Buying Gold Coins Before 1975 0

[GoldFinger1969]

From an article by Burton Blumert, a prominent silver/gold bug of the 1960's and 1970'd.  He talks a bit about how it was getting pre-1933 gold coins.  

Hard to believe that collectors and everyday folks who just wanted a gold coin had to go through all this .  WTF happened to the 5-coin examption, huh ?

Appears it was MUCH tougher to buy the coins before 1963 than later in the decade and the early-1970's.  I recall that Paramount Coins (later with David Akers) was importing lots of Saints and gold coins from Europe in the 1960's.  But before then all those hoards in the 1940's and 1950's must have had lots of hoops to jump through.

I believe Leland Howard, the clown at the center of the 1933 Double Eagle fiasco, was still dictating gold import policies in the 1960's some 30 years later !!   

 

"....And by 1971 most Americans had little first-hand memory of gold. The Depression and WW II were indelibly imprinted on their psyches and if they thought about gold at all, it was as a murky link to the hard times of the 1930s. Silver was a different story. The dimes, quarters, and half dollars minted almost continually from 1796 through 1964 were 90% silver. Most folks simply took it for granted that the coinage was silver.

Not one in a thousand reflected that one dollar’s face value in silver coins contained 72 parts of a pure ounce and that at $1.29 an ounce, the price fixed by the Treasury Department, the intrinsic value was precisely one dollar. This magnificent reality went unnoticed.

That all came to an end several months after JFK’s death in 1963.The new “LBJ” non-silver, 10 and 25-cent sandwich coinage appeared on the scene amidst a barrage of propaganda.

The experts said the “sandwiches” would circulate side-by-side with the silver coins for eternity. Speculator-hoarders would find slim profit in pulling the silver coinage from circulation. This obvious deceit provided me with early evidence that public opinion was being manipulated and the manipulators knew the truth.

Shortly thereafter the US Treasury announced that August 16, 1968, would be the last day to redeem the $1, $5 and $10 silver certificates. In effect, the government had created an expiring option, and as the days passed, silver’s time as money was passing as well. The silver coinage quickly disappeared, of course.

Your local coin shop was the place where you purchased or sold silver coinage, or liquidated your silver certificates. This activity honed the coin industry for the onslaught that was to soon follow in the gold market.

In 1962 US Treasury Department policy toward gold ownership was little changed since 1933. Gold for jewelry was legal. Gold coins dated 1932 and older could be legally held, but ONLY if physically in the US and as collectibles, not investments. All gold imports were forbidden, except by special license which was rarely granted.

So, a US $20 St. Gaudens gold piece was available in Switzerland for US $50, but, due to a shortage of supply in the US, it was worth $60 plus.

Hmmm…US gold coins minted prior to 1933 were legal if already here? You couldn’t legally bring them in. But, if you were able to get them here, there was a nice profit. Interesting. Sounds like an invitation to the bootlegger.

My company, Camino Coin, was founded in 1959. Although our primary business was numismatics, we soon were deeply involved in buying and selling precious metals. In Europe, these services were provided by banks.

US government policy was harsh, and the gold coin bootleggers reign existed through the early 1960s. The process was simple: the bootlegger purchased the US gold coins in Europe where most of them had resided since 1933, and had them shipped to Canada. So far, everything was legal. Getting the gold safely across the border was the problem.

Treasury Department enforcement against the smugglers was sporadic. Most of the gold coins arrived safely, but occasionally the feds would “send a message to the coin community” by making midnight raids and confiscating gold as if they were dealing with dangerous drugs.

In one instance, I saw the process close up. A smuggler carried gold coins from Canada to the state of Washington, packaged them, and mailed the parcel from a Seattle post office to a US dealer. (This fellow was selling them to me.) When the dealer’s sister sought to pick them up at her California post office, the Secret Service confiscated the coins.

The dealer, desperate to recover his merchandise, argued that since the coins were mailed from Seattle, they were physically in the US, thereby not subject to confiscation. The government held that these coins were never “here,” but rather in transit from Canada, hence, contraband. The case finally went to a US Circuit Court and the government prevailed.

Near the end of JFK’s presidency, the Treasury Department modified its restrictions on gold coins minted 1932 and earlier. US and foreign coinage could now be legally imported by Americans. This led to an avalanche of European gold coins like the British Sovereign, the French and Swiss 20 Franc, and all the American gold coins coming into the US.

In 1973, with the government in disarray, and a president near impeachment, a small but energetic movement to eliminate all remaining restrictions on gold ownership won a shocking victory and for the first time in over 40 years, Americans could freely own and trade gold without restriction.

The late, great coin dealer and conference entrepreneur James U. Blanchard III was the main force behind the struggle.

For the first time since 1932 gold coins, bars, and gold certificates could be freely imported. Items that, prior to January 1, 1974, were almost as dangerous to handle as heroin were part of everyday commerce.

But it took a while for a dealer to hold a Krugerrand or a Credit Suisse gold kilo bar in his hand without looking over his shoulder to see if a Secret Service agent was lurking in the shadows."

[Moxie15]

On 1/13/2024 at 10:44 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

 

Treasury Department enforcement against the smugglers was sporadic. Most of the gold coins arrived safely, but occasionally the feds would “send a message to the coin community” by making midnight raids and confiscating gold as if they were dealing with dangerous drugs.

 

The Government is not always logical, especially when viewed in hindsight. For a long time it was illegal in California to own, possess, or transport into or through the state Meyers lemons fruit, trees, seeds, or products thereof. Offence of these laws or statutes carried penalties often greater than doing the same thing with marijuana. 

[VKurtB]

On 1/13/2024 at 11:15 AM, Moxie15 said:

The Government is not always logical, especially when viewed in hindsight. For a long time it was illegal in California to own, possess, or transport into or through the state Meyers lemons fruit, trees, seeds, or products thereof. Offence of these laws or statutes carried penalties often greater than doing the same thing with marijuana. 

And when you drove over the Arizona state line, your vehicle could be searched for "agricultural contraband" which included citrus. I was in college in 1973-1977. Not having the ability to own gold just feels "right" to me, and it always has.

Edited January 13 by VKurtB

[RWB]

On 1/13/2024 at 10:44 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Burton Blumert, a prominent silver/gold bug of the 1960's and 1970'd.

He was also a pernicious liar and fraud. Much of the quoted section is invention and distortion, and the rest is false. He and his ilk sold emotional trauma and insecurity; the same breed of honesty thug proliferate on-line and in phony "news" sites.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/13/2024 at 2:38 PM, RWB said:

He was also a pernicious liar and fraud. Much of the quoted section is invention and distortion, and the rest is false. He and his ilk sold emotional trauma and insecurity; the same breed of honesty thug proliferate on-line and in phony "news" sites.

Like I said, he WAS a gold bug !! 

Did you ever meet him ?

What part(s) of the column are definitively false/misleading, in your opinion ?  Some of the experiences he relates seem to be his personal situation so it's tough to doubt him.  The rest seems consistent with U.S. gold policy until the law was changed on December 31, 1974.

Edited January 14 by GoldFinger1969

[zadok]

On 1/14/2024 at 10:29 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Like I said, he WAS a gold bug !! 

Did you ever meet him ?

What part(s) of the column are definitively false/misleading, in your opinion ?  Some of the experiences he relates seem to be his personal situation so it's tough to doubt him.  The rest seems consistent with U.S. gold policy until the law was changed on December 31, 1974.

...there was nothing misleading in that particular column, it was mostly reflections n comments, but u always need to ask urself what is the underlying reason for any column...just as u need to ask urself why certain individuals always need to take negative swipes at everyone else besides themselves...we all know the answer, but u need to keep reminding urself of the reasons....

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/15/2024 at 9:39 AM, zadok said:

...there was nothing misleading in that particular column, it was mostly reflections n comments, but u always need to ask urself what is the underlying reason for any column...just as u need to ask urself why certain individuals always need to take negative swipes at everyone else besides themselves...we all know the answer, but u need to keep reminding urself of the reasons....

Oh, I have no illusions based on his economic and political philosophies.....hyperbole tends to be the gold bugs stock-in-trade.  I see them on other forums and while they are nice people, they cry about banking cartels and control of the Fed etc. etc. etc. 

Blumert did write some good post-bubble stuff after the markets imploded in 1980 and 1990.

