Posted on 03/02/2006 7:12:11 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed
The prospect of further rises in interest rates in the eurozone unnerved both equity and bond markets on Thursday.
...
The price of silver rose to a fresh 22-year high above $10 an ounce amid expectations that a silver exchange-traded fund would soon receive US regulatory approval.
During the 79-80 spike, I was a kid reading Boy's Life magazine. They were selling gold and silver coins in the classifieds. I just naturally assumed that you should always be able to buy coins out of the back of Average Publication. A 17-year bull cycle should eclipse the numbers posted back then.
Yes, exactly. OTOH, an unbacked fiat currency Federal Reserve Note dollar may not be worth a Continental in the future. That is, if it follows every other unbacked fiat currency in the history of mankind.
But an ounce of silver will still be an ounce of silver.
It's really handy and convenient to know you can instantly tune out and ignore anything said or written by anyone on finance as soon as you see the word "fiat."
Excerpt from the speech by Governor Ben S. Bernanke Before the National Economists Club,November 21, 2002 (The famous "helicopter money" speech)
Let me start with some general observations about monetary policy at the zero bound, sweeping under the rug for the moment some technical and operational issues.
As I have mentioned, some observers have concluded that when the central bank's policy rate falls to zero--its practical minimum--monetary policy loses its ability to further stimulate aggregate demand and the economy. At a broad conceptual level, and in my view in practice as well, this conclusion is clearly mistaken. Indeed, under a fiat (that is, paper) money system, a government (in practice, the central bank in cooperation with other agencies) should always be able to generate increased nominal spending and inflation, even when the short-term nominal interest rate is at zero.
The conclusion that deflation is always reversible under a fiat money system follows from basic economic reasoning. A little parable may prove useful: Today an ounce of gold sells for $300, more or less. Now suppose that a modern alchemist solves his subject's oldest problem by finding a way to produce unlimited amounts of new gold at essentially no cost. Moreover, his invention is widely publicized and scientifically verified, and he announces his intention to begin massive production of gold within days. What would happen to the price of gold? Presumably, the potentially unlimited supply of cheap gold would cause the market price of gold to plummet. Indeed, if the market for gold is to any degree efficient, the price of gold would collapse immediately after the announcement of the invention, before the alchemist had produced and marketed a single ounce of yellow metal.
I had a Fiat once. I know what you mean.
The Gold Standard vs. Fiat Money
[Q:] I saw the term "Gold Standard" mentioned in one of my textbooks. What was the gold standard and how does it differ from today's system of money.
[A:] Excellent question! First we'll have a quick history lesson, then we'll see how it works and how it differs from fiat money.
Definition of the Gold Standard
My normally extensive Economics Glossary does not have an entry on the gold standard, so we'll have to look elsewhere for a definition. An extensive essay on the gold standard on The Encyclopedia of Economics and Liberty defines the gold standard as "a commitment by participating countries to fix the prices of their domestic currencies in terms of a specified amount of gold.
National money and other forms of money (bank deposits and notes) were freely converted into gold at the fixed price." A county under the gold standard would set a price for gold, say $100 an ounce and would buy and sell gold at that price. This effectively sets a value for the currency; in our fictional example $1 would be worth 1/100th of an ounce of gold. Other precious metals could be used to set a monetary standard; silver standards were common in the 1800's. A combination of the gold and silver standard is known as bimetallism.
A Very Brief History of the Gold Standard
If you would like to learn about the history of money in detail, there is an excellent site called A Comparative Chronology of Money which details the important places and dates in monetary history. During most of the 1800s the United States was had a bimetallic system of money, however it was essentially on a gold standard as very little silver was traded. A true gold standard came to fruition in 1900 with the passage of the Gold Standard Act. The gold standard effectively came to an end in 1933 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlawed private gold ownership (except for the purposes of jewelery). The Bretton Woods System, enacted in 1946 created a system of fixed exchange rates that allowed governments to sell their gold to the United States treasury at the price of $35/ounce. "The Bretton Woods system ended on August 15, 1971, when President Richard Nixon ended trading of gold at the fixed price of $35/ounce. At that point for the first time in history, formal links between the major world currencies and real commodities were severed". The gold standard has not been used in any major economy since that time.
What Do We Use Today?
Almost every country, including the United States, is on a system of fiat money, which the glossary defines as "money that is intrinsically useless; is used only as a medium of exchange". We saw in the article "Why Does Money Have Value" that the value of money is set by the supply and demand for money and the supply and demand for other goods and services in the economy. The prices for those goods and services, including gold and silver, are allowed to fluctuate based on market forces. Next we'll look at how the monetary system used can change other variables in the economy.
Feb 26th 2004 From The Economist print edition
The trouble with paper money
IS THE problem with the dollar only that it is falling? It has certainly been doing that. This month, it fell to $1.29 against the euro. This is its lowest-ever rate against the euro, and represents a decline of 19% since the beginning of 2003. In trade-weighted terms, the dollar has fallen less over the same period (15%), but mainly because Asian central banks have been intervening heavily to stem their currencies' rise against it. Of late, it has been wobbling around unconvincingly: America needs a weaker dollar to correct its current-account deficit. But given the dollar's role as a currency of last resort, some wonder if its decline heralds not just an economic adjustment by the United States, but a crisis of sorts in the value of paper money itself.
Money in its present form is a relatively new invention. For most of human history money meant either gold or silver, either directly, or indirectly by means of the “gold standard” which meant, at least in theory, that all paper money was backed by gold. Enthusiasm for the gold standard evaporated in the 1930s, when it made dreadful conditions worse. But it was adopted in a watered-down version after the second world war, when only the dollar was backed by gold. This arrangement made some sense, since America held three-quarters of the world's gold stock. But it came to an end in 1971, when inflationary pressures in America caused the country's manufacturers to become uncompetitive and forced the country off the gold standard. Since then the world has relied on “fiat money”, so-called because it is created by government fiat and is backed only by the promises of central bankers to protect the value of their currencies. It is the value of those promises that some are now questioning.
(Continues at link.)
Encyclopedia Britannica Online
Gradually, governments assumed a supervisory role. They specified legal tender, defining the type of payment that legally discharged a debt when offered to the creditor and that could be used to pay taxes. Governments also set the weight and metallic composition of coins. Later they replaced fiduciary paper money—promises to pay in gold or silver—with fiat paper money—that is, notes that are issued on the “fiat” of the sovereign government, are specified to be so many dollars, pounds, or yen, etc., and are legal tender but are not promises to pay something else.
So far, you are on record as "tuning out and ignoring" anything said by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, or written in About Economics, The Encyclopedia Britannica, and The Economist.
In a few more minutes, I could pile up a dozen more references to fiat money, but I think the point is made.
No comment? No retraction?
It is much more plausible that oil will be created (oil is a molecule, not an element and so could theoretically be made by other methods).
Even nano-tech theorists do not suggest nanotechnology will be able to convert one element to another.
Asteroids are the more likely source of lots of "new" gold, not alchemy.
Read from 22 on for a laugh.
I only grabbed that part of the Helicopter Speech because that was when Ben made a few mentions of fiat money. But it does show how his mind works (or not.)
Thank you all! I bought some silver in 1999, but I couldn't remember how much I'd paid for it. I'll file this for future reference.
I don't ever intend to do anything with it, I just like having it around.
Prospectors are my favorite. You never pay much of a premium on those.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.