The state is always and everywhere a danger, even when it has no monopoly on money and no printing press that can create money tickets at will. But a state with the ability to make its own money is a grave and relentless threat to prosperity and freedom. It leaves the future entirely to the discretion of the money managers. Every day we live under the threat that the United States could be the next Weimar Republic or even another Zimbabwe. All that stands between us and that day is the wisdom and prudence of the Fed.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jnr - talk given on 1 November 2008
Now, how do we mice bell the cats?
And if a foreign nation that trades with you uses currency inflation to support its domestic employment and its exports to you, are you prepared to see a slump in your own economy in order to maintain the integrity of your currency? Can virtue be rewarded, or is it (as seems to happen in this world) severely punished?
5 comments:
I'm reading and I'm noting, Sackers.
It's interesting to read articles written to oppose the use of a gold standard (or any other reality-based standard). They list the disadvantages, and stop. There is, typically, no attempt to demonstrate that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, or, what comes to the same thing, to show that the net advantages are smaller than the net advantages of a fiat currency system.
That is right, Dearieme and there are cogent reasons to support some sort of backing for the fiat money, gold being preferable.
Or silver. Arguably, silver should be better than gold. For starters, there's 6 times more gold in the world than silver, and silver probably has more industrial uses. Why it isn't more expensive I don't know.
Hi, wildgoose - isn't the price of silver in relation to gold supposed to average 1:16?
Post a Comment