The unbacked dollar that buys more gold in 2006 than it did in 1980? That's funny!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are so predictable as to be patently ridiculous! You cherry pick one short period which fits your theory and ignore the rest. How about comparing 2006 to 1983? I see your game but I cannot understand your motivation. You are not fooling too many by the way.
I know you are, but what am I?
You cherry pick one short period which fits your theory and ignore the rest.
How about something a little more recent?
Under a gold standard, we'd have had severe deflation (over 30%) from January until mid-May and severe inflation (over 20%) from mid-May until mid-June. Yeah, that sounds more stable than an unbacked dollar. LOL!
Well, the unbacked dollar today buys more gold than it did in May of 2006.
I guess that's another "cherry-picked" choice.
There are dangers in having a dollar that isn't tied to anything -- but tying it to gold isn't really useful, as the quantity of gold held by a country is not a meaningful measure of the value of the country or of the true economic power of the country.
The federal reserve's attempts to keep money supply in defined ranges based on the true product of the country serves the same purpose as a gold standard.