Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

He uses the gold ban as precedent. The US didn't outlaw private gold ownership because gold was competing with the dollar.

It outlawed gold ownership because the dollar was backed by gold, the Fed wanted to print more dollars to stimulate the economy, and at the time it could only do that if it had enough gold to back those dollars. They were running out of gold so they confiscated it from regular people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102#Rationale



I'm amazed I've never heard about this. If I lived then and was going to have my gold confiscated, I don't think I'd be able to avoid going full killdozer.


They did at least pay people, if they surrendered it in time. (Then they raised the price of gold afterwards.)

Come to think of it, that's another difference from "outlawing Bitcoin."


> They did at least pay people, if they surrendered it in time. (Then they raised the price of gold afterwards.)

Wouldn't it be unconstitutional for them to seize and not pay for it? Though they probably just paid face value in paper money.


Yeah seems to me it'd violate the Fifth Amendment.

Since the dollar was backed at $20 per ounce of gold, that's what they paid. Then they changed it to $35/oz.


The 1% are still pretty pissed about it - nearly 100 years later. If you're an American then I am surprised/concerned you never heard about this in history class.


Yeah, I am concerned on that same point as well. I had spent a lot of time reading about various historical events both in school and outside of it, so it's surprising that I never encountered this.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: