I know I'm not Gard, and don't claim to speak for him, I'd like to point out that a shortage of gold is not much of a problem if it is warehoused in such a way that it can be accounted for at the atomic level.  Really, todays technology can do just that, so perhaps an atom of gold is equal to 1/50th of a cent or something like that (hypothetically), then use the warehouse (independently verified to have each atom of gold that they claim, then there is no problem with the supply of gold.

I've not read much of what is said about social credit systems.  I'll have to look into it further.  To me, it does not matter so much that money be based on physical specie.  I mean, look at bitcoin as an example of a nontangible medium of exchange: BitCoins are mined by computers doing cryptography.  Once a computer (or set of computers) solve a cryptological problem, they are awarded a bitcoin, which then is spent into circulation.

I'll be curious to see what Mr. Goldsmith thinks of social credit systems.  To me, as long as it is voluntary, I am not opposed to it.  I may not endorse it, but certainly won't oppose it.

I still maintain there has to be a way to popularize the gold exchange credit system.

The closest I've seen this is those credit card style gold increments, that I saw on the web a while back, I forgot the name of that. Maybe Furb or Gman can jog my memory. I thought that was really cool, it was simple for the average joe smoe to remember and came in increments that would allow small and larger purchases. Put the power in the hands of the consumer I say!

I have heard the argument before that not enough gold exists to substitute from a fiat currency into gold if there was a theoretical switch-over into a gold or gold backed system. That argument is not valid because gold has no set value, and as many know rarity can place a premium on the value of a good relative to the volume of demand. In other words, the quantity of physical gold does not determine its exchange value, hence a high demand can yield a greater value and fractions/percentages can be used to create functional denominations, if need be.

Another way to look at it is this: Why doesn't the Federal Government simply fabricate the amount of money they require to pay off the national debt and be done with it? Because it would either collapse the government, or word would get out and it would collapse the economy, or both. For practical reasons, they don't pay off the debt because they have no individual personal liability for it, and the Federal Reserve thrives on promoting the addiction to easy money.

As for gold being necessary as a backing currency, it's not. It begs the question, though: Necessary for what? A centrally planned economy with a fiat system of money is neither necessary or ethical, though. Backing it by gold doesn't make it ethical.

Gold and silver manipulation is fairly well documented. To better phrase it, they are trying to steal the value, not merely the fiat. The manipulation of the fiat and the manipulation of commodity stocks by declaring paper silver/gold on the books and concealing their movements/distortions is the method by which they seek to defraud. They'll inflate and deflate the prices this way, creating artificial periods of price stability, then letting the prices rise, then using their dominant positions on commodities to burst the bubbles and take advantage from the downslide as well. The more complexity and confusion they can create, the better they can hide their manipulation actions.

I too am unfamiliar with social credit, but suffice to say I do not trust a system of money based on granting some person or group of persons a monopoly authority to dictate the value to everyone else.

A non-inflationary, or rather, a predetermined unit/volume growth system such as Bitcoin extends a measure of foresight about the nature of the currency in order to overcome the inflation problem. People know there is a set limit number of coins that can and will be produced at some pont in time. It's still a system of fiat in that it is not backed physically, but it is not a monopoly, not a mandatory fiat. It meets several qualifications that people are looking for in a currency, including a standard of money, ease of transfer, and security. It has a greater ease of use than the USD, and it can chase USD and other monopoly fiat out of the marketplace.

To mythyspace's point, the "good" money is chased out by the "bad" is often used to explain the hoarding of precious metals relative to inflationary fiat economy since people want to get rid of the fiat to maximize the value they can exchange it for before that fiat loses value. Most people don't actively see this and simply use the currency because they don't have any other more convenient alternative. But I always see agorists willingly exchanging gold and silver with one another. These exchanges happen because there is, unseen to a third party, a premium evaluation placed on making such exchanges, which means there is a form of value above and beyond the value they place on the metal itself. In order for exchanges in precious metals to catch on, a level of trust must exist that simply is not present in a cartelized system that willingly debases its currency. Gold credit cards are, practically speaking, at the mercy of seizure by the thugs in government. Like Liberty Dollar had certificates, whose backing of silver and gold were seized by the government, the reliability of such systems of proxy money have their drawbacks.

The best monetary ideas will survive in decentralized economic conditions.