I believe Switzerland is the only country that has ever successfully kept a Gold standard. Having currency based on a single commodity is a big risk because it can easily be influenced by outside events. If we went to a commodity based currency, I would rather see it as a broad spectrum instead of just one.
having currency based on a worthless piece of paper issued by a banking cartel is not a big risk?
I have wondered if we could inject some stability into the currency if we would mint large denomination circulating coins. Say $500 gold coins, $10, $25, $50 silver and perhaps even $5 copper.
The face value and commodity content would need to be set at the commodity price on a certain date so if on that date gold was $2000 an ounce the $500 coin would need to be a quarter or fifth ounce (depending on purity)
This would be akin to the gold and silver certificates that you used to be able to exchange for gold and silver at your local bank. It would establish a competing currency to the paper dollar and therefore cause market pressure to make diddling with the currency less attractive.
We are on one. We have always been on the Gold Standard. The Fiat Currency is the problem.
Nope, the Swiss Franc is a fiat currency.
Swiss Franc...
The Swiss franc has historically been considered a safe-haven currency with virtually zero inflation and a legal requirement that a minimum of 40% be backed by gold reserves.[8] However, this link to gold, which dates from the 1920s, was terminated on 1 May 2000 following a referendum.[9] By March 2005, following a gold selling program, the Swiss National Bank held 1,290 tonnes of gold in reserves which equated to 20% of its assets.[10]
I distinguish between a “modern” gold standard where the supply of a nominally fiat currency is tied to gold prices vs. the gold coin or deposit notes that is more susceptible to to fluctuations due to changes in supply. Both are probably better than what we have now where the high priest of monetary policy determines money supply.