As far as their concerns about government spending or the prohibition against gold ownership -- I'm right there with them.  But on implementation of a gold standard or getting rid of banks or the Fed or BitCoin or digital currencies replacing sales and income taxes.....

 

Edited January 15 by GoldFinger1969

[dcarr]

On 1/15/2024 at 11:03 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Oh, I have no illusions based on his economic and political philosophies.....hyperbole tends to be the gold bugs stock-in-trade.  I see them on other forums and while they are nice people, they cry about banking cartels and control of the Fed etc. etc. etc. 

Blumert did write some good post-bubble stuff after the markets imploded in 1980 and 1990.

As far as their concerns about government spending or the prohibition against gold ownership -- I'm right there with them.  But on implementation of a gold standard or getting rid of banks or the Fed or BitCoin or digital currencies replacing sales and income taxes.....

 

You make your living with the financial and monetary systems the way they are now. So naturally you would feel threatened by any major change to how these systems work. There are far better (and more equitable) ways for these things to function, but you would have none of it.

Edited January 15 by dcarr

[Zebo]

On 1/15/2024 at 6:43 PM, dcarr said:

You make your living with the financial and monetary systems the way they are now. So naturally you would feel threatened by any major change to how these systems work. There are far better (and more equitable) ways for these things to function, but you would have none of it.

Such as?

[dcarr]

On 1/15/2024 at 5:49 PM, Zebo said:

Such as?

For example a digital currency issued by the US Treasury. Use of this currency would have a small transaction fee (like a credit card) and those fees would replace the income tax system. Imagine never having to file a tax return again.

Prior to about 1913 there was no income tax. The Federal Government was funded via small fees on bank checks, insurance policies, stocks, bonds, and other financial documents. It worked well, but the banks and Wall Street were successful at taking the tax collection off of themselves and put it onto the general public instead.

North Dakota has the right idea. They established a state-run bank for the benefit of the people, and proceeds from those bank activities go towards paying the state's bills.

 

Edited January 16 by dcarr

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/15/2024 at 6:43 PM, dcarr said:

You make your living with the financial and monetary systems the way they are now. So naturally you would feel threatened by any major change to how these systems work. There are far better (and more equitable) ways for these things to function, but you would have none of it.

Right, a system that works 99.9% well for the majority of Americans is good enough for me.   I don't want to walk off a cliff and hope that unlike Wile E. Coyote I stay elevated on pie-in-the-sky promises that might look good on paper but don't work in the real world.

Most Americans have their assets and make their living within "the financial and monetary system the way they are now."   That includes YOU, Dcarr !! 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/15/2024 at 10:29 PM, dcarr said:

For example a digital currency issued by the US Treasury. Use of this currency would have a small transaction fee (like a credit card) and those fees would replace the income tax system. Imagine never having to file a tax return again.

Coinage and currency are part of a country's history.  You would end this.  A digital currency also has NO privacy.

On 1/15/2024 at 10:29 PM, dcarr said:

Prior to about 1913 there was no income tax. The Federal Government was funded via small fees on bank checks, insurance policies, stocks, bonds, and other financial documents. It worked well, but the banks and Wall Street were successful at taking the tax collection off of themselves and put it onto the general public instead.

Most of the revenues came from tariffs.  The other taxes you cite were practically nonexistent.  You want us to believe that banks and Wall Street were behind the implentation of the 16th Amendment ?  Please.......

In fact, the backers of the 16th Amendment were largely agrarian populists, Westerners, and farmers....the William Jennings Bryan crowd...and it was opposed by the East Coast bankers and Wall Street.

On 1/15/2024 at 10:29 PM, dcarr said:

North Dakota has the right idea. They established a state-run bank for the benefit of the people, and proceeds from those bank activities go towards paying the state's bills.

It's a tiny bank that would rank about 500th or so nationwide.  It represents a low-density state...largley farming and mining.....with no major urban areas....a profile that would not work in more than another 10 states, tops, if that.  It has only 1 or 2 branches...very limited products for consumers....and pays very low rates of interest historically.

No different than Alaska setting up the Permanent Fund with oil revenues.  And North Dakota probably has common-sense individuals ACROSS the political spectrum and the dominant party and sentiment there probably skews to common sense and an understanding of banking, finance, and economics.  That won't work in New York City or even NY State.  

