Because savings are a lot harder to come by, investments will chosen a lot more carefully.
Nowerdays, peoples pensions are 'invested in the bonds of bankrupt governments.Thats not good.Thats bad.It will be seen to be very bad in the not too distant future.


Warren James said...

@Lord Sidcup, thanks. I agree - the software analogy becomes easily strained. One last stab though - for the 1% of bad code to be completely blocking, only depends on the critical nature of that 1% ... it is always possible for 'cosmetic bugs' to exist in the definition without hindering the primary operation. It is still my view that all large complex definitions will have a degree of grey areas.

@ozzy, good summary of post-transition, that is my understanding as well.

BullionBaron has just produced a post of his understanding of the Freegold paradigm, which is a useful summary and offers some new questions for exploration: Freegold: Gold bubble or new monetary paradigm?. I find it generally interesting how (a) the freegold paradigm is always multifaceted, and (b) it's a long post as well - topics this big require big discussion.

Some great observations raised here in this thread here, enough to start some serious investigations. Cheers, all.

Desperado said...

Yes, there is an eerie devotion to "the archives" on FOFOA that is almost as off-putting as the cultish devotion of the followers to their messiah. Just look at the interviews. I would call it "Freegold Salvation Blindness Syndrome"

Although I carefully read every one of Victor the Cleaners posts, he also suffers from FSBS to a degree. I have attempted to argue with him about the Euro and EMU and received only his scorn. I also find it interesting that despite these FOFOA interviews Victor has never lowered his veil even enough to allow readers to have some idea of his background. Bron not only provides equally important information but we also have the benefit of knowing what his stake in the game is. Combine that with Victor's vehement support of the Euro not only as a strong and legitimate currency that can compete with the dollar, but also his insistence of its long term viability and his motives become as suspect as Another's.

Finally, it is tiresome to weed through the many sacred wisdoms accepted at FOFOA, such as hatred for hard money, love of fiat, and the conviction that Silver can only go to its industrial value.

Michael H said...

I'm not sure why people are surprised that most commenters on FOFOA's blog are pro-freegold. Would we be surprised if the majority of people who post on the 1979 Trans-Am owners forum think that "'Stangs Suck"?

FOFOA posts his views, and people read and consider. Those that agree (or at least find the viewpoint worthwhile) will stay for the discussion, those that disagree or find the viewpoint distasteful will migrate to other forums. C'est la vie.

I think the focus on ANOTHER and FOA's identity is misplaced. There are really only two options: either they are insiders or they are not. If they are not insiders then we cannot ascribe any particular authority to them and must consider their writings based on their merits alone. If they are indeed insiders then we will question their motives, and depending on what motives we ascribe to them we must still question the content of their writings in case they were deliberately trying to mislead. Again this leaves us to consider the merits of the ideas as they stand.

Lord Sidcup, I think you will never, ever find evidence for two prices of gold, because I don't think that is what ANOTHER was alluding to. Rather, the point is that gold has a different value to a central banker who can print currency since he does not care what the price is.

Desperado, perhaps we will see victor once his trenchcoat comes back from the dry-cleaners.

But seriously, you question victor's motives? My guess is that he is a regular (but very smart) guy who disagrees with you. Not, as you seem to imply, a disinformation tool to promote the Euro.

mr pinnion said...

@ desberado

The gold standard was tried.It failed.
We came of the gold standard.

Why do you think it would nt suffer the same fate if we tried it again?


Warren James said...

@Michael H, @Lord Sidcup, very well put both.

I wish to submit my reasons for wanting to know ANOTHER's identity - reduced to three key points:

1. We would get to find more about F/OA's perspective and bias and relate to them as people, which makes the narrative less abstract.

2. Interesting additional details would become known - who were their influences? what kind of societal circles were involved with the planning of the Euro?

3. It may allow us to seek their current-day opinion and reconcile the last 13 years of observations and discussions, gaining further clarity.

The information would help the 'man on the street' to understand, helpful for when the transition does take place since there will be a lot of angry and scared people who won't have the luxury of time necessary to study and digest FOFOA's great posts. To clarify my position - I am (also) broadly satisfied with Freegold theory as it stands - specifically FOFOA's exploration of Money. I don't think we'll ever get those answers about identity but I don't feel silly for wanting them.

Michael H said...


On your points:

1 and 2. We do know a little bit about FOA and about where some of these viewpoints originated. I'll try dig up the relevant material in a few days. Keep in mind that A/FOA's influences were not necessarily the same people behind the planning of the Euro.

3. If we knew who FOA or ANOTHER were, it would make them less likely to come forward now.

As for the 'man on the street': I wager that the majority of Americans under 30 don't even know Nixon closed the gold window, and we had oil shocks in the 1970's. As in, don't even know these events occurred, never mind be able to offer a reasonable explanation as to why.

So I would not expect the 'man on the street' to care ere

Motley Fool said...


You raised 3 theories of interest and wondered about their possible interconnectedness or enmeshing.

I cannot comment on free banking, but I can comment on Fekete's work.

Prior to discovering Freegold I was a student of Fekete. I have read and grasped everything he has written.

After having understood Freegold, I sat down and tried to see if they were reconcilable, or rather if there was anything in the work of Fekete that could help enhance Freegold.

The answer is there is nothing that can or would be worthwhile salvaging from the Real Bills Doctrine.

It may be simply a fool's opinion, but it is a studied opinion.

Fekete's ideas are great in theory, but fail to take into account the human element, and as such would fail in practice.



Michael H said...

FOA (10/20/99; 19:25:56MDT - Msg ID:17025)


I addressed the $30,000 concept a while back. It's more a projection taken during a study (I was not part of) that indicated just how much the dollar would lose "reserve use"! Truly, the price is unimportant as value assignment can take many forms at that stage of failure. Let's say, at least $5,000 in the five years the ECB has allowed.

Yes, total change is a time consuming affair. Yet, it is longer than an eternity for investors that cannot recover in their lifetimes! The major story here, is the transition of currencies. Earlier, Another was pointing to the various political leverage that made this outcome proceed. Gold, being the historic world currency of "all" resort, will benefit from this transition in that it's use will greatly expand! It's price in currency terms is meaningless as it's new value in today's modern world is made clear. No one knows where it will finally level out.

Truly, until the IMF/dollar pricing system fails, gold's paper price can run literally "anywhere" as the values indicated in dollar currency are completely false! As Another says, "time will prove this out".

thanks FOA

Michael H said...

(I selected this comment for the bolded section, but I copied the whole thing because it is very good)

FOA (10/14/99; 9:20:06MDT - Msg ID:16318)

Back in the early oil days I was very close to some of the largest oil men in the country. When in Texas we would visit at the country club and shared a lot of our perceptions. Usually over a poker table. Looking back, I find their (and mine) viewpoints had much in common with the gold outlook today.

When oil went from around $3.00 to $5.00 everyone that had local reserves thought they had made a fortune. You wouldn't believe how many sold off not only their storage barrels but their best (lowest cost production) reserves for cash. The feeling was that oil had just zoomed in price and would quickly go back down. The percentage gain on those leveraged assets was simply huge.

Then oil went up to around $8.00! Good god, we were so stupid to have sold. What a bunch of buying fools out there. Those idiots buying $8 are going to get killed. Everybody knows the major producers can pump for $1.00. Oh well, it just a political thing.

When oil hit $15, some of them knew they had missed out on a train to $20. But they still thought oil would one day return to around $5.00. So as not to miss out completely many of the early sellers jumped on the Natural Gas wagon, using everything they had gained from their first sale. At first this new move made money, big time. Then something funny happened, oil soared and later returned to a more normal $18 to $25 range, but gas plunged from the higher supplies. The "oil boys" turned "gas boys" lost it all. Even into today, gas has never returned.

Truly, they used the silver vs gold concept, thinking the more leveraged natural gas would out run oil and regain their fortunes. It made sense as gas (like silver) was more industrially useful and "CHEAPER". You might even say it was the "poor mans oil" (smile)! Also: Just like silver, gas proved to exist in much larger amounts that the "statistics" demonstrated. As it's price "coat tailed" oil, it brought out the massive increase in production that wasn't needed as long as oil was available. Incredibly, this was the exact same story for silver. All the stories about people buying silver as gold went up saw them sell the silver and keep the gold because people just didn't need both of them. The same will happen when gold runs this time. People will keep the high unit cost gold in their vaults, use the digital currencies for trade and sell the silver as it floods out of the woodwork.

Michael H said...

Continued ...

You see, oil in the early 70s is like seeing the prevalent gold concept today. The perception was that oil could never go up from the $1.00 production range into the $20s (just an unimaginable increase to those in the business) because such a price would flood the world with production. It was thought that there was so much unfound oil in the world that every home owner would have an oil drilling rig in their back yard at $20+. Just as $10,000 gold will have people taking gold from sea water.

Here is where reality gets in the way of concept based on perceived conditions. Yes, the $20 and $30 oil did bring out the rigs and production soared. But, even at the higher prices, the world found uses for this great new gusher of oil. The same human traits that dictate that "you can never have enough money in the bank" also said "we can never use too much oil"! If all the oil reserves in the world could produce at $2.00 then the price would return to $2 plus a profit. But, we want and use all oil produced from fields that pump from $2 cost on up to $30. Gold and oil are not like any other commodity, because under the right circumstances, people find both of their qualities useful and can never get enough of them at any price. It seems we accumulate assets until we die?!

