1. What to do about silver? When the U.S. had a gold standard, post Civil War, most observers thought a policy of bimetallism was unworkable. It would require pegging the price of one metal to the other. Any time metal markets moved to higher gold, silver would drive gold out of circulation (Say's Law, I believe).
2. If you don't adopt bimetallism, political pressures will develop to do so, just as they did in the late 1800's (William Jennings Bryan). What happened was silver purchases by the Treasury -- 1890 Sherman Silver Repurchase Act -- to placate the easy money crowd. When the budget ran a deficit back then, the purchases threatened to force the government to redeem paper with silver rather than gold, effectively forcing conversion to a silver standard.
3. Conversion to a silver standard then destroys the fixed exchange rate which is one of the original purposes of a gold standard. Currencies are then revalued accordingly, depriving investors of what was originally sought, a guarantee of non-depreciation of the currency.
4. Under a gold standard, when the gov't runs a surplus, its drains gold from the economy, making it difficult for banks to keep necessary reserves on hand. The banks then have to call in loans, precipitating an economic tightening, raising interest rates, lowering prices on capital markets for stocks and bonds. Gov't deficits work in the opposite direction, with the potential inability of the gov't to redeem its currency in gold. This is why Nixon took us off finally in the 70's.
They found it was very hard to have a balanced budget back in the late 1800's, when things were much simpler than today. Would be near impossible to do so now I imagine, so surpluses and deficits would have the same harmful consequences they did in our previous experience with gold.
Can these problems, which are based on our actual experience, be overcome?
Many good points and the answer to your final question is no.