> it would actually make the poor poorer since it would devalue any of their current golden possessions to near zero. It would make people whose wealth is disp

> it would actually make the poor poorer since it would devalue any of their current golden possessions to near zero. It would make people whose wealth is disproportionately stored in gold poorer. Same as if a company hands out a bunch of shares ex nihilo -- the existing shareholders are screwed. The people who had no shares and now have some shares are richer, despite the shares being devalued. If the poor are heavily invested in gold, then plonking a bunch of gold into the economy will make them poorer, but I don't think they are.