Bob Prange writes:

Nearly all of my investment capital is now devoted to gold equities and
some physical. I have taken this road of greater risk because I believe
that gold is, first and foremost, money; that gold is, or should and
will be, a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of account.

To my mind, the primary focus of the GATA movement must first force this
issue relentlessly: IS GOLD MONEY? I have expressed in the past that if
gold is a mere commodity, then more than is needed is above ground, and
surely its price must collapse.

However, if gold is indeed, first and foremost, money, then it is
severely underpriced as a representation or bellwether of currency, and
its price must soar. I believe that, for maximum effectiveness, GATA
must first eliminate all of the gray area from this issue.

Central and national banks must not be allowed to continue the
manipulation of gold simply because of nebulous definition.

Let them admit out of their practice that, "yes, gold is for us not
money but a commodity which we happen to have held from days of old, to
be used occasionally as a 'reserve' and occasionally as a simple
deposit." Once this is out in the open, the truth of my primary focus,
namely the hypothesis that GOLD IS MONEY, may be determined.

In my opinion, if GATA treats the manipulation as a 'commodity' rather
than GOLD IS MONEY issue, even the best of cases will be tied up in
legalities, and the ultimate morality (or ethics) may never be
determined. As for the value of gold, that, too, may be lost to us.