Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: djsherin

I think we could come up with a weighted basket of goods, actually backed by commodities on hand in a controlled environment. That would be more stable too, since any one commodity’s secular situation would not completely upset the entire monetary system (discovering 3X the gold in one go; Goldfinger irradiating it all, etc.)

I think we’re heading in the same direction. I just don’t want to end up in a world where I’m paid 1/10th of an ounce of gold for my year’s productivity. That is an unsustainable medium of exchange.


21 posted on 01/06/2009 10:45:44 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (Most Animals protect their babies. Palestinians kill their babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Miltie

I realize that, but as soon as something else becomes more appealing as a medium of exchange (whether the reason is gold’s unattractiveness or another commodity’s attractiveness), gold will be phased out anyway. That’s the beauty of the market not hindered by the government. People simply by their actions influence what the dominant money(ies) is/are.

I think people don’t realize that if we go on a gold standard now (or rather allowing the market to choose the medium of exchange), we won’t be forever beholden to gold.


24 posted on 01/06/2009 11:16:38 AM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson