Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SeeSharp

Perhaps it is nit-picking but no private person could call his production “money” since it would not have to be universally accepted as anything other than an object of value. Nor is foreign exchange true “money” for exchange.

The Dixie story is an interesting one isn’t it?


51 posted on 03/22/2011 1:26:46 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: arrogantsob
Perhaps it is nit-picking but no private person could call his production “money” since it would not have to be universally accepted as anything other than an object of value.

I don't follow. Private individuals have issued money and have had it universally accepted. Usually private money contained gold or silver but not always. Token money issued by button makers fueled the early industrial revolution - see Good Money by George Selgin. There is a great story in Selgin's book about how the Chancellor of England was outraged at being asked to pay double by a Manchester merchant when he tried to pay with English money. Nine out of ten English coins were counterfeit at the time. The local merchants in places like Manchester and Birmingham preferred the local factory tokens because they knew they could exchange them in bulk for gold.

55 posted on 03/22/2011 1:41:13 PM PDT by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson