Physicist here. This is nonsense. We know what it takes to have such reactions. These kind of neutron bombardment nuclear reactions were studied and understood more then 50 years ago. We know the energy per reaction, the probability of it occur (we call these cross sections) and the branching ratios (when you bombard a target you make a soup of various elements, so further processing is required to separate the elements). The bombarded target is so radioactive, you have to store it for many years. Here are the theoretical limit (ideal case) numbers. To make 1 oz of gold, you need to bombard 21 kg of mercury. To get enough neutrons for it, again, theoretical limit, you need 2.8 lbs of pure U-235, or 390 lbs of natural uranium, which is mostly U-238. At current prices, the raw materials ALONE (21 kg of mercury and 390 lbs of uranium) cost $33k ($2k for mercury, $31k for uranium). And we're not talking about the need to have a working nuclear freaking reactor, chemical separation afterwards (with 1 oz of gold you also make 1/3 oz of thallium, which is extremely toxic). This is the ideal theoretical case when everything is assumed to work with 100% efficiency. To call this scheme a threat to gold mining is ridiculous.

Your employer will never pay you what you're worth. They can't. Their model only works if there's a gap between what you produce and what you cost. A great way to close that gap is to work for yourself.

Here is the inflation the government won't tell you about: