Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

news.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 105 posts

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#61

Post by jonnathanson »

At the risk of stating the obvious, it's worth noting that $27,000 was a lot of money in 1849. To give a rough estimate, we're talking about the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $750,000 (give or take).

Who buries $750,000 in tin cans? Who has $750,000 in unbanked, walking-around money in the first place? The mid-19th century Walter White? Maybe someone cleaning out his bank account in anticipation of a financial apocalypse? This is the interesting part of this story, IMO. In any event, this might be one stash among several. If someone had that kind of coin lying around, my guess is that he didn't bury it all in one place.

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#62

Post by moonka »

jonnathanson wrote: post #61

At the risk of stating the obvious, it's worth noting that $27,000 was a lot of money in 1849. To give a rough estimate, we're talking about the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $750,000 (give or take). Who buries $750,000 in tin cans? Who has $750,000 in unbanked, walking-around money in the first place? The mid-19th century Walter White? Maybe someone cleaning out his bank account in anticipation of a financial apo…

I'm not sure in 1849 there were a lot of banks that one would trust that kind of funds with in gold rush areas in CA. I'd imagine banks were much less robust than they are now, and even now I believe that 750k is > the FDIC insurance limits.

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#63

Post by hcarvalhoalves »

jonnathanson wrote: post #61

At the risk of stating the obvious, it's worth noting that $27,000 was a lot of money in 1849. To give a rough estimate, we're talking about the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $750,000 (give or take). Who buries $750,000 in tin cans? Who has $750,000 in unbanked, walking-around money in the first place? The mid-19th century Walter White? Maybe someone cleaning out his bank account in anticipation of a financial apo…

I would start looking at the records for some bank robber who got shot and nobody ever found the money.

Stashing your economies inside a house, in a safe, I can understand... but in cans, under a tree? This is the kind of thing someone on a getaway would do. The coins are fresh out of the mint too, so it's likely the entire stash came from one place.

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#64

Post by jonnathanson »

moonka wrote: post #62
jonnathanson wrote: post #61

At the risk of stating the obvious, it's worth noting that $27,000 was a lot of money in 1849. To give a rough estimate, we're talking about the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $750,000 (give or take). Who buries $750,000 in tin cans? Who has $750,000 in unbanked, walking-around money in the first place? The mid-19th century Walter White? Maybe someone cleaning out his bank account in anticipation of a financial apo…

I'm not sure in 1849 there were a lot of banks that one would trust that kind of funds with in gold rush areas in CA. I'd imagine banks were much less robust than they are now, and even now I believe that 750k is > the FDIC insurance limits.

There was no FDIC in 1849, so fair enough point. No deposits were insured. :)

But people generally didn't realize how problematic that was except in financial panics and runs on banks. To wit, there was a big panic in 1873, not long after these coins were ostensibly buried. But that was well after these coins were minted, which makes their near-mint, quasi-uncirculated condition a bit hard to reconcile. I suppose it's possible the burier had them in tin cans (or some other receptacle) for decades, and buried them in the 1870s.

At any rate, banks were around and thriving during the Gold Rush, and San Francisco was in many ways the most progressive financial hub in the US, rivaling NYC. To whatever extent someone had $27,000 in those days, he probably would have banked it. Unless he'd come into it very recently, or under suspicious circumstances, or had just withdrawn it prior to burying it. It's certainly possible this person was a bank robber, though the more likely explanation is an unbanked or bank-panicked individual.

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#65

Post by brianbreslin »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #47
theandrewbailey wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe in 50 years, we will be mining asteroids for precious metals...

"In space, a single platinum-rich 500 meter wide asteroid contains about 174 times the yearly world output of platinum, and 1.5 times the known world-reserves of platinum group metals (ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, osmium, iridium, and platinum)." -- Planetary Resources, http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/composition/ (take with as many grains of salt as you feel like) But hey, I'm sure they can spare a mis…

I am sure Elon Musk is working on this...

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#67

Post by nerfhammer »

MichaelGG wrote: post #50
nlh wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just 1933 Double Eagles ($20). It's actually a fascinating story ... I'll dig up the link and post an edit shortly. Edit: the essential story - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_double_eagle Edit 2: Quick aside: I know the guy who found the 10 additional coins in his vault (Roy Langbord). Super nice guy. I remember when a mutual friend called me up one day and said "So Roy just found 10 1933 $20 gold coins in his vau…

Wow that's so messed up. The Gold Reserve Act, too. It seems extremely "un-American" for the government to force people to sell their gold to the treasury. OTOH, so do a lot of things in hindsight, like the Vietnam draft. (Can you imagine US citizens today being forced to fight overseas?) Was this a common viewpoint when the act went in, or it decades of history since colouring my vision?

It was popular at the time but it was widely assumed that the gold standard would be restored soon.

In the months prior a large percentage of country's banks had failed, and immediately beforehand all of the major financial exchanges had frozen, every federal reserve branch and almost every state had suspended banking operations. Withdrawing and hoarding gold were considered to contribute to the destabilization.

Here's an example editorial from the era:

> There will be no sympathy with the position in which these hoarders of gold were placed. They were perfectly aware that they were helping to aggravate an already difficult situation and they, by action taken with a view to their person profit or advantage, were creating the very situation which they professed to fear. Hoarders of gold on such a scale must have been mostly men of considerable means, not subject to the blind fright of the small currency-hoarder and not drive to money-hoarding, as has happened in many parts of the country, through absolute breakdown of normal bank facilities or the fear of it.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60712FB3E5D...

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#68

Post by stan_rogers »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #13
ereckers wrote: post #8

I wouldn't go public either. Somebody before them owned that property and I wonder if old relatives could give you troubles.

If it was found on your land, and the deed to that land has been in your name for several years, they wouldn't have legit claim.

Depends where. This is treasure trove, (the discovery, or trover of treasure cache, deliberately hidden goods that can be classified as treasure, especially gold/silver) and the laws around that are a bit of a mess in a lot of places (particularly in the US, where most states opted to receive common law and there are several contradictory precedents).

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#69

Post by WalterBright »

iandanforth wrote: post #58
wintersFright wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the mono lisa only worth $2.50 for the price of canvas, paint and wood frame? Old paint at that! The price of a collectable is because someone else (not necessarily you) values it. And the odds are that many other wealthy collectors would value it at the same price, allowing the buyer to hold it and then trade it later for similar value.

Indeed, but here it's something that has two well understood prices. One, currency, which doesn't change over time, and two, gold, which fluctuates but generally increases over time. And despite being composed of these other things it has a third almost-totally-unconnected price related to artificial scarcity! I think that is super neat. It may also signal that humans are totally insane, but no matter.

When the price of gold fluctuates, you have to be careful inferring meaning - is it the value of gold fluctuating, or the value of the currency fluctuating?

It's not an easy question to answer.

Re: Tin cans filled with $10M in gold coins found buried in California

#70

Post by nerfhammer »

wintersFright wrote: post #54
MichaelGG wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that's so messed up. The Gold Reserve Act, too. It seems extremely "un-American" for the government to force people to sell their gold to the treasury. OTOH, so do a lot of things in hindsight, like the Vietnam draft. (Can you imagine US citizens today being forced to fight overseas?) Was this a common viewpoint when the act went in, or it decades of history since colouring my vision?

They immediately revalued the price of gold afterward so I'm sure it was seen as theft by the govt.

The price of gold was increased at the same time, not afterwards. So they repaid people 65% more than it had been worth the day before.
Post reply on HN