Replies

Gold is a dead issue as far as money goes. It has rarely worked well for long and there is no doubt that it would ever do so again.

Can't you say the same about paper money? Hasn't every attempt to use paper money eventually ended in an inflation? I'm not against a paper based money per se. But it should be backed by something, gold, land, whatever. And the amount banks can fractionate their savings should be restricted. I also don't like the idea of a central bank. What's wrong with competition between banks?

That's just my understanding of the issue. I have never been good at economic theory. So, what do you say?

Actually we have moved beyond paper money and are now in the realm of electronic money. Far more of our transactions today are handled through that realm and the use of checks.
This will only increase in the future.

Review American banking history between 1812 and 1850 and you will get a good idea of what is wrong with banking without a central bank. It is not a matter of competitition since that is not incompatible with central banking. Why do you believe every country has such an institution? In actual fact there is LESS inflation when there are strong central banks. Germany had little inflation after 1922 because its authorities did not allow it. Nor does a gold standard prevent inflation as examination of European monetary history after the gold from the New World was introduced into its financial system shows. Spain ruined itself through such importation.

Banks are restricted by the reserve ratio in the amount of money they can create.

Deflation is as destructive as inflation as the 1930s showed and a gold standard is inherently deflationary since its supplies cannot expand sufficiently to meet the need for money. This is why there was a persistent clamour throughout our history to establish a new monetary standard.