That's all fine and dandy, but also IMO it's entirely possible that the US cannot deliver their gold if these countries (and/or others) wanted it back.
Just look at what happened when Venezuela wanted their gold back. It took ages and that was a relatively tiny amount.
It's extremely naive for many EU countries to still believe that they "have" "their" gold stored in the US. And even more naive to not try and get it back.
The entire US banking and financial system relies on NOT delivering or owning the underlying (fractional reserve banking, federal reserve printing money out of thin air, failures to deliver every single day on everything from stocks to government bonds, failing CDS'es and so on).
> The entire US banking and financial system relies on NOT delivering or owning the underlying (fractional reserve banking, federal reserve printing money out of thin air
This is sadly a very common misunderstanding of how money is created inside the financial system, even by professional economists and financial advisers. In reality money is not valued at parity with some physical material but as a simple act of accounting [0,1,2,3,4].
Historically a currency (subset) has been pegged against rare minerals as a method of insurance against state or exchange rate instability, the flip side is that this restricts state spending and economic growth -- a growing economy needs a growing stock of currency to service loans and avoid debt driven deflation, as in e.g. the great depression [5,6,7].
This is why gold/silver standards are always episodic in world history [8].
Even in the fien-de-secle gold standard era the majority of currency in circulation had its origin in endogenous bank lending [9].
The typical stability and viability of a currency is from the fact that it can be used to procure real goods in the wider market, which in turn is because money contracts are legally enforced via social power relations, e.g. by a local government with the power make and enforce such rules. Incidentally this is why cryptocurrencies act as an investment asset and not as a currency, it lacks the enforcement component and it appreciates in value, which is never what you want for a currency [10].
You addressed only 1 of my example points and your post doesn't explain how USD is not essentially "printed" (digitally) out of thin air (or I'm too dumb to read which is entirely possible).
Look up the meaning of "failures to deliver" in the stock market. In short: it means stocks sold by market makers and never delivered. AKA: they take your money when you buy a stock, it appears in your account, but they didn't actually deliver anything.
Then look up how many of those happen daily in any US stock.
Or read up here: Naked, Short and Greedy: Wall Street's Failure to Deliver by Susanne Trimbath
It really doesn’t. The Federal Reserve’s gold vault is in New York, not Fort Knox, and it’s separate from the U.S. Treasury’s holdings. This thread started about foreign gold held at the Fed, Germany and Italy’s reserves, not U.S. sovereign gold in Kentucky. Mixing those up is like arguing about your neighbor’s bank account while waving around your mattress stash. Different institutions, different controls, different issues.
Or while you are at it provide some evidence to your conspiracy theory.
Just look at what happened when Venezuela wanted their gold back. It took ages and that was a relatively tiny amount.
It's extremely naive for many EU countries to still believe that they "have" "their" gold stored in the US. And even more naive to not try and get it back.
The entire US banking and financial system relies on NOT delivering or owning the underlying (fractional reserve banking, federal reserve printing money out of thin air, failures to deliver every single day on everything from stocks to government bonds, failing CDS'es and so on).