Fiat Currency Debasement Driving Central Banks to Gold -

Happy 4th of July and welcome to this week’s Market Wrap Podcast, I’m Mike Gleason.
Coming up don’t miss a wonderful interview with Larry Reed, President Emeritus at the <a href="https://fee.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Foundation for Economic Education or FEE</a>. Larry is a terrific historian and the author of several books and shares with us some fascinating history on the origins of sound money in this country, a fitting topic here given the celebration of our nation’s founding this weekend.
Larry and Mike Maharrey discuss why the founding fathers were so skeptical of paper money and how our country’s move away from a gold backed currency has completely eroded the purchasing power of our money – the type of thing the founders were specifically afraid of. Larry also shares an interesting story about how gold played a very key role in the famous Battle of Yorktown in 1781, which proved to be a pivotal turning point in the Revolutionary War.
So, be sure to stick around for an interesting and enlightening interview with Larry Reed from the Foundation for Economic Education, coming up after this week’s market update.
Well, during this holiday shortened week the metals are having decent success. Gold is up about $60 or 1.7% to come in at $3,342 an ounce. Turning to silver, the white metal is performing slightly better, up nearly 90 cents or 2.4% to check in at $37.05.
As for the PGMs, platinum again is falling off a bit here late in the week, just like it did a week ago, but, like last week, is still in positive territory despite giving back some of the early week gains. The industrial metal currently trades at $1,389, good for a 2.7% weekly advance. Palladium meanwhile is also giving back some gains from the first half of the week and is up just 0.5% since last Friday’s close to come in at $1,163 an ounce as of this Thursday afternoon recording.
Meanwhile, there's been more talk about the weak dollar in recent weeks, given it has already slid 10% lower this year when compared to other fiat currencies.
In fact, we've seen the biggest dollar decline through the first half of any year since 1973. That was just two years after President Richard Nixon severed the last tie between the dollar and gold.
Lots more financial powers seem to be catching on to the trend, and taking action. Swiss investment bank UBS just said it is time to “reduce and hedge exposure to USD before further dollar declines.”
UBS analysts say they expect further dollar weakness, and the U.S. economy to slow, and the firm worries about the rapidly deteriorating fiscal situation in Washington, D.C.
Meanwhile, Bloomberg recently reported that many exporters “no longer want dollars,” explaining that foreign vendors are asking U.S. importers to settle invoices in euros, pesos, and yuan to avoid currency swings.
But UBS forgot, meaning they left out, the most stable currency in its analysis – gold.
Frequent Money Metals podcast guest Frank Holmes didn't forget. The Chief Investment Officer for <a href="https://www.usfunds.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">U.S. Global Investors</a> just called gold the “preferred reserve asset,” pointing out that “one of the surest beneficiaries of the dollar’s weakness has been gold.”
In fact, <a href="https://www.moneymetals.com/news/2025/06/13/gold-overtakes-euro-as-second-largest-global-reserve-asset-004124">gold recently moved ahead of the euro</a> as the second-largest reserve asset. But it’s not so much that central banks are trading in gold for euros. The EU currency’s share of global reserves has remained relatively steady.
But what's happening is they are swapping dollars for gold, making last year the third-largest expansion of central bank gold reserves on record. And strong buying has continued here in 2025.
Holmes says investors "should think carefully about how exposed their portfolios are to a single currency.”
He’s right.
Even a modest de-dollarization of the global economy could be a disaster for the United States.
The U.S. depends on this global demand for dollars supported by its reserve status to underpin its massive government. The only reason Uncle Sam can borrow, spend, and run massive budget deficits to the extent that it does is the dollar’s role as the world's reserve currency. It creates a built-in global demand for dollars and dollar-denominated assets. This absorbs the Federal Reserve’s money creation and helps maintain dollar strength despite the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies.
So, if the world no longer needs dollars, who will absorb the inflation?
American consumers.
To be clear, it doesn't take an outright currency collapse for there to be problems. A partial de-dollarization of the world economy would cause a dollar glut, and the value of the U.S. currency would further depreciate. That translates to more price inflation at home.
In other news, Money Metals' national effort to remove sales taxes from gold and silver have borne more fruit in recent days.
Florida governor Ron Desantis just signed a bill which removes the arbitrary $500 purchase minimum for Floridians to qualify for sales tax exemptions on gold and silver — with that new law taking effect in August.
At the same time, governors in Virginia and Connecticut signed bills which enact full exemptions on precious metals purchases in those states.
As it stands, the tally of states with precious metals sales tax exemptions is now up to 45… and that number would have been 46 if Maryland's legislature and governor hadn't just canceled out the partial exemption that had long been on the books there. Sadly, all purchases of sound money in Maryland are now socked with a sales tax.
Meanwhile, the sales tax exemption in Washington State is scheduled to terminate at the end of the year, barring an intervention.
Like every freedom we enjoy, Americans can't take for granted the freedom to protect their purchasing power in gold and silver without paying a financial penalty to the government.
Money Metals' legislative team is working to protect and defend sound money policies all across America… and with your ongoing support of our company, we will continue to do so.
After all, vigilance is required to protect and defend ANY right — and the forces of tyranny remain a clear and present danger to all of us.
Not coincidentally, our guest this week has a lot to say on this very subject, so let's move right now to our special 4th of July interview.
<div class="pl-3"><img class="mx-auto md:float-right p-3" src="https://www.moneymetals.com/uploads/content/mike-maharrey-and-dr-vieira-podcast-img.jpg" alt="Mike Maharrey and Larry Reed" width="450" height="180" loading="lazy" />
Mike Maharrey: Greetings. I'm Mike Maharrey, a reporter and analyst here at Money Metals, and I'm very excited to be joined today by Larry Reed. He's the President emeritus of the Foundation for Economic Education, better known as FEE, and he's the Humphrey's Family Senior Fellow. He's the author of several books, a phenomenal historian and all around great guy. How you doing, Larry?
Larry Reed: Hey, just terrific, Mike. Thank you so much for having me.
Mike Maharrey: Well, it's really a pleasure to have you on, and I think it's kind of cool. You're well versed in history, and as this is being aired, it's the 4th of July, so we're celebrating America's independence. And of course that's got people thinking a lot about the founding fathers. And I was looking at some old articles that I'd written, and I ran across a quote by Thomas Paine that I really, really liked. He said, “Money is money and paper is paper. All the invention of man cannot make it otherwise.” Paine, he was pretty strong in his disdain for paper money, but he wasn't alone. A lot of the founding generation was what kind of drove this skepticism as America's forming into a republic of paper money.
Larry Reed: Well, Americans understood as much of the world did that historically, the forms of money that have served us best were based in precious metals, gold or silver. And so when governments came along and said, here, take this paper instead, we were instantly skeptical and we'd had some experiences and we knew of the experiences of other countries with unbacked irredeemable or invertible paper money. And so we didn't really in those early days of America want to have anything to do with it. And yet Congress experimented with it anyway to help pay for the war against Great Britain.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, and didn't the British use that paper money as a weapon against the us? I was reading not too long ago about the Brits actually counterfeiting the Continentals and kind of flooding the market to try to devalue the money even more, not that they even needed to help.
Larry Reed: Yeah, the British absolutely used paper money as a weapon of war. I've written about this very recently, a British ship called the Phoenix was stationed off of New York Harbor, and very early in the war, while Congress was printing paper, continental dollars, which were depreciating rapidly, Britain ordered the Phoenix to do the same, to counterfeit and print more paper and try to flood the American economy with it. And Britain also had its counterfeiters based on land within the 13 states. So they were very knowledgeable over there in London that you can ruin an economy if you ruin the money. And so, it was a weapon of war from the standpoint of the Brits.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah. Now we've outsourced the money creation to the Federal Reserve. We do it ourselves. But one of the articles that we've got printed that you've written, and it's over at moneymetals.com/news, was about how sound money actually helped win the Battle of Yorktown and turn the tide of the war. Can you kind of share how that went down? I think people would be fascinated by that.
Larry Reed: Yes, it is a remarkable story. Well, the War with Great Britain actually broke out in 1775. Americans who remember the history know that the Battle of Bunker Hill was in June of 1775. The Declaration of Independence didn't come out until July of 1776. We were already at war for a year and to pay for that Congress, which didn't yet have the power to tax, decided to plead with the states to send money, but also to print paper Continental dollars. And we have an old phrase in American history called “not worth a Continental,” which tells you a lot in fact about what ultimately happened to this paper money. At first, the Congress said, well, we'll just print up a few million dollars-worth, and they put Ben Franklin in charge of the printing press. But after the first year, they said, well, we need more. And ultimately they printed hundreds of millions of paper dollars was depreciated rapidly.
Larry Reed: So, by 1780 the money was worthless, and Americans had on the battlefield lost more battles than they won. And yet a year later we were set up for the pivotal battle of Yorktown, which began in very late September of 1781. But the problem was that Washington couldn't pay his troops and Congress hadn't authorized a payment in anything of real substance, just as worthless paper. And so, with the siege and battle of Yorktown looming, Washington was very worried that we couldn't sustain our assault on the Brits. It might lose the war because he couldn't pay his very dispirited troops. But Admiral de Grasse of the French Navy was very aware of the financial straits that Washington and his men were in. And so, since France was our ally at this point, Admiral de Grasse arranged for gold and silver to come from Mexico to Havana, Cuba, where he was to pick it up and then deliver it to Washington in September to pay his troops.
But the problem was when de Grasse got to Havana, the species, the gold and silver were not there yet. And he knew the clock was ticking. So he took up donations from Cuban citizens saying, help us help the Americans. Can you give us all the silver and gold you can spare? We'll pay you back later. And de Grasse ended up raising through these private voluntary donations, enough gold and silver that he then got to Washington who was able to pay his troops. And then in late September, Washington laid siege to Yorktown. That was about a three week or so effort, which ended up in an American victory because Admiral de Grasse had been able to get the gold and silver to Washington. He paid the troops. The siege was successful. When the British tried to flee Yorktown, they were bottled up in the harbor by the French fleet, and that effectively ended the war. So, you can say that sound money saved us at Yorktown, the most pivotal battle of the American Revolutionary War.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, that's fascinating. And not only the sound money aspect of it, which kind of reinforces this, the soldiers, they didn't want this paper that they knew was virtually useless. They wanted real money. But I think it's also interesting just from kind of a sociopolitical standpoint, that it kind of demonstrates the fact that when people want to do something, they can come together voluntarily and fund that. You don't necessarily have to have this aggressive taxation regime to build the roads, so to speak. I don't want to get too far afield into political philosophy because this is more of an investment kind of show, but I think that's an interesting takeaway from that. And I just came across another quote. This is Thomas Jefferson. He said, that paper is poverty. That it is only the ghost of money. It's not money itself. So you can see in their attitudes, you can see why when you look at the history. So here's the $64,000 question. What has changed that has brought us to the point where we've completely abandoned even the pretext of sound money?
Larry Reed: Well, the reason that Jefferson and others among our founders didn't like paper was that they knew that when paper money first appeared, it was a substitute for the real thing. It was redeemable in the real thing. And I have no problem with that. As a believer in the gold standard, I recognize that people when they're free to choose may well choose paper over the metals if they think they can get the precious metals on demand whenever they want it. That's what exerts a discipline on the issuance of the paper when it's tied like that to gold and silver. So, America started out with a commitment to sound money, at least in the Constitution. By that point in 1787, we'd been burned enough by paper money that Congress said, okay, no state shall issue anything but gold and silver as money. And the first treasury secretary, Alexander Hamilton put us on what he expected to be a biome metallic standard where we would use gold and silver, and any paper that was issued would be redeemable in gold and silver or otherwise it would be fraudulent. Now, Hamilton didn't quite do it right. That's another story perhaps. But he fixed the price of one metal in terms of the other. And that had the effect of bringing Gresham's Law into place, which drove one medal out in favor of the other. But at least our money was metallic. It was backed by something that wasn't easy to manufacture more of. That's what protected its value. Now, over the course of the 19th century, America largely retained metallic backing for its currency until the Civil War. Then both the north and the South abandoned precious metal backing issued paper unbacked currency. The Southern paper, of course, became completely worthless. The northern currency depreciated by at least half. And so we continued to have these occasional paper experiments, but we bounced back from them. And by 1900, we actually had restored by law a gold standard for America. The dollar was defined as a specified weight of gold. Well, that ushered in a new century of sound money for America, but we only had it until the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, when all of a sudden Congress says, well, we need a central bank like these other countries in Europe have.