Most large cities and states are de facto banks by their huge flotations of bonds and other municipal financing mechanisms.  Many are headed for a day of reckoning, too.  Imagine the problems they'd get into running a bank.....DSA members ?  Socialists ?  Redistributionists ?  

I smell another Teamsters CSPF moment ! 

Edited January 16 by GoldFinger1969

[dcarr]

On 1/16/2024 at 7:48 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Right, a system that works 99.9% well for the majority of Americans is good enough for me.   I don't want to walk off a cliff and hope that unlike Wile E. Coyote I stay elevated on pie-in-the-sky promises that might look good on paper but don't work in the real world.

Most Americans have their assets and make their living within "the financial and monetary system the way they are now."   That includes YOU, Dcarr !! 

Biden wants to hire 87,000 IRS agents. They would produce nothing useful, they would only take from the economy. If a transaction-fee digital currency was in place, the tax system would be fair, simple, and there would be no cheating. Most of the IRS would no longer be needed. Those 87,000 IRS agents would have to get jobs elsewhere actually producing useful goods and services. And everyone else would benefit from not having to fill out tax forms.

That would be a much better system. But you sound scared of such a thing.

[dcarr]

On 1/16/2024 at 7:58 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Coinage and currency are part of a country's history.  You would end this.  A digital currency also has NO privacy.

Most of the revenues came from tariffs.  The other taxes you cite were practically nonexistent.  You want us to believe that banks and Wall Street were behind the implentation of the 16th Amendment ?  Please.......

In fact, the backers of the 16th Amendment were largely agrarian populists, Westerners, and farmers....the William Jennings Bryan crowd...and it was opposed by the East Coast bankers and Wall Street.

It's a tiny bank that would rank about 500th or so nationwide.  It represents a low-density state...largley farming and mining.....with no major urban areas....a profile that would not work in more than another 10 states, tops, if that.  It has only 1 or 2 branches...very limited products for consumers....and pays very low rates of interest historically.

No different than Alaska setting up the Permanent Fund with oil revenues.  And North Dakota probably has common-sense individuals ACROSS the political spectrum and the dominant party and sentiment there probably skews to common sense and an understanding of banking, finance, and economics.  That won't work in New York City or even NY State.  

Most large cities and states are de facto banks by their huge flotations of bonds and other municipal financing mechanisms.  Many are headed for a day of reckoning, too.  Imagine the problems they'd get into running a bank.....DSA members ?  Socialists ?  Redistributionists ?  

I smell another Teamsters CSPF moment ! 

The US Mint could still make silver and gold eagles.

Here is a bank check with a 2-cent Internal Revenue tax stamp on it. Banks didn't like this system, but it did work and it was fair. This type of tax arrangement raised revenue from people and entities that did more banking, more investing, and were wealthier. Poorer people would not have been opposed to this tax system because it didn't affect them that much. Your contention regarding the support for the 16th amendment is flawed.

Every state should follow North Dakota's lead. Such a thing could be scaled much larger. Why are you so against nationalized banking ? Because that doesn't line your pockets ?

As Shakespear wrote: "me thinks thou doth protest too much !"

 

Edited January 16 by dcarr

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/16/2024 at 11:42 AM, dcarr said:

Biden wants to hire 87,000 IRS agents. They would produce nothing useful, they would only take from the economy. If a transaction-fee digital currency was in place, the tax system would be fair, simple, and there would be no cheating. Most of the IRS would no longer be needed. Those 87,000 IRS agents would have to get jobs elsewhere actually producing useful goods and services. And everyone else would benefit from not having to fill out tax forms. That would be a much better system. But you sound scared of such a thing.

We don't need more IRS agents.  We're still using systems built in the 1980's.  They need to upgrade and implement AI.

Every other private corporation downsizes and has people to shed because of increased efficiency -- but NOT the Federal, State, or Local governments.  I'm sure unions have nothing to do with it !! 

There are hundreds of billions of lost tax revenues from increased audit efficiency....going after tax cheats....hitting the underground economy.

I might be OK with a national consumtion/sales/VAT tax....IF it were limited to a number that was very low and required a supermajority of both Houses to raise.  Maybe cut/eliminate other taxes as an offset.  Sales and income taxes started low....now they are obscene (i.e., CA and NYS).