"We are in our economic condition due to the hoarding of dollars by the 1%."
Technically, you could extend that argument and claim that all americans, who make up the top 1% globally, are hoarding the wealth of planet earth, which should be penalized as a means of putting it in the hands of our less fortunate brethren in the developing world.
Here's the obvious flaw to the logic, at least as it relates to a free society. They created those dollars. Society exchanged those dollars for a relatively rare good or service that they were singularly able to provide. So in some respects, it was the hoarding of that rare good or service, not the hoarding of dollars, that is at the root of the problem. Because without that good or service they would have never had the dollars in the first place. Conversely, not being able to provide a good or service is why the poor are what they are.
And while I am quite positive you would be willing to deny the wealth that which society has freely given, would you be willing to demand that society go without the goods or services, whose provision resulted in the rich becoming that way? If so, you will find yourself at odds with both society, the productive classes or both. The only way you could ever truly hop to achieve your goal would be the enslavement of the productive classes, something they would not likely take sitting down.
"Ray a stock or bond is issued against debt and nothing is produced in that transaction, it is the vehicle in which dollars are allowed to accumulate to those with the most hoarded dollars."
You need to take a corporate finance course. Bonds are instruments of debt, used for financing something. Stocks are shares of ownership. So, if you have a stock, then it technically means that you (collectively alongside all other stockholders) are obligated to pay whatever debt has been contracted to the bondholder.
"Now you own 1 dollar of gold which is the product of debt. You own that loss until you sell your gold. It is at that time a value is assigned to your gold. It may be more than 1 dollar or it may be less than 1 dollar to be determined by the market."
That is quite possibly the silliest argument I have ever heard. Instead of gold, let's use Canadian dollars. Let's say I buy $1 USD worth of Canadian dollars. Using your logic, I am now $1 USD in "debt". But you weren't exactly clear or your definitions of "debt" and "loss." Debt implies that I owe money to someone else. Loss implies that in the process of some financial exchange I have lost money. Clearly I do not owe money to anyone for the Canadian dollar I purchased, so we can rule that out. And given that loss in an accounting function, it would only be realized when and if I chose to convert my Canadian Money into some other currency. If I was seeking to make money off arbitrage via currency trading, then I might realize a small loss or gain, but that's the only time.
