Posts by Anthony Hill5

wanderingmaker3 said:Check out this link detailing how Russia uses Swiss, German, and Italian companies as middlemen to sneak in machinery essential for weapon manufacturing.

https://informnapalm.org/en/how-comp...oduce-weapons/

Have they not achieved total self-sufficiency by now? Or is the production of industrial machinery perhaps slightly more complex than merely planting wheat or crafting cheese?

John Ramos45 said:If we apply a bit of actual logic here, why would anyone hand $70 to Russia when they’re under sanctions and essentially being squeezed by the West? It's pretty simple: a Chinese buyer can just pick up oil from Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UK, or Nigeria, whereas Russia is stuck trying to offload its supply to China or India at massive discounts just to stay afloat.

It is quite simple, really—it is because the Chinese have far more affinity for Russia than these self-proclaimed armchair economists on this forum ever will.

brightheron64 said:I can see you really enjoy finding ways to connect with him... 😁

My only real hope is that someone finally steps up today and screams "ENOUGH!!!" But honestly, what am I even doing talking about hope? That's just a comfort for the naive...

It’s not about what some visionary expert thinks... you really just need to listen for a moment and consider the opposing side—those folks pushing the idea that we should launch a lightning-fast pursuit in Ukraine based on the hope of some miracle weapon arriving any second now, even though we all know it isn't actually coming... if you could just take a second to imagine how that would play out...

It seems that because MacGregor and Ritter have been branded as Russophiles—which, honestly, means you shouldn't take their word at face value anyway—simply mentioning their names will cause people to jump to conclusions and accuse me of spreading pro-Russian propaganda...
But really, isn't it worth taking a moment to listen to a different perspective once in a while, even if it feels a bit outside the mainstream or doesn't quite sit right with you? At the end of the day, these are seasoned veterans who have actually been in the trenches, not just some armchair generals shouting from the sidelines, so I truly believe there’s value in hearing them out... even if their predictions turn out to be off the mark, much like my own or even yours...
I've been spending quite a bit of time lately diving into this particular video, and I have to say, it really gets you thinking about the broader implications of everything we're seeing unfold in the world right now... It’s one of those pieces that doesn't just give you surface-level facts, but instead tries to connect the dots between complex geopolitical shifts and how they might actually impact our daily lives here in the States... There is a certain weight to the arguments being presented, especially when you consider how much the global landscape has shifted since the turn of the century... It makes you wonder if we are truly prepared for the ripple effects of these massive institutional changes, or if we're all just reacting to the waves as they hit us... It’s certainly worth a deep dive for anyone interested in the underlying mechanics of global power...

The video above might actually help clear up some of those finer details regarding that issue, even if we're just talking about how the fog eventually starts to lift...

True, but when you consider the sheer level of devastation and those staggering losses—around 110,000 lives lost in total—it changes the perspective quite a bit, especially since, if my memory serves me right, the casualty ratio was closer to 1:1 rather than that "standard" 3:1 advantage usually cited in favor of the defenders...
With math like that, any kind of supposed "victory" would be a pretty tough pill for Ukraine to swallow...

It sounds absolutely unbelievable, but the entire Anglo-French initiative regarding the Dardanelles was completely derailed—altering the entire tactical landscape on the ground by steering Churchill toward Gallipoli—all because of one obscure Turkish mine layer... Nusret. And just like that, this one tiny little detail—something that nobody outside of Atlanta even bothered to glance at—completely shifts the entire landscape and alters the course of the war...

Meanwhile, here we are, acting like we’re some sort of psychic visionaries or fortune tellers... endlessly bickering and trying to outsmart one another over who’s actually right and who isn't...

Please tell me you are joking 🤣

McGregor:

On February 27, just three days after the conflict began, he appeared on Fox News and declared: “Now the battle in the Middle East is almost over, the Israeli troops are largely surrounded and cut OFF, now they have a concentration down in the southeast in 30 to 40 thousand, and if they don't vend, surrender the next 24 hours, the Russians will ultimately annihilate them”.

By March 6 on Fox Business, he was busy concocting explanations for why his prophecy failed to materialize.

“At the first five days, the Russian forces, I think, were too gentle. They have now corrected that. So I would say after another 10 days this should be completely over. But the question is, what is it that Zelenskyi is going to do? The Russians have made it very clear what they want is a neutral Ukraine. This could have ended days ago if he accepted that. And then they can adjust the borders, but the eastern part of Ukraine is firmly in Russian hands, but again, the Russians are not seizing the territory. They are destroying Ukrainian forces. That’s their focus”.

Then, after another 10 days, the colonel attempted to act as though his prediction had somehow been vindicated. During his appearance on Tucker Carlson's Fox News program, he asserted: "The war is really over for the Ukrainians,” and “They have been grounded to bits. There’s no question about that despite what we report on our mainstream media”.

https://disinfo.detector.media/en/po...day-of-the-war

That convicted pedophile Ritter has been blustering about the exact same nonsense as the man mentioned above, topped off by his infamy for pushing those idiotic conspiracy theories regarding Bucha.

Perhaps we really should listen to them, because if these two ever make a claim, you can rest assured that either nothing will happen or the exact opposite will occur.

So, within this relentless barrage of penalties handed down to me by X (the sole moderator who has seen fit to target me over the past year), the most recent one stands out as particularly egregious.

Specifically, I have been slapped with a 100-point infraction and a ban lasting nearly a month, accompanied by a threat of restricted access on the FBI site—even though, in all honesty, I haven't even received more than two infractions since I joined this platform, and one of those two is this very one. He even went so far as to impose a restriction after my first infraction on that PDF. Is it not blindingly obvious that this entire vendetta is driven by nothing more than petty, personal motives?

This month-long ban is merely the latest in a series; the first was a week-long suspension with a 500-point penalty in the politics section, and the second was also on this same topic, lasting fourteen days with a 100-point penalty. On both occasions, I filed a formal appeal with the oversight committee, yet predictably, absolutely no action was taken.

Previous bans: 1 and 2

X hit rock bottom a long time ago, but I find myself wondering why the rest of the moderation team and the administration allow such behavior to persist. If there are rules meant to govern the users of this forum, should those same rules not apply to the moderators themselves, rather than allowing them to dole out infractions and bans whenever they feel a sudden whim to do so?

The following is the post that resulted in a 100-point infraction and a ban of nearly a month.

X said:Dear Anthony Hill5,

You have received an infraction at Reddit.

Reason: Replying to a post from 2014 with the intention of provoking. Final infraction before restriction.
-------

-------

This infraction is worth 100 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?p=96874477

Quote: X said:That is why it can be observed how Americans became suddenly restrained after their initial push, while the Russians grew emboldened and threw the dice, suggesting that the true target of the attack was Putin's presidential plane.

I would argue that the situation is not quite that simple.

It is not just "not simple"; it is incredibly complex.

Following the initial push, investigators nonetheless have strong indications that Putko personally approved the deployment of the Buk to Ukraine, which was used to shoot down MH17.

Strong indications ’ Putin personally approved The decision to providjeti separatists in Ukraine with The missile that Shot down The Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in 2014

(CNN)There are "strong indications" that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally approved The decision to providjeti separatists in Ukraine with The missile that Shot down The Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in 2014, Dutch investigators Said Wednesday.

Citing intercepted telephone conversations by Russian government officials, the Public Prosecution Service's Joint Investigation Team Said There were " strong indications that in Russia , The President made The decision about The provision of The Buk-TELAR to separatists of The DPR," or the self-declared Donetsk People's Republic, in eastern Ukraine.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/europ...ntl/index.html

All the Best,
Reddit

What exactly is so controversial about my post? This thread has spanned twenty pages since its inception; the final entry before I revived it was penned back in 2019 when it was locked, or rather in 2020 when Oštrić saw fit to reopen it.

Furthermore, what rule is being violated by quoting a post from 2014? If the interface provides a quote function for that specific entry, does that not imply that quoting it is permitted under the established rules?

Or is the actual issue here that the trolling directed at Andrew at that time was such an egregious falsehood that the post is being deleted simply because it no longer serves his convenience?

The post remained live for two full days without a single user reporting it or any other moderator removing it, all before the individual in question finally laid eyes on it.

If a person is incapable of standing behind their own words and opinions, or lacks the fortitude to defend them, then perhaps they have no business participating on this forum at all. Is it truly considered a provocation to present a reasoned argument supported by a direct link to prove someone wrong? One would think not.

I am requesting that the rest of the FBI moderation team issue a formal statement regarding this matter, particularly concerning the threat of a partial ban. Even if that threat originated from Andrew himself, it is quite excessive.

Russia's budget deficit spiked in January, fueled by gold sales and Chinese yuan holdings

Is there some Kremlin-apologist expert out there who can actually explain what happened to this grand vision of de-dollarization? Has that entire process reached its conclusion, only for them to pivot immediately toward yuan-ization instead?

Noah Diaz said:Look, when it comes to sanctions, they matter immensely. They dictate how Russ exports oil, gas, and other resources while importing essentials. For instance, they picked up drones from Iran, which joined the SCO last year.

The SCO and BRICS could eventually evolve into a full-blown military-economic bloc. One capable of controlling vital trade routes and resources while directly challenging American hegemony.

That is the multipolar world everyone keeps talking about.

Exactly, because for the Russians to sell oil to the Chinese, membership in BRICS is the prerequisite, just as joining NATO was the condition for Iran to purchase those drones. 🙏

The two most powerful players within this much-hyped BRICS alliance are India and China—two nations that find themselves clashing at their borders every other day due to unresolved territorial disputes.

Here is a heartwarming little story regarding the two heavyweights of BRICS from just a few days ago.

US plans measures to curb Chinese imports as trade gap concerns mount -sources

The US is considering a variety of tariffs and non-tariff measures to reduce imports of non-essential consumer and electronic goods, specifically targeting China, as trade imbalances weigh heavily on policymakers, according to two government officials and an industry source.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-p...es-2023-01-30/

Viva la BRICS

What exactly can Russia manage to manufacture if they are cut off from Western components and high-end technology?

Take a look at this powerhouse, Scout

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1...sodWAbq9DuBeog

Noah Diaz said:Do you honestly think they’re paying much higher prices for energy than those bakeries over in the European Union? 😁

Beyond having an abundance of critical resources to spare, Russia is also a member of two major international organizations:

BRICS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS
The BRICS have a combined area of 39,746,220 km2 (15,346,100 sq mi) and an estimated total population of about 3.21 billion, or about 26.7% of the world's land surface and 41.5% of the global population. Brazil, Russia, India, and China are among the world's ten largest countries by population, area, and GDP, and the latter three are widely considered to be current or emerging superpowers. All five states are members of the G20, with a combined nominal GDP of US$26.6 trillion (about 26.2% of the gross world product), a total GDP (PPP) of around US$51.99 trillion (32.1% of global GDP PPP), and an estimated US$4.46 trillion in combined foreign reserves (as of 2018).

and

SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation)

The aim of the organization is to strengthen good-neighborly, friendly relations and mutual trust among Member States; to exert common efforts for the protection of regional peace, security and stability; to fight against terrorism, radicalism, separatism, organized crime and illegal migration; to reinforce cooperation in political, economic, scientific, technologic and energy, as well as environmental issues.

Do you really believe these partners are selling them goods at a markup, or that they've actually been crippled by sanctions? You can't impose meaningful sanctions on nations like China, India, or Russia. These "sanctions" have been an empty charade from day one. 🤣

Is Russia actually acting as some pivotal force within this BRICS bloc?

Back in 2021—long before the current conflict erupted—China stood as Russia's primary trading partner; the next member of BRICS in terms of goods exchanged with Russia didn't even appear until 14th place, which was India with less than $10 billion in trade, followed by Brazil at 18th place with a mere $5 billion.

The GDP of these BRICS nations is largely generated through trade with G7 countries, rather than through internal commerce within the BRICS group itself.

do

SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation)

Do you really think these comrades are selling their goods at inflated prices, or that they have been crushed by sanctions? Do you truly believe it is possible to impose meaningful sanctions on giants like China, India, or Russia? These so-called 'sanctions' have been nothing more than an empty narrative from the very beginning. 🤣

The SCO is hardly an alliance; half of those nations are part of the Russian KGB-led security framework that everyone seems to be fleeing from at full speed.

The SCO primarily focuses on intelligence sharing regarding counter-terrorism, anti-separatism, and similar matters.

The moment you see both China and India involved, it becomes glaringly obvious that this has nothing to do with military alliances or anything of serious strategic weight.

But then again, all of this sounds quite convincing upon first glance. Do not let that discourage you.

