I have already written, if we are talking about a real gold standard - this scheme will not work, for a banal reason - there are no mechanisms to verify the real gold reserves of the holding countries.
Of course there are
they are called audits
If you say, gold standard can't work today, it's your opinion.
I disagree, but I respect it.
If you say, gold standard was abandoned because it didn't work, that's factually false.
Gold standard was abandoned not because it didn't work.
It worked very well.
It was a political decision.
The US gov needed money in order to keep throwing bombs on the Vietnamese
With all due respect, I can't agree

Or let's discuss what would be more productive and interesting !
1. audit - where can we read the results of the audit of state gold reserves in China, Russia, Iran, and let it be Germany ?
I will answer in advance, from my side - there is no such data. There are only official statements, but not the audit.
2. With the gold standard not everything is so simple.... The gold standard worked well in times before the 20th century. By the second half gold became not the most convenient measure of value, for many, both subjective and objective reasons (we can discuss).
And most countries have embraced the idea of changing the asset to measure value. No, they were not forced or coerced, they accepted the idea themselves because of the lack of others and the inconvenience of the "gold standard".
And after that gold became not a measure of price, but a commodity, the price of which was regulated by the market, including speculative actions. That is why the time of stability and low volatility ended, and from about 60s gold as a commodity started market price rally. That is what we are witnessing now. The key point is that gold ceased to be a currency or a measure of price and became a commodity.
I'm ready to hear your opinion !
PS the US changed the gold standard to bomb Vietnam ? ! I have heard many "interesting" versions, but this is new

Ok - then it turns out that gold was necessary for example Gaddafi - to destroy the opposition. Russia - for international terror, and China - well, let it be for the seizure of Taiwan ? Or maybe the U.S. needed money to weaken the USSR, which in Vietnam did not organize a nuclear and biological war and did not destroy Mexico and then the whole world ?

My THEORY also has a right to life, and a logical statement ! Or ?
Let's not use dubious PROPOSALS ? We are intelligent adults, aren't we ?
When a problem is solved by "assigning a single culprit" because "it's convenient" or "it's the way you like it" - it usually indicates some bias in the solution, or a search for a "convenient answer". Yes, I recognize that the U.S. has been both more cunning and smarter and more nimble than others. But it also suggests that the rest of the world was dumber, less resourceful and unconvincing against the US. Let's not confuse PREFERENCES with AWESOMENESS or PERSONAL INFLUENCE, and assess the situation objectively.
It is more interesting that way, and what is important - you can find a logical and truthful explanation of the situation
