You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The Socialist Poverty Formula

in #socialism7 years ago (edited)

The reason the most prosperous time in recent history, the American colonial heights, was quickly brought to an end, was because paper money which used land as the value backing the currency was usurped by the king and parliament and a gold/silver standard was enacted which proved to be distributed far to thinly to make any economy, and so the rampant poverty that struck the previously prosperous colonists led to the American Revolution and because there's no evidence in over an extremely long 5000 year history when Gold standard worked because it has always been counterfeit by the ones that issue it, it will never be enough to account for the economy or any portion of it, and it's vastly inconvenient to move a lot of wealth as such and the danger of being separated from the gold makes it better than cash for a thief as far as tracing the gold is concerned. Gold is a store of value, but it couldn't be currency, currency needs stability or it's valuations are worthless, from a logically consistent point with the function of currency or money.

See bibocurrency.com for a great write-up of what money is.

Sort:  

currency needs stability or it's valuations are worthless

Interesting thought...

I'm curious then, the US dollar has lost 95% of its purchasing power since the FED was established in 1913. Is the US dollar a currency in your eyes, seeing as by your definition it is not very stable?

I would consider gold more stable than fiat, simply because gold has gone up in value in the last 100 years, where the dollar (and all fiat for that matter) has clearly gone down. I agree gold isn't easy to transact with, but I'm not making that argument.