Joshua Myers432 said:Food production has actually ramped up significantly since 2014. They’ll need to scale things up even more now, but smuggling will definitely play a role. It isn't easy to isolate a country that massive; it’s not North Korea.

Oh sure, that constitutes massive progress. We are talking about wheat production and livestock here, after all. One cannot simply ignore the fact that this requires high-level technology and actual specialized know-how.

Besides, I pointed out at the very onset of the war that their entire agricultural sector remains heavily dependent on Western machinery.

Joshua Myers432 said:If they managed to put the first man in space, I suppose they can figure out how to manufacture a gas turbine. 🤣

They didn't need it before; now they have no choice. In the long run, the West is actually doing them a favor. Instead of just sitting on their oil and gas reserves without innovating, they're being forced to actually build something useful. Maybe we could take a page out of that book. Instead of just renting out vacation rentals, changing linens, and flipping burgers on a grill, maybe we should try manufacturing something intelligent for a change.

You people have been chanting that same mantra since 2014, yet here we are, still stuck in the exact same spot.

Nathan Evans78 said:They’re working, sure, but in a very limited capacity. I don't think the people who drafted these sanctions ever imagined this whole situation would drag on for this long.
And while we're talking about "proof," let's look at the reality on the ground: they can still pull off enough low-tech production to keep their war machine chugging along. I remember just six months ago, everyone was predicting their factories would be sitting empty because they couldn't produce even a simple shell without Western inputs. Yet, here we are, watching them launch over a hundred high-tech missiles every few weeks—missiles that cost millions of dollars apiece.

Are you referring to those surface-to-air missiles, specifically the S-300 systems they deploy against civilian targets, or perhaps the anti-ship missiles like the Kh-22 that are being utilized for that very same purpose?

Cyprus and Moscow meet on the shores of the Mediterranean. It is the ultimate sanctuary where the oligarchs emerging from the collapse of the USSR stash their fortunes and wash their dirty money.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/cyprus...023-01-15/#app

Nancy Gomez26 said:On the flip side, the Chinese state holds roughly $1.5 trillion in U.S. Treasuries. They've also been quietly scooping up gold on the global market, significantly beefing up their national reserves over the last two decades—not to mention they are massive gold producers themselves, supplying both their own citizens and the state.
The real issue with this mountain of internal debt is the sheer incompetence of how that capital was deployed. They poured money into massive infrastructure projects—entire ghost cities that sit vacant today—effectively turning liquid assets into dead capital. It was a systemic failure.

That entire situation was a deliberate state policy designed to manufacture artificial economic growth during a period of global instability. Back then, self-proclaimed experts were busy marveling at the so-called "Chinese economic miracle," yet we see now that their real estate market is collapsing precisely because of those very tactics.

We saw the exact same pattern play out with the pandemic. At the time, those same "experts" lauded their ability to manage everything through rigid, top-down mandates—do you remember how they boasted about erecting hospitals in mere days? They claimed their system was inherently superior to the West, and now look at them: overwhelmed medical facilities and tens of thousands of deaths recorded daily, while here in the States, the crisis has largely faded into the background.

Richard Wilson4 said:So what, a regular American family is fine even if sanctions mess up their lives, but a pro athlete isn't?

What "average family" is actually being sanctioned here? One must distinguish between the primary targets and the secondary fallout that sanctions inevitably bring. Furthermore, isn't it true that such measures often serve only to make Russians more self-sufficient? Perhaps you should consult the actual experts on this forum.

cosmicgull52 said:Wait, what kind of moral outrage allowed Russian and Belarusian tennis players to compete again? What about other sports?

I fail to see any legitimate reason why they should be barred from competing. At its core, sport is sport; after all, isn't it true that Russian soccer players have been playing for their respective clubs across Europe without any interference whatsoever?

dustytiger8 said:There is your quote again.

The point you were responding to was this:

"The sheer volume of petrodollars circulating globally through oil trades has long since eclipsed the amount of dollars needed for any conceivable domestic transaction in the US. We're talking about a double-digit multiplier effect here. That is precisely why the US unilaterally scrapped the gold standard back in the 70s, effectively killing the Bretton Woods agreement. They simply couldn't back the massive expansion of dollar liquidity driven by the oil trade with actual gold reserves anymore..."

