[Mr. Quarterpanel]

I am STILL trying to figure out what the author is getting at.

While the salient points offered are true, there is much interpretation going along with the stated points. The main reason that money has value (fiat of not) has to do with the availability of it for loans, the ability of said loans to be paid back, and the confidence that the money will be available to pay it back. To strip the value from the current system WILL cause economic collapse worldwide. The coin of the realm in the world is the mighty US buck. To return to a "hard currency" (like gold) would place money out of reach from the average citizen, and price volitility for comodities would prevent a stable economic situation from developing for a long time, if ever.

You can post 1000 word chapters outlining the situation (sort of), but the truth is, a stable currency is what helps keep the price of comodities reasonably stable. Before the current situation, economic depressions were commonplace. The price of oil is a good example: talk of war, and the price jumps $10. Without the mediating effects a stable currency, that price jump might be $50-$100. Enough to bankrupt every airline, and most bulk carriers around the world. Without those, other businesses then can't do business, and the cascade continues until: economic depression.

But this is just my .00002 oz of gold's worth.

[zechariah]

a stable currency is what helps keep the price of comodities reasonably stable.

Actually, exactly the opposite is true. Compare commodities prices before and after 1972 when we finally abandoned all pretense of a gold standard. Commodity prices have been significantly more volitile in the past 30 years than in all previous history.

[z]