I would vehemently argue that point since right after the gold "exchange" FDR had the dollar value cut by 40%. They sold at a loss. That's the whole reason gold was taken.
The only reason to confiscate gold and other assets is because you want to debase the currency. Otherwise there is no need to destroy the competition.
Yes, the paper was devalued, but that does not make it “confiscation”. Gold owners had an ability to invest their proceeds from the gold sale into other hard assets. In some cases those investments yielded much better returns than if owners continued to hold gold. Yes, those who kept the paper lost big. Now, Germany did confiscate plenty of gold from some of its citizens just a few years later and at most they got 197gr of lead in return.
![Wink [wink] [wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif)
I am in no way defending FDR actions. However, my point was that unfortunately, many are not properly educated and some might take your statement at face value and spread misinformation. I now know what you meant and saying “confiscation” was expedient way to communicate your point.