stolwyk - here's that article, page-2

I read this and thought it was simple Whittaker.

"Gold is often touted as a “store of value”, but most would be hard- pressed to deflne what that term means.

If a massive crisis came along, items such as antibiotics and long- life milk may be just as good a “store of value” as bullion. They will tell you how useful it will be when times get tough. But if we suffered a nuclear war and the country was devastated, how far would a starving group of people let a person get who tried to cash in a gold bar?
"

But if you had some long life milk but needed some vegies or starve, you are just as far up the creek as everyone else.

But if I had some one third oz silver coins would you not do a trade? The guy with the vegie patch would accect them and buy some petrol to run his rotary hoe with.

Silver and gold have maintained purchasing power for millenia. Fiat currency loses 95% of face value in a century.

"Things" (or commodities) maintain relative value, for sure, but Au/Ag are the only commodities which will be accepted a currency WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS!!!! To speak of shells replacing fiat currency is total BS because they could only ever have had value by fiat, and only in societies without the technology to print paper.

If Whittaker with his store of drugs wants to eat, what does he do? He barters his stash. But What if the guy with the vegies is in good health? I give Wittaker some otherwise useless one third oz silver coins so I can heal my sick wife. He then gives these round 50c coins to the market gardner and avoids starvation. The gardner, of course needs these coins to buy petrol for his rotary hoe from the local servo who knows a dozen gardners, none of whom own a tanker of petrol.

Precious metals will always be the currency of last resort. Whittaker's claim to fame is that he wrote about the Power Of Compounding in a clear and simple manner. For that he deserves credit but when looking for a guru, I will look further.