The "paper boys" try and paint a picture of gold like "old oil men" looked at values "back then". They were wrong and so are the "paper boys" today. The Smiths and Arnolds of the world try to convince us that the supply of gold is never used up and creates a glut as it grows. They say that unlike oil that is consumed, gold holdings have become a stockpile that refining cannot use up. I bet these guys would have also sold their oil reserves in the mid 70s also.

Where they miss the boat is in their assumption that people will get enough gold. Not if it's money, they won't! People do consume money just like oil, rather it's just in the form of "savings consumption". Gold, just like money has an "unlimited demand". Again, have you ever seen anyone that said "I have too much money and have no more use for it". "No, don't give me any more of that cash, I've got a glut of it now, go away"! Yea, right!

Often, we read where people say, "oh what am I to do with all this gold if it hits, $30,000?". Funny how Bill Gates never says "what am I to do with all these MS shares". Well, you too will act like anyone with to much cash or assets, just stash it away until you need to spend it. The old "what will I do with all this high priced gold I can't get change for" logic just doesn't compute when dealing in reality? Ever see someone in a flea market rolling around a cart full of $100 bills,,,and frantically trying to unload it because it buys so much and they can't get change? Help me out here, am I not seeing something?

I'm afraid that even the very poorest of people have a better grasp of spending and saving value than some of the "big time investors" present about gold. (I'm talking about the brokers, Strand)

Michael H said...

Continued ...

Anyway: The amounts of gold in vaults today is no where near enough to represent the only circulating world money. It would have to be priced at $++++++ to do that. So, if mine production can continue, the world will take any and all they can produce. Be it 3,000 ton a year or 10,000 a year because the demand for money (even a parallel supplement money) is unlimited. Personally, I would take all of it (smile) and let the rest of you keep the paper.

The reality of this is that people hold cash in banks as it is lent out and earns interest. If no one lent their cash and just saved it (like gold) to spend in later years, it would take an enormous amount of paper money. This is why the US goes to great lengths to identify gold to the public as a commodity, not money. They want you to know that it must be sold as soon as it goes up. Trade it, don't save it. Most Western investors have brought into this and are going to pay dearly because of it. Again money demand is "unlimited". The same will be true for gold.

As people begin to buy gold as a currency supplement, to be spent "as needed", the price could reach enormous levels.....and be seen just like oil............a useful asset you just can't get enough of.

On the road.........FOA

Michael H said...

FOA (09/13/99; 18:52:08MDT - Msg ID:13574)
To the best of my knowledge, the ones that initiated this were major oil producers. Strange as it may seem, the very first questions came from a US natural gas producer in 1985+/-. Later the initiative came from outside the US. Again, all of this was some time ago.

Michael H: This is what I could find on short notice, but there might be more in the archives.

SS said...

Subscribing to the thread.

milamber said...


Thanks for the ideas to think about. I will try and get to them.


I want to know FOA's identity just to satisfy personal curiosity. With that being said however, I think that if FOA wanted to be known, he would be known by now. So, I am torn in wanting to respect someones privacy & insatiable curiosity. But then I remember that respecting someones privacy never killed any kittens.

So far it appears that SMRI and Desperado have presented the only "arguments" against Freegold/RPG in this thread. My own contributions against FG (and I made these on FOFOA's blog last month)are:

- Are we going to continue to be too stupid to separate out the long term SoV function from the daily MoE? That is, will we resolve FOFOA's dilemma?
-American response to its hegemony (exorbitant privilege) collapsing. I dont think it can prevent it, but it can sure make a mess of the world trying.


Motley Fool said...


I have tried to engage you on twitter. After my initial query and your singular response, I have received no replies to my responses.

As regards the paper gold thing, Jeff Christian gives a excellent overview here of the whole gold trade market : Podcast. Alternatively or additionally consider reading this : So you think you own gold?

As regards the Hyperinflation expert, and your comments thereon. There is a qualitative difference between base money and credit money. This distinction is missed by most who comment on these matters. He is in essence making the standard deflationist argument. Perhaps consider rereading FOFOA's series on hyperinflation, there are several.

“He will engage easy targets but any real debate he usually deletes the comments or ignores. I just dont find the debates there engaging.” “Any real meaningful pts they sidestep and just say you dont understand.”

These are two pretty serious allegations. Care to provide examples?

“b) the govt wont charge cap gains taxes on the gains(if there is one thing I am confident on is that govt will continue to tax people on whatever they can).”

