Idaho Politician Opposes Removing Tax on Gold for a Very Odd Reason
We witnessed what appeared to be the Dunning-Kruger effect (people who know the least tend to overvalue their own competence, and believe that they are experiencing some sort of upper-echelon level of thinking) in action earlier this month on the floor of the Idaho House of Representatives.
During the March 14 floor debate on Idaho’s House Bill 206, a measure that promotes sound money by removing Idaho income taxation from precious metals, Democrat Representative Mat Erpelding—the House Minority Leader—shared his two cents, even after asserting that he had no opinion on the bill (but then voted against it).
“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have an opinion on this bill. However, I do have an opinion on facts. Facts are somewhat important,” Representative Erpelding said. “If we say that gold is going to protect us from inflation, I want to point out that in 1868, gold was $27 an ounce, and today gold is $1,218 an ounce. So we can’t say that gold is going to protect us from inflation when you have that type of a price range over the last hundred years.”
What? The purchasing power of the dollar versus gold has fallen nearly 98% and gold therefore offers no protection against inflation?
Despite Minority Leader Erpelding’s objection, House Bill 206 overwhelmingly passed by 56 to 13. Next, sound money supporters hope to receive a hearing and a vote in the Idaho Senate.