answer:It’s a bad idea. Or perhaps more accurately, a useless idea. I wonder if you have ever thought about money and what it is? Is paper money? Are shells money? Is gold money? Gold creates confusion because it is, of itself, valuable. Other things are not, in themselves, valuable. Their only value is symbolic. Money, whether it is gold, paper, or electrons, stands for the value of all the goods and services that humans create. It’s a pretty abstract concept, isn’t it? We use money as a symbol for a unit of value. All the stuff we do and make has a value. All the money in the world should equal all the value of things in the world. When we make more things, we need more money to stand for the value of those things. When we lose things, we need the money supply to decline, too. Money is really measured in terms of a comparison with the previous day or hour or week or month or year, etc. Well, I could go on, but I’m straying from your question. Since money is only a metaphor, it really doesn’t matter which symbol we use for money. We can equate gold to the value of stuff we do, or we can just use numbers without any physical symbol for the money. As more and more interactions are done using credit cards and computers, the need for a physical symbol for money grows less and less. Eventually it will disappear. All the “money” we have will be symbolized in a card we carry about with us, or a chip in our heads, or whatever—it will be backed by computers. A lot of people don’t understand what money is, and they don’t understand it’s symbolic nature. They think it should be a real thing. So they choose gold. If we switched to gold, there are some problems. THere is a limited supply of gold in the world. We can’t make more gold the way we can just create more money in the banking system. So, as gold supplies remain the same—all the gold there is must stand for all the value there is. As value increases, gold won’t increase. That means a unit of gold will constantly increase in value. I don’t know how it would start out, but I wouldn’t be surprised if an ounce of gold would be worth an entire company at the beginning. We’d be flaking off amounts of gold too small to see in order to be worth what a 100 dollar bill is worth now. What is the point? Maybe a few people will feel more secure, but that security will be a chimera. The future is not in going back to a gold standard, but in going forward to an even more hard to understand abstraction. It doesn’t matter whether people understand it or not. What matters is whether people trust the system. Does the money as counted in computers accurately reflect the value of everything in the world. If it doesn’t, we don’t trust money, and the economy goes to hell. That’s what happened in the mortgage loan crisis. It turns out that the value we thought was in the houses wasn’t there. It was a fake. Those houses were worth a lot less than we thought. This caused a disbelief and mistrust in various companies and in our own lives, and the economy has been stalled in a recession ever since, because people still don’t trust there is an accurate measurement of the value of stuff and services in the world. When that confidence comes back, the economy will recover. People didn’t believe that Obama was bringing back confidence. They elected Republicans in hopes they could make people feel confident. We’ll see what happens. Once the confidence comes back, the economy will grow again.