The is is addressed in Confiscation Anatomy part 1 and two, amongst others.

“This is just so bizzare, i mean what would that imply that Saudi Arabia has like 20k tons of gold? “

My best guess is 7000-8000 tonnes.

“They have huge social expenses now, they need 100 oil just to fund a the social programs, after the exorbidant expenses of the family and the social costs to keep the country from unrest I dont think there is much left over.”

Perhaps consider rereading Gold & Money : More than meets the eye, by Aristotle.

“d) Decoupling of 'paper' gold price and physical. Listen to the Bron interview w Financial sense. Unless banks stop wanting to make money on arbitrage the chance there will be some decoupling is very remote.”

This is simply recognition that paper gold is not physical gold, and more importantly that paper gold cannot serve the function of physical. I will again link the post I linked in twitter, where I had discussions with AD about these exact issues on page 3 (i think) of comments). Fallacies – 1. Paper Gold is just like Paper Anything

“Remember in the Buffett article he says something like 'bubble in paper gold, sure, but in physical, never' I mean just bizarre.”

Gold The ultimate Unbubble and The Shoeshine Boy
“...the Dollar would hyperinflate because all the dollars in the world would race back to the US to try to get real stuff before it collapses.”

No, that is not the reason. The reason being that support for the dollar would be withdrawn. Consider rereading the latter parts of : Moneyness.

Fwiw, I ignored the numerous ad hominem comments directed at fofoa and the merry band of brainwashed cultists. ;)



Motley Fool said...

Seems I screwed up all my links. Just copy and paste the link and edit out the first part.

Warren James said...

[ more historical indexing: Bron Suchecki has compiled a 'post' on Freebanking - which contains relevant excerpts from a discussion on FOFOA's blog, conversation between Bron, costata, and Michael H. ]

It can be found at Bron's Goldchat blog:

Michael H said...

FOA (01/16/00; 20:58:26MDT - Msg ID:23019)



Do you remember my question of a few days ago about the circumstances in which you and Another might reveal your identities? Is that ever a forseeable possibility? ----------------

foa: the major push of these posts is that you look for economic events that explain where we have been walking. If they tell you your trail is correct, then we are thinking for ourselves and perhaps seeing the world as others do. Not knowing us forces you to look closely with your own eyes. The understanding gained in this way is wealth that lasts forever. Thank you for reading and thinking

FOA (1/19/00; 8:53:32MDT - Msg ID:23197)


Our sole reason for writing is a private commission to share official directions and perceptions with the average citizen of the world. Nothing else.

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

what I dislike about Freegold most, is the assumption and interpretation of "giants".

Isnt it funny to see the FG praetorian guard with some questionable CV, talking about giants, waiting for donations for the guru, never obviously seen anything from the rest of the world outside? Just look at the debriefings. Maybe nice people but most are just clueless. Those people teach me about the greatness of the Euro? Sorry, but how more pathetic can it get?

And from my point of view, ANOTHER was not any different: Enough stuff was just BS. So if his BS is so easy to spot, why give him credibility on the rest, which is not verifiable?

So what's FO(FO(A)) good for? I think the word of a person is always good the extend into new perspectives, regardless of the person who said it, and one has to admit, nice writing of FOFOA, but besides that? Credibility (=accepting a promise) needs more than just la-la-words.

And his last post when deleting my post (which he shall do however he pleases, I dont have a problem with that, but he cant delete reality), tells me, he starts finally losing it:

AD, in case you haven't noticed, your comments are all gone from the blog....

uhhhhh, that hurts, what a punishment. I'm aware, you value the remaining circle references much higher.

...You are no longer welcome to comment here....

that's okay, I guess a non believer is also not welcome to church, if he continues to open his mouth.

...Not because you present an argument that threatens Freegold, me or this blog

I like that one best, basically this admits exactly the opposite :D

...(your argument hasn't changed since your very first comment 21 months ago), but because you post too many obstinate and mind-numbingly, head-thumpingly obtuse comments that do nothing but frustrate and discourage the more productive conversations...

And I assume most joy you receive from the insultation of your praetorian guard towards non believers, that sounds productive.

...for which I maintain this blog's comment section. Go monopolize someone else's conversation.

*headshaking*, man you're really losing it.

To sum it up with my2cents: Freegold is a nice thesis, but besides that nothing more and there is nothing these people can receive credibility from, more or less maybe even the opposite, it is what it is, a thesis.

Greets, AD

Warren James said...

AD - it depends on perspective I suppose. Most people interpret the world as being full of thought-filled humans but it could also easily be argued it's just a bunch of ideas inhabiting bags of bacteria and water walking around – they are both right depending on their frame of reference.

