The Cantillon Effects you describe have nothing to do with whether the government has reserves of gold or not, and incidentally are not the source of Jeff Bezos

The Cantillon Effects you describe have nothing to do with whether the government has reserves of gold or not, and incidentally are not the source of Jeff Bezos’ enormous wealth (the source of that wealth is a combination of luck, entrepreneurship, and tax policies that allow an individual to amass billions of dollars). Sure, he gets even richer because he is rich, but this “Matthew Effect” would still be present if he held his wealth in gold bullion. The money of 1970 still had to be injected into the economy somehow, and that somehow is fractional reserve banking which was invented in the 17th Century. If you can get a loan of such new money and invest in productive assets, you will come out ahead of people who are unable to make strategic use of debt. Money is ultimately like food, in that we just require an adequate amount of the stuff. Using precious metals as the basis of money in a growing world leads to a chronic under-supply. Limitless printing of fiat leads to a debasing of the currency that would ultimately mean it ceases to be money. That is categorically not what’s happened in the United States. In short: gold money is no more real or pure than fiat money. Perhaps if we lived in a static economy without the means to create artificial scarcity, we would use gold. But we don’t, and there’s no special benefit to doing so. We can’t make our way back to a monetary garden of Eden because there was no Eden to begin with. The problems we see around us are primarily driven by other factors, such as tax policy and demographics.