Replies

Gold and silver can only expand as fast as mining permits, that much of what you said is true.

But the ASSET VALUE of gold is not restricted. Supply and demand in the market will set the value of gold as high as it needs to go.

But that was not good enough for the banksters, because "honest money" (ie gold backed money) did not permit them to simply print all of the fiat currency they wanted, when they wanted. Hence Jekyll Island, and the federal reserve act.

But you will say, "so what?" I'll tell you "so what." Show me an example in all of recorded history where the debasement of the currency didn't end in disaster and tears. Begin with the Roman Denarius, which went from pure silver to pure copper, as the Roman Empire declined and fell.

How about pre-revolutionary France? The printing presses rolled, and then heads rolled. Literally.

How about "worthless as a Continental?" The USA was almost stillborn, and the Constitution and the Coin Act were supposed to guarantee an end to worthless fiat money.

How about Weimar Germany? Wheelbarrows worth more than the millions of Marks it held. "Hello, Adolf."

Now it is your turn to say, "It's different time."

But please, give me one example in recorded history where ballooning expanding fiat money produced a stable and prosperous society IN THE LONG RUN.

And don't tell me, "in the long run, we are all dead." I do not want to hand a Caligula, Napoleon or Hitler to my children, if the survive the coming Greater Depression.

So please, one historical example of oceans of fiat money leading to stability and prosperity will suffice. Just one.

But the ASSET VALUE of gold is not restricted. Supply and demand in the market will set the value of gold as high as it needs to go.

But I thought that you'd have notes that say, for instance, this note redeemable for 1 ounce of gold? How does the increasing value of gold increase the money supply? You still have the same number of notes. Same number of ounces.

Stability not only has never been a characteristic of metallic regimes but in actual fact they have been only theoretic thoughout most of capitalistic development. It was the growth of capitalism which led to the development of banking in the first place because of the needs to provide and international means of exchange without having to deal with the cumbersome transportation of precious metals. Coins were notoriously variable in quality and weight. You might measure the backwardness of an economy by its dependence upon metals for money.

So an exchange economy and credit banking are historically coordinated. As for the historic horrors you list surely you cannot compare a deliberate governmental policy of inflation under Weimar to destroy the huge debt of Versailles with the deliberations of representatives of the American people? Or those of a Bloody Tyranny casting about like a desparate animal with the French Assignats?

Hamilton solved the problem of American monetary needs and the Continentals with his funding program and the creation of a money supply by selling debt for specie. He capitalized the word of the American people. American monetary authorities have on the whole done a good job in monetary matters though making some mistakes there have been few examples of real irresponsibility.

Gold coinage is hugely difficult to keep and, the proclamation of metallic standards prove impossible to maintain with war certain to suspend convertibility. Financing modern military establishments is also impossible under a metallic standard.

Public finance is like most sciences in that there were strange theories which once held sway but which have gotten closer and closer to real answers. There is nothing to fear about Central Banking which is just as well since it is impossible to do without it in a modern economy.