Larry Reed: And so, we'll have to create one and we'll reduce the required gold backing of the currency to just 40%, which gave the Fed lots of room to print paper. And which they did, sometimes they did the opposite. They contracted the money supply because governments don't know what they're doing when they try to control something like this. So anyway, with occasional bouts of inflation and deflation, we pretty much in the later 20th century turned over the function of money to the government, to a government monopoly, the Federal Reserve. So now today, the typical American doesn't have any memory of what our money was like when it was gold backed. We think that money is something that governments must monopolize, that governments have always monopolized, and that governments must print paper in order for there to be enough money. There's all kinds of fallacies in that, but that's where we are because we've lost our understanding of sound money and of sound economics to a great extent.
Mike Maharrey: And I think I'm picking up on a theme here. You look at Civil War, world War I, world War II, the Great Depression, it's these calamities that tend to impulse the government, that's not really the right way to say it, but incentivize the government to expand the money supply. So in effect, I think we could probably safely say that paper money is a big benefit to government, not so much of a benefit to you and I who are sitting here watching the value of our money depreciate and devalue on almost a minute by minute basis. Right?
Larry Reed: Yeah. In fact, we should think of unbacked or fiat paper. Money issued by government monopolies as a kind of taxation. It just shows up in a different way. It's not a direct tax on your income or on the sale of something. It's a tax that takes the form of rising prices because of the falling value of the paper that government is printing. So things like wars and other calamities certainly put pressure on the government to think of ingenious ways to finance their expenditures. But in the end, we're not getting any of that stuff for free when we think that government should just print paper money to pay for them, we still pay full price and then some for all these things, we just pay it in different forms. There ultimately are only three ways that government can raise revenue or three main ways. I suppose a fourth might be sale of assets like federal lands, but primarily one is to tax and other source of revenue is to borrow. And the third major source is to inflate. And the bigger the deficits, the more the federal government spends, the greater the pressure to use that third tool to simply print money to pay the bills.
Mike Maharrey: And it's interesting, you can see the impact on us. I did an article just yesterday and it breaks down the retail sales basically since the pandemic. And you see a big dip obviously during the pandemic when the government shut everything down and then it very quickly rebounded back to the previous level. And then retail sales have skyrocketed since then. But if you inflation adjusted, it's absolutely flat. So in essence, each one of us is spending more to basically get the same amount, and I think in some cases even less than what we have. So that's the pernicious impacts of it. Now, it's interesting because we're starting to see, you mentioned the monopolization of money by the state, and I've always believed that this is a huge problem because whenever you have a monopoly, whoever controls the monopoly, it's advantage to them. We're starting to see some states try to do some things to at least inject some currency competition into the system.
So, you've got states officially recognizing gold and silver as legal tender, which is kind of a symbolic thing, but it at least gets it top of mind. We're seeing taxes being cut, sales taxes, capital gains taxes so that gold and silver can be used as money as opposed to a commodity. And we're even seeing some states experiment with some electronic payment systems backed in gold, or even issuing gold bullion, I hesitate to use the word currency, but transactional gold and silver. So these are all, I think, positive steps. Do you think that it is possible for the people to break this government monopoly if they make disconcerted effort kind of a reverse Gresham maybe, where we start to see the good money drive out bad? I mean, is that something we can maybe be optimistic about?
Larry Reed: Well, I think so. But it may take a real crisis of major proportion before developments along. Those lines really take off because so many people are simply happy to go through day by day with what they're accustomed to, what they're used to. And even if the government is kind of ruining it by slow motion, it seems to most people as too much of a challenge to try something different. But when a crisis happens, people sometimes, well, I think most of the time, will then start looking elsewhere. They'll say, wow, this stuff that we've been using issued by the government is going down so fast. I got to find something else. In Argentina, for instance, when inflation was in the hundreds of percent very recently, people were shifting to all kinds of alternative means of payments, including digital currencies, anything to escape government paper. Right now, the sentiment in America is such that it would probably take a crisis before you see large numbers of Americans fleeing to something else. I wish we could get the message to people. In fact, we're trying all the time and fee that in the long run, it's far more likely that gold and silver will reassert themselves as the country's chosen monies as they have been for centuries, then that government unbacked paper will be the centerpiece of our financial future. I don't put much faith in politicians look at these $2 trillion deficits.
How on earth are we ever going to pay off the national debt with deficits growing by $2 trillion a year? So the financial stage is set for some sort of crisis in the not too distant future. I just hope. In the meantime, we educate Americans well enough to know that there are alternatives, that the precious metals are among the best.
Mike Maharrey: And we're actually seeing this globally. There's this kind of ongoing, they used the term dollarization. I think maybe that term overstates it a little bit. I mean, we're not in any, well, I shouldn't say we're not in any danger, but we're not on the cusp of a currency crisis. But you are seeing countries holding fewer dollars in reserve. They're buying gold, they're replacing dollars with gold, and I think that might not be such a bad idea for individuals as well.
Larry Reed: Yeah, a big portion of the demand for the American dollar is the fact that we are still the world's reserve currency, but you give people a good enough reason to abandon that, such as lots of paper printing and huge deficits and so forth. We could lose that status. People may say the heck with that, we're going to find something else. And if that were to be the case, that could be what precipitates the crisis, the flight from the paper dollar that pushes people into better substitutes.
Mike Maharrey: Right? Absolutely. So, you mentioned FEE and the work that you're doing. Tell folks a little bit about the organization and the work that you do and what's going on over there at fee.
Larry Reed: Okay. The Foundation for Economic Education or FEE, fee.org is our website. It has been around since 1946, founded by a wonderful man named Leonard Reed, no relation, but I held his job for 12 years as president. Now I'm retired to the emeritus role. But we have always been committed to the morality of freedom and free markets. And once you understand that the morality of freedom and free markets really means you have to be honest in all your dealings, then sound money becomes a kind of corollary. Sound money means that you keep your promises, that you don't deceive people, you don't rob them of their savings by reducing the value of the currency that gold and silver historically have been the best and the chosen monies in free markets. So, we've always been very precious metal. We recognize that government always needs discipline. It has an insatiable appetite for revenue.
It's always looking for more ways to spend more money on foreign wars, foreign aid, domestic monuments and welfare programs and what have you. So it always feels the need to come up with more money one way or the other. And unless you bind it down, unless you shackle it with the change of sound money, you're going to have profligate government diluting the value of your currency and your savings to no end. So that's something that fee has always been committed to, and we spread that message mostly to high school and college age students through our online webinars, through the website itself and through many in-person events, not only in this country, but around the world as well.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, y'all do fantastic work. It's such a wide range of materials. There are books, there's videos, all kinds of great content and all very educational, all free market, as you mentioned, sound, money, and a great organization. I use it as a reference quite a bit. So here's kind of an interesting fun question for you. You've been involved in economic education as kind of your career. What do you think, and this is probably going to be a harder question to answer so many things, but if you could kind of boil it down to one thing, what do you think is the greatest, I guess, misunderstanding or point of ignorance for the American public when it comes to economics? What is the biggest thing that's a roadblock in people understanding good economics?
Larry Reed: Oh, that's a great question. I can think of several things. I'm not sure how I'd rank them, but certainly one is the temptation to be enamored of the short-term. So many people are short-term focused. They don't think of the long run, and there are a lot of things that can look and feel and sound pretty good in the very short run, but can also sow the seeds for disaster. And certainly that's true in money. Oftentimes unbacked paper money or government deficits, that paper money helped finance, helps to finance are sold to people as it'll get us through the current mess or the current crisis, or John Maynard Keynes, the British economist who is partly responsible for big government deficits and erosion of the value of the currency he wants. Put it this way. He said when somebody asked him, “Mr. Keynes, if we follow your advice and the dollar goes down in value, deficits get bigger, maybe the dollar will become worthless someday. What do you think of that?” And his response was, “In the long run, we're all dead anyway,” which was his way of saying, focus on the short run. Do what makes you feel good for now.
Oh, I wish I could go back to the ancient Romans and speak to them on mass and say,
“Hey, we know where this is headed. You've abandoned sound, money, limited government, and now you've got your welfare state, your warfare state. You're spending like crazy. This is going to lead to the extinction of your republic. Now, do you still want to do all that stuff?” Maybe they'd say, yeah, anyway, because a lot of people don't think of the next generation so much, but that is at the core of so much economic mischief, the tendency to fall prey to the short run and not think of the long run effects of things.
