I never understood the "barbarous relic" nickname.
Does anyone know WHY gold should or might be considered a "barbarous relic"?
Because the gold standard is an ancient standard. In order for a monetary standard to be valuable, it needs to be based on something truly rare. That's why I'm proposing that we move to what I call the "Honest Democrat" standard. If we base our monetary standard on something truly rare - the rarest thing I can think of is an Honest Democrat...
That was what Keynes called it.
Maybe because in modern society, the bulk of the economic GDP is services, not physical goods?
Out vast wealth is based on the knowledge of our workers. With modern technology, physical goods are of very little value. Probably 50 million farmers, and 50 million factory workers, could produce all the food and manufactured goods the world needs. The real value is in medical services, legal services, and entertainment.
Does anyone know WHY gold should or might be considered a "barbarous relic"?
Possible reasons: (1) The source for the article is a periodical called "The Economist." Economics deals in abstractions. People who deal in abstractions are embarrassed by the existence of actual physical things upon which worth is based, just as most political science professors appear to be embarrassed by the inconvenient exitence of actual human beings who make nonsense of their theories. Gold is a "wild" thing whose worth fluctuates depending upon the unpredictable wants and desires of human beings for it. It is therefore unstable. It is therefore "barbarous." (2) The idiot writing the article has become so accustomed to thinking of worth in terms of money that he cannot see that gold is in itself a desirable and beautiful thing. What cannot be numerically expressed, but exists as its own concrete reality is, therefore, barbarous. (3) Gold may have been the base for monetary systems at one time in the deep dark distant past, before our monetary system began to be based on whatever the hell it's based on now. It is therefore not only barbarous, but a relic.
Or there could be some other reason entirely.
Because over the long run, it is a stupid investment.
My guess is it refers to mercantilism and all the violence that went along with that flawed economic system.
Gold is a "barbarous relic" to those economists and politicians and bureaucrats who desire to control from the politicval center the ups and dwns of economies. The Keynesians, especially, believe that all facets of the economy should be under the direct control of the Political authorities and that they should be abe to "manage" inflation and production and everything else by making "adjustments." Gold is a very visible measure of the failures of the Keynesians and the Monetarists and the politicians to accomplish anything, at least the things they wish to accomplish. They work for short term ends and use tools that produce long term effects which are not at all understood by the tool users. Gold is not an investment for value gain because gold is the measure of value. Gold is a safe harbor for assets in that its value does not change appreciably.
The price of oil has, indeed moderated from the short term increased scarcity in the market but it is still double what it was only a couple of years ago. And housing, levelling off, remains much higher. The rapid and large increases in both these things shows the working of very real inflation. If they actually decline we can expect rises in the market generally. The extra dollars that are inflation have largely
gone into real estate and oil since 2000. If those areas decline then those dollars will be in the market chasing everything else. Evidence that these price rises are, in fact, the manifestation of inflation is that while oil and RE have gone up rapidly, other goods have not declined or disappeared. If the money supply were stable, i.e. no inflation, the sharp rise in a major segment of the market would be accompanied by declines in the rest of the market
Let me take a stab at this question...
It is as much a slang or derogatory term.
The socialist and big government types (yes that includes Bush too) will constantly demean gold because their funny money fiat system rest solely on the faith of the people to believe in it, and be beholden to its masters and creators.
Money isn't worth the paper its printed on unless you believe it is. Without belief, the control over you and me and the rest of society would soon dwindle, or maybe even grow brutally worse.
So you see, gold is a threat to the system, for what it is, and what it represents; an alternative measure of value not based on the smoke and mirrors of our keepers but rather the free will of the people. They can't control the value of it...so they set their currency free of it to control us.
As to being barbarous and relic, that reference is likely because it was the standard when we were nothing if not unsophisticated by todays 'standards'.
Barbarous: 1. Primitive in culture and customs; uncivilized.
Relic: 1. Something that has survived the passage of time, especially an object or custom whose original culture has disappeared: “Corporal punishment was a relic of barbarism” (Cyril Connolly). 2. Something cherished for its age or historic interest. 3. An object kept for its association with the past; a memento.
Antonyms for Relic: fresh, green, new, unripe, unseasoned, young, youthful
Antonyms for Barbarous: civilized, cultured, humane, kind, nice, refined, sophisticated
Its very easy to understand why the elite, though they love gold themselves...hate the common mans desire for it, and the independent value it represents.
FDR, the father of the welfare state took us off the gold standard...
Because barbarians from all times and places make relics with it?