For what it’s worth I never thought FOFOA as talking up the euro – it is just a currency and does what it’s designed to do – siphon people’s well-being from them without their knowledge, under the guise of being a necessity (brilliant really; wish I’d thought of it first).

Quick question to clarify though, are you arguing that the Freegold construct is not deserving to exist in its current form, or do you object to the people who safeguard its expression? A few complex issues there, just curious as to what motivates you as a person to pursue FOFOA in such a way.

Useless yellow rocks – get you some ;)

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

In regards to "deserving to exist" I have no preference on how the world should be. That is basically useless thinking, that might just be the second step. I guess we are all here to understand how the world is right now first.
So what I like about FOFOA and why I am coming back reading, is that there are lots of interesting perspectives to gain personally from, again: PERSPECTIVES, nothing more. But that actually concerns only FOFOA's writing not FO(A). Whenever I read references to FO(A) or Eurogold, I am just disappointed about how people can be refusing reality so much. IMHO Most of these folks just simply confuse claims and thesis with proveable verifiable facts of reality. I wonder why? Could it be, that they are poor shrimps, sitting All-In with their wishfull thinking, hating everything and everybody that threatens their dream, convictions or donations to become finally rich? (IMHO this applies to most of the PM-bloggesphere)
But if you having nothing to argue but "because XYZ said so" to underline you statement this is for me not really much of an argument.

To give you an example:
Somebody claimed dont you see, everybody is fleeing the dollar
I responded: Okay, nice claim, but show me, from which numbers can I conclude that?
Shortly afterwards the praetorian guard showed up with insultations and 5min. I was kicked and deleted by FOFOA with above comment.

Personally I almost conclude from this so far to say to myself: Never trust a poor man's advice => sell all those useless rocks. But I havent, I probably will never sell because I simply would not know where else to put the money, but also never ever purchase any further, except maybe some historical coins for fun for my collection, once in a while.
Greets, AD

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

Having said so, one more example that just popped up after I finished:

There is a lesson to be learned now that athrone has been addressed by the host of this blog. If it looks like a troll, sounds like a troll, and smells like a troll, it's likely a troll.

For those who are new on this trail, you may feel a sense of urgency as you work to figure out this Freegold thing. Understand that time allocated to trolls like athrone will be lost time. That in itself is bad enough, but a more serious ramification may be that the troll gains enough credibility in your eyes such that you decide to follow him down a path that ends nowhere.

Understand this, contrary to his claim that he has read Another/FOA and this blog as well, he hasn't. Anyone who has can immediately see that he hasn't. .....

unbelievable. I dont know what else to say. Just simply unspeakable insane. Just compare that with the "debriefing" what kind of dude matrixsentry is: An ex-soldier (which is on my personal rating one of the lowest in terms of intellectual credibility), an earlier passionate mining stocks trader..... BUT NOW HE FINALLY FOUND THE TRAIL TO SALVATION, DONT WASTE TIME TO THINK FOR YOURSELF, READ THE HOLY BIBLE SO YOU WILL BE SALVAGED.

Seriously, if I would be FOFOA I would kick such people in order to remain at least some kind of credibility. But apperantly that's the type of folks FOFOA likes to be surrounded. I don't know, but what does that tell you in terms of credibility?
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

@AD, I'll grant you the use of hyperbole since all FOFOA's critics tend to use it. Interesting you are all using the same word - 'credibility' (and haggling over who should 'have it'). Don't forget that credibility is established/given by others external, it can't be created by the subject.

But may I quickly point out to other readers that you have been selective with MatrixSentry's words? The second part of his missive describes a practical solution he is taking to solve the issue of 'too much material to read' - that is quite balanced and rationally presented, is it not?

Anyway, I agree that credibility in digital media is something that we're all still very young at - each of us think we are experts in discernment. Part of the trouble is that I don't think our brains are equipped to handle the volumes of information we have now. 'night.

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

I'll grant you the use of hyperbole since all FOFOA's critics tend to use it. Interesting you are all using the same word - 'credibility' (and haggling over who should 'have it'). Don't forget that credibility is established/given by others external, it can't be created by the subject.
100%ACK absolutely. But can we also agree, that despite the fact that the subject can not create it itself from within, but it very well can destroy it by itself?

And IMHO FOFOA and his crowd is on the very best way to do so. I'll have the feeling that the famous days of Moneyness, ReturnToHonestMoney & FreegoldFoundation are over and now heading downwards faster and faster. Correlating with the price of physical gold? ;)

Warren James said...

Your words are my own personal ohrwurm AD.

Yes, we can agree that the subject has the ability to destroy credibility. You use the market analogy and I think it is appropriate to extend - your own personal thresholds matter less, the 'price' has more to do with what the majority thinks (we're talking about the free market in content creation and consumption).

In theory FOFOA will have the skill to keep the freegold narrative current and relevant. If the idea starts to become too divorced from the real world then that will become naturally difficult and the effect should be observable.

Don't forget freegold theory calls for a semi-final thumping of the gold 'price' before being repriced at a much higher level. If he is right about the whole shebang then most of the guys who frequent the freegold blog are all entitled to the biggest 'I told you so' in human history.

In the meantime we can happily index the arguments so it's easier to test. MF is correct - freegold as a thesis should not be above scrutiny but as examiners we must know that some tests are less credible than others.

I doubt I'll have the last word here (I'm done), but all I really want to say is thanks for using the appropriate forum to discuss the topic.

Slow Loris Larry said...

Posted 3 March 2013 by SLL

Just in case some folks are still looking at this page, and have also somehow missed the latest FOFOA post 'Checkmate', here is the URL:

This is a recapitulation of some of his main themes, but in a new context with fresh and interesting metaphors having to do with poker and chess.

If you are new to the whole world of A/FOA/FOFOA, and want to know more, this is a great introduction.

Freegold is only mentioned cursorily, but the thesis comes across nonetheless, if you read between the lines a little.

Many of FOFOA's staunch readers have commented that this is his best post ever!


AdvocatusDiaboli said...

I wonder, what has when to happen, so that the FOFOA and his followers would admit, that all this FOA/ANOTHER "paper gold" waiting-for-godot-20bagger stuff was just a huge BS.

Seriously, what kind of event or timeline will prove it wrong?
IMHO, even if the € breaks up, gold goes down to $500 and stays there for the next ten years, Bitcoin (LOL!!) will be the next world reserve etc.... I wonder if we will still read the same "It is just around the corner", just like 15yrs ago.
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

@AD, that's a tough question. I have a feeling it's answered in some of Costata's 'what to look for' index, but my gut says that so long as all the events appear to be moving towards the event, then what you describe will continue. In some respects it's a bit like continental drift - the movement is inexorable and unarguable but to the casual observer it matters not so much.

A few things I can think of, like wildcards in the Hari Seldon topology:

- If the euro dumps their MTM gold methodology, citing failure ;p
- New (oil-disruptive) energy technology.
- Global-scale civil unrest or collapse in global productivity or population.


AdvocatusDiaboli said...

Thanks Warren,
yes, those will be the ultimate game changers rendering the nominal value of gold to far below mining costs, no doubt about that.

I was more thinking about issues of the Freegold belief to acknowledge that we already do have Freegold today. I really have a problem with FG always making up stuff that "we are moving towards the event".
IMHO no we are not!!!, it is what is, no use to interpretate weird things into contexts that does simply not exist.

Having said that and looking at the three points you made in this context:
- Euro MTM
I have the impression the ECB gives a crap about their potential yellow button. Do they actually know they have one? Looks like they prefer ESM, EFSF, ELO, OMT....
I am really wondering, because their are many old retired Bundesbank memembers and when they are talking now in interviews, absolutely nothing touched (Free)Gold even slightly, more the opposite, most I would consider SDR/IMF friendly.
- oil flow direction
hmmm, it looks to me, that this is a little overestimated, looking at the stuff oil producers invested their $ over the last 10yrs.
civil unrest
hmmm, isnt that already happening, just look at the arabian spring and in Europe it will get far far worth.
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

@AD, depends again on frame of reference.

If money is a social contract, then a repricing of money involves a massive schism in all things social-contract related. It's my understanding that this societal change is already occurring regardless of our level of understanding.

The money masters already have us stitched up well and proper, this situation will remain in place so long as the complacent populace use the television as their daily dose of reality.

In my mind the only remaining question of real worth is whether 'they' can manage the social change without causing mass fatalities. Perhaps we will finally know the intended use of all those armored personnel carriers, yes? One thing is for sure, many present will pay a heavy price for the financial malfeasance of an entire generation past (regardless of whether that happens overnight or spread over decades/centuries).

I have actually been waiting for you to start up your blog. Writing good article content focuses the mind and helps refine those ideas bouncing around inside. I promise I will have a look occasionally if you expand on those 3 points. You can invite @SugarLover to co-contribute. --Warren

Anonymous said...