Mike Maharrey: I absolutely love that answer. That's one of my pet peeves in talking with people in the investment world. If you watch the markets closely, most of what drives the markets is whatever was posted on X 20 minutes ago. I mean, our timeframe has gotten that short. And I was talking to somebody the other day who he's been in the investment world since the early 1970s, older guy. He's seen a lot. We were talking about the fact that there's so many people that are out there in the world of investments today that basically their entire careers has been post 2008. So, they think that all of the monetary malfeasance that we've seen in the wake of the financial crisis and the great recession, they think that's normal. And it boggles their mind that in 1980, Paul Volcker raised interest rates to 20%. They can't fathom that. So it's not just the kind of short term rewards, but it's also just an inability to really understand history. And that's why I really appreciate somebody like you who is so well versed in the history. You can look back and say, look, Rome did this. Look where they ended up. The Americans did this. Look where we ended up, and then here we are today.
Larry Reed: Yeah. Well, thank you, Mike. Yeah. If I had to add a second one, do I have time to?
Mike Maharrey: Absolutely.
Larry Reed: Okay. Another fallacy is that the failure to apply moral principles to our economic thinking, if you were to go next door to your neighbor and say, do you mind if I steal something from you? He would be shocked. And of course you wouldn't think of doing that because we know that stealing is bad. But let's suppose I say, “Well, how about if we hire a politician to go do the stealing for us? He can take it from the neighbor and call it the rule of law or whatever he wants to make it legal, and then he'll get those goodies for you.” There are a lot of Americans who think, “Oh, well that's okay. That's sanctioned by the democratic process.” But stealing is still stealing. And if you hire a politician to do it for you, it doesn't make it right.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, absolutely. That's a great point as well. And folks can go over to – it's dot-org, right?
Larry Reed: FEE.org. Yes.
Mike Maharrey: And gobble up a lot of content dealing with these very things. And then also some of the books you've read. I know your most recent is about Jesus and socialism, right?
Larry Reed: Yeah. Titled “Was Jesus' Socialist?” And I can tell you that the one-word answer to that is no. The two word answer is hell no. And the book explains why Jesus said nothing that is even remotely akin to the ethics or the economics of socialism.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, absolutely. So where can folks go? We've talked about FEE.org. Is there any other places that you would send folks to follow your work or the work of fee?
Larry Reed: Yes. I have my own website where I put everything I publish at fee, but also at other places too. And that is simply Lawrence W. Reed, no punctuation in there. L-A-W-R-E-N-C-E-W-R-E-E-D, LawrenceWReed.com. And all my articles there appear mostly under the blog section, but there are other tabs that people can explore too.
Mike Maharrey: Fantastic. Well go check that out. Also, you can follow a FEE on X. I do that. So, make sure you check them out there too. They're constantly posting. Your social media team posts a lot of really good quotes and stuff that really gives you a lot of juicy historical context. I particularly enjoy that. Well, I really definitely appreciate you taking a little bit of time out of your day to chat with me, and I think this makes for a great Independence Day issue or episode of the podcast. And thank you so much for taking the time.
Larry Reed: Thank you, Mike. Let's hope every American does more than simply look at the fireworks, but also thinks about the great ideas that made it all possible.
Mike Maharrey: Yeah, absolutely. Pull out a copy of the Declaration of Independence and read the whole thing, especially the grievances that they listed against the British. A lot of those will ring Very true in today's day and age. Well, thank you again so much.
Larry Reed: My pleasure. Thank you, Mike.
</div>
A very fascinating interview and I trust you enjoyed that as I did. Larry is a great historian as you just heard there, and it was wonderful to have him on during this 4th of July week.
Well, that will do it for this week. Be sure to check back next Friday for our next Weekly Market Wrap Podcast. And don’t miss our second weekly podcast, the Money Metals Midweek Memo, hosted by Mike Maharrey and available each Wednesday. To check out any of our audio programs just visit <a>MoneyMetals.com/podcasts</a> or find them on your podcast platform of choice. And as a big help to us we would ask you to please like, subscribe, download and rate our podcasts. Doing so helps us extend the reach of this material.
Until next time, this has been Mike Gleason with <a>Money Metals Exchange</a>, thanks for listening and have a wonderful 4th of July weekend everybody.

Read The Original Article