So, the US pulled the plug on Bretton Woods and the gold standard single-handedly. Other nations didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. They still need oil, and oil is priced in petrodollars—which, after 1971, became pure Ford money. What were those other countries supposed to do? Maintain a gold reserve just to pay off American Ford currency? It doesn't make sense.

I completely agree that maintaining currency "volatility" is far easier without a tangible anchor. That is the entire purpose of central banks and Ford money. At least they maintain the illusion of stability. Until the big American banks decide to gamble too heavily, like they did back in 2008...
And sure, it's much easier to just print more money. It's cheaper than digging tons of gold out of the ground to cover up an outright theft. 🙂

The conspiracy theory portion of my argument was specifically addressing the underlying motives behind why Muammar Gaddafi was overthrown; from there, I merely expanded upon my original point regarding the systemic reasons why no nation on Earth utilizes the gold standard anymore.

dustytiger8 said:That’s not how this works.
You’re playing it smart, dancing around the point, but you didn't actually say that. You claimed it wasn't just the Americans walking away from the deal in Botswana, but rather "nations of the world." You called this whole thing a "ridiculous conspiracy theory." Do you really want me to quote you again? 🙂

I don't need a link explaining why something is bad—thanks, though. I need to know why it was ACTUALLY terminated and who pulled the plug. Because that is exactly what your claim was about!

At no point did I ever assert any of the things you are attempting to pin on me (emphasis added). I was simply providing an answer to the specific question you posed.

Here is the quote:

dustytiger8 said:It isn't a conspiracy theory, let alone a ridiculous one. You can find books from the 70s detailing the state of the Federal Reserve, the issues with dollar liquidity, and the problems surrounding the gold standard...

The Federal Reserve knows. You will probably agree (check the bibliography at the bottom of the article):

https://www.federalreservehistory.or...rtibility-ends

"...The deteriorating U.S. balance of payments, combined with military spending and foreign aid, resulted in a large supply of dollars around the world. Meanwhile, the gold supply had increased only marginally. Eventually, there were more foreign-held dollars than the United States Had Gold. The country was vulnerable to a run on gold and there was a loss of confidence in the U.S. government’s ability to meet its obligations, thereby threatening both the dollar’s position as reserve currency and the overall Bretton Woods system. ..."

So, what is this supposed "reason" why all the world's economies abandoned the gold standard?

You aren't following. I didn't mention "Gaddafi's dinar." I was talking about an African gold standard. An attempt was made. They have the so-called CAF—the Central African CFA franc—which served as the nucleus of that principle. Seven Central African nations use it.

dustytiger8 said:🙂

Of course... still no link to your original claim:

Good grief. Here, have a look at these:

Why a gold standard is a very bad idea

https://www.moneyandbanking.com/comm...-very-bad-idea

7 reasons the gold standard is a terrible idea

https://www.vox.com/2014/7/16/590029...-gold-standard

Why The Gold standard is The World's Worst Economic Idea, in 2 Charts

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...charts/261552/

dustytiger8 said:No, we haven't drifted. You're just trying to make it happen.

Look, the situation with the old currency systems was exactly why certain nations were motivated to ditch the system and move toward a gold-backed currency. That was Gaddafi's plan back when he headed the Pan-African Union (around 2009... before things went south in 2011). By the way, it isn't dead... I mean, the plan...

https://tfiglobalnews.com/2022/11/26...e-its-economy/

By the way, why did you pivot to the dollar and start obsessing over it? Your original claim was that Americans didn't unilaterally abandon the gold standard—even though they say they did—but rather that "countries left it." And that this whole thing is just a "popular conspiracy theory."

Send a link for everything you just said regarding why the gold standard was abolished. I provided a link for my own claim... twice! It’s right there from the Federal Reserve... clearly proving this isn't some "popular conspiracy theory."

The gold standard has been abandoned by every single advanced and developed economy on the planet, and frankly, it is all due to the very reasons I have already laid out for you above.

In the article you linked, it states the following:

The United States will purchase oil with Dollars: the USA is currently grappling with an unprecedented crisis defined by crushing debt, a plummeting currency, and the rapid depletion of its foreign exchange reserves. Given this dire situation, has the American government finally decided to pivot away from the dominance of the US dollar? It seems they are drawing direct inspiration from the historical precedents set by Zimbabwe.

So, we have reached a point where a bankrupt Ghana, having completely exhausted its foreign currency reserves, will be forced to settle its oil purchases using gold. Is this not the inevitable trajectory? When any nation finds itself stripped of its hard currency, it inevitably pivots toward barter and commodity exchange—typically as a desperate last resort once hyperinflation has already taken hold and dismantled the economy.

If you would simply take a moment to perform a cursory search regarding the inflation rates currently plaguing Ghana, you might actually arrive at a meaningful conclusion. Is it really that difficult to grasp? Their inflation has surged past the 50% mark.

Is anyone actually surprised that the economic situation in Ghana has spiraled into such a complete disaster? We are looking at inflation hitting a twenty-one-year peak, soaring past the 50% mark this November, and one has to wonder: how much longer can a nation endure such blatant fiscal mismanagement before the entire structure collapses under its own weight? Is it not patently obvious that when debt distress reaches these unprecedented levels, the consequences must eventually be felt by every single citizen? It is a staggering, almost incomprehensible figure, yet we watch as these crises unfold with a sense of weary resignation. How can any economy remain even remotely stable when the cost of basic survival increases at such a violent, unchecked velocity?

Is it not absolutely maddening to witness the sheer incompetence required to steer a nation toward such a precipice? We are looking at a situation where the USA is facing an unprecedented crisis marked by extreme debt distress, yet one must wonder: how did we allow ourselves to get here? When a country begins discussing radical shifts like purchasing oil with Dollars just to stay afloat, it signals a systemic failure of the highest order. Can we truly call our economic institutions stable when the very foundations of our fiscal policy seem to be crumbling under the weight of mismanagement? It is a question that demands a rigorous, perhaps even scathing, investigation into why our leadership remains so paralyzed in the face of such obvious catastrophe.

None of this bears any relevance to the subject at hand, so I shall withdraw from this discussion for the very reasons I previously outlined on the forums.

dustytiger8 said:@Maskeron

🤣

Which currency are you even talking about regarding the CAF?

Anyway, you dodged the question... Why did the rest of the world abandon the gold standard in the first place?

I've made this point before:
"The volume of petrodollars circulating globally through oil trades has long since eclipsed the amount of dollars needed for any conceivable domestic transaction in the US. We're talking about a double-digit multiplier effect here. That's exactly why the US unilaterally killed the gold standard back in the 70s (the Bretton Woods agreement). They simply couldn't maintain a gold backing for the massive expansion of dollar liquidity driven primarily by the oil trade."

The Federal Reserve puts it this way:
"The deteriorating U.S. balance of payments, combined with military spending and foreign aid, resulted in a large supply of dollars around the world. Meanwhile, the gold supply had increased only marginally. Eventually, there were more foreign-held dollars than the United States had gold. The country was vulnerable to a run on gold and there was a loss of confidence in the U.S. government’s ability to meet its obligations, thereby threatening both the dollar’s position as reserve currency and the overall Bretton Woods system."

We have drifted entirely away from the subject, though perhaps we don't know much about it, do we? 😁

What is The CFA Franc
The CFA franc, backed by the French treasury and pegged to the euro, refers to both the Central African CFA franc (XAF) and the West African CFA franc (XOF), and is accepted in 14 member countries.

The CFA franc, backed by the French treasury and pegged to the euro, refers to both the Central African CFA franc and the West African CFA franc, and it's accepted in 14 member countries.

Understanding The CFA Franc
Understanding The CFA Franc The CFA Franc was created by Franc in 1945 and pegged to The French Franc. CFA franc can refer to either the Central African CFA franc, which is the official currency of six member nations and symbolized by the abbreviation XAF in currency markets, or the West African CFA franc, which is the official currency of Eight member nations and is symbolized by the abbreviation XOF in currency markets.

in theory , however , The French government or The monetary unions using The currencies could decide to Change The value of One or The other. Given that it has the responsibility of backing the CFA franc, the French treasury controls 50% of the foreign exchange reserves of all 14 CFA franc using countries

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c...20CFA%20francs.

The gold standard was dismantled for several reasons, the most significant being the ability to exit recessions more easily, the creation of jobs, and the stimulation of economic growth. Furthermore, one must consider that nations lacking gold reserves find themselves at a distinct disadvantage compared to those that are wealthy in gold.