Prices are relative determinations. When something is elevated to the role of money in the marketplace its value is determined by the participants on an individual case by case basis. There are 'enough' yen to price everything in the world, just as there are enough Federal Reserve notes. A currency denominated in gold weight would just as readily by priced by the market against all goods available.
Too many people would lose too much value to tolerate the switch.
Who? Those who get the loans of 'new money' first? Surely not those seeing the value of the dollar driven down by Bernanke's deliberate inflation of the money supply. Why do you care more about Goldman Sachs than the people who live on your block? They're losing too much now to continue with this system of institutionalized robbery in lieu of taxation.
- rate of gold supply increase does not match general wealth creation rate. Inflation or deflation ensues as GDP increases.
Changes in value (price) consequent to relative levels of production are how free market economies prioritize production. If the rate of production of two goods are different, then an increase of the money supply can't match them now anyway. This point you raise is actually irrelevant. In the event that production in general outpaced the production of gold specifically this would actually confer additional benefit upon savers, and automatically encourage even greater levels of capital formation to support even greater capital investment and increased productivity.
What good is capital formation in a deflationary environment when no one wants to borrow or invest in new production?