Dear ScrewTape Files I have decided to enlighten you with the "great thoughts" cough, cough, of Chairman Duggo,

What is FOFOA?
Well the letters stand for Friend of a Friend of Another. FOFOA is a person who runs a blog dedicated to the thought of A/FOA. Confused? " A " stands for Another and "FOA" stands for Friend of Another. Still not clear?
Well it's a kind of like a religious movement run by it's High Priest FOFOA. I say "religion" because to my mind it has all the trappings of a religion. The site is dedicated to the thoughts of A/FOA who are no longer with us. Sounds familiar like Jesus, Mohammed, and Moses possibly?
FOFOA is the Ayatollah or Chief Rabbi interpreting the thoughts of the great A/FOA somewhat like the interpreting the writings of the Bible or the Koran.
A/FOA set down their thoughts over the period of a decade and then disappeared. Their thoughts were called the "Trail" leading to the promised land of "Freegold"
Like all religions when you enter as a novice you are quickly instructed to read all of the "thoughts" of A/FOA and the "thoughts and interpretations" of FOFOA. This can take a considerable time. If you then ask questions various "keepers of the truth" will come to your aid with quoted passages from A/FOA and FOFOA. Questioning, unless positive to the religion, is generally frowned upon and if persisted in will garner rebuke and perhaps excommunication. You will then be given the stigma of Troll.
All followers are encouraged to endlessly discuss nuances of the doctrine until a new sermon is delivered by the Pope FOFOA. I say Pope because most of his followers consider his utterances as infallible.
Like most religions and cults there is continual striving of the adherents to reach a state of "bliss". A state of total awareness called "Freegold". Many followers of FOFOA will, after a period of intense study of the ancient scriptures", proclaim they are in a state of "bliss" and now understand the true meaning of Freegold.
The message of Freegold is very enticing. The followers will insist that it is completely true, much like the Bible and obtainable much like Heaven.
When you step outside of the religion you see that is like any other religion. It may be true or it may not be true. In any case it relies on a great deal of faith.
FOFOA and his followers are looking forward to the financial equivalent of "The End of Days" or an Armageddon of the currency World.
My own take on Freegold is that it has a slim possibility in the form that FOFOA and his followers believe in.
Reality and history always shows that things never turn out the way we expect them to. Still the idea of having Gold is a good one.

Anonymous said...

For during no period of history has an entity used a commodity to corner another commodity!

Now this is the actual question.

Oil for gold. Gold for oil,

I think oil reserves (Venezuela, Canada) are being mobilized. As are gold in the ground.

Anonymous said...

I stumbled through fate into the Kitco blog circa 1997.

Many years later I think I see the basic wisdom of this. It is being played out on drawn out scenario. Far longer that was anticipated.

But I think that, for all intellects and all choices the basic premise that gold will enter the system as the ultimate currency is playing out. Slowly. I leave it to "bigger minds" to argue the systems and do bar counts and analyse identities.

What remains is the basic human truth that gold is re-entering the system. I do not know if Freegold will occur. We shall see. However I do believe that Another was correct. Oil is the valuator.

Gold is the wealth. So the commodity is oil. The wealth'payment is gold. Digiital currency will be trashed yet not eliminated.

Store of wealth. Gold.

Anonymous said...

I am but, as they call, a shrimp.

I like many outside the Western thought system, do not accept the DOW or S&P as credible investments or stores of the future of my savings.

Freegold is an ultimately intelligent answer. Will it happen? IMHO the only system reorgaization will be one that reins in greed/abuse. Freegold does that. Will this happen? I do not know. Another saw a clear objective and path. I think most of what he/she said was without duplicity at the time. What is left? I think the basic premise that gold is re-entering the system as the ultimate currency is true. I think that time proves that out.

I know not how it will play out is true. However I think gold is the only place to be. I am totally with the Saudi's. I have no need for digital or paper futures of any kind.

Like Another said "For during no period of history has an entity used a commodity to corner another commodity!"

Now I know oil is a finite commodity but gold?

Anonymous said...

I am being long winded.

We can argue and pick nits about
Freeogld theory. But it is a "guess scenario".

You and me will have no input. And the end game is already determined I think.

so I think Another's timely advice, in light of world events, survives.

Anonymous said...

I do not presume to have a handle on knowledge beyond my own. Another shared a viewpont that was actually very simple.

And I think the simplicity was the aim.

Be it Freegold. That actually is the most just system. But at this point I do not count on "just and fair".

But Freegold accomplishes a reset that is ultimately "fair". So, inetellects can argue this and that a the world currencies burn; we can argue about the "code" in programs. But the only "code" is the viewpoint of what is wealth that cannot be wiped out by a planned crash.

Inellectual arguments will not suffice.

We can backstab. Look for clues that lead up blind alleys. Ultimately what will occur will happen without any input from me and you. The game is already over.

What is left is the timeline involved in finding a seat at the end game poker table.

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

FG Update concerning Cyprus:
IMHO the whole Cyprus storry finally debunked Euro(Free)gold completely.
In order to understand what I mean by that, reread

Now compare this to, what is the EU(ro)-message of Cyprus? The only message I read in Cyprus is:

"We are the godfathers. We are "doing gods business" just like our boss told you before, and have covered all bases. We do not f*cking care about property rights. Neither do we care about souvereign governments and rights. We do not care about logic. We do not care about the market. We do whatever us pleases to do and we do it at random.
We the godfathers will protect whoever has faith in us and is holding our bonds. In order to do so, we will screw, rob, steal and tax whomever we feel usefull and where we think we can grap something".

That my friends, is the one and only message send by the EU idiocracy.

And to all the confirmation biased and around five corner wishful thinking people, let me tell you one think: This is 100% against gold, not for gold.

I like to repeat an earlier statement of mine (deleted by FOFOA), on how value is given to fiat: You give fiat value by stealing it from the productive.

Just think of it: If all private savers are robbed by 10% of there currency holdings in there deposits and the robbing goes into the black hole of worldwide financial. How much is your gold worth any longer? It has just lost 10%.
On the other hand how much is your paper cash you have taken out of the bank before the robbing is now worth afterwards? It has just rissen 10%.
Simple as that.
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

Arrr ... AD, bits of that, I don't follow.

Regarding your 10% percentages, I think you're wrong ... quantity of units of currency has not changed - just changed hands ... therefore ratio of gold:currency remains unchanged (in that isolated scenario).

But absolutely the ratio of 'purchasing power held by individuals before:after' does change ... i.e. balance of claims held against your goods and labor shifts.

Win for the banking system and everyone feeding from it, loss for the common man (yawn, same as last year and the year before that).

I will later check to see if it debunks his article, apologies no time current. but do you agree with the claims stuff and currency units?

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

"quantity of units of currency has not changed"
hmmm.... I think it does, because somebodies debt will probably been settled after the robbery with that loot (bank, state, CB...?).

Who needs gold anyway? The new debt extinquisher: Robbery! ;)

On the other hand: Does it really matter where the currency units went anyway? Potential buyers (and all the holders of gold among those) dont have it any longer, that's the only thing that matters.

Besides that, right now the discussion is to maybe seize Cyprus CB gold. Where will that go (at what price)? I doubt it, that it can go in stronger hands than those of a central bank?
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

Yes fully agree - who needs precious metals when you can just take from those who have what you need. It's a good gig.

I think it does matter where the currency units end up because at some level it is a closed system.

I guess this is the point though, the men in charge have really good data on how much is where and when it is. The lever pulling is down to a fine art. And when they lose, cheat! Another good gig.

I haven't paid much attention to the Cyrpus thing ... thought it was a bit of a storm in a teacup despite the many words written about it. The telling factor will be whether in 3 months time people are still talking about it ... I don't think they will be, that's about the average attention span I think. Cheers -

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

absolutely, Cyprus itself does not really matter, that was not really my point.
What I wanted to say is, that the proposals offered by the puppet masters point exactly into the opposite direction of Euro-Freegold. It fits into the long list of counter evidence of Euro(Free)Gold.
That's basically all I'm saying.

So what lesson have I learnt? Dont have your money in a checking account at 0.x% if you want to keep it, have it in paper cash under your mattress (or in form of silver 10Euro-coins). That's the one and only lesson to be learnt. And a message to the 100%-All-In-Goldbugs: Try to buy something with your useless yellow stones in Cyprus.
Greets, AD

Anonymous said...

Advocatus Diaboli,

I note your frustration over the failure to get a good debate going at Fofoa's site (which I incidentally share). In defence of the Fofoa crew, the notable Motley Fool is cooperating with my attempt at forensically deconstructing all its fallacies (well some of them) in a long dialogue. He is fighting it hard but is in fact answering the questions. It is at Meanwhile one Erebus is having a more erudite but also more parallel discussion at NeuralNetWriter. This debate is in fact now opening up and being held in neutral venues.

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

Regarding the latest FOFOA post:

A nice theory, really nice, and if you completely ignore reality it almost fits perfectly. But now let's take a look at reality:

What are the biggest positions in terms of stream regarding outflow of FOFOA "subterrean stream"? And how did those develop over time? Jewelry!!!

So before singing the song of "la-la-giants" paying multiplies, so a stupid thesis adds up, I suggest to look at the open FACTS!

I dont know on how to judge about a "women decoration commodity", but the numbers are clear: That position is a much bigger stream than this GLD interpretation stuff (regardless if valid or not).
Greets, AD