Don’t Expect a Return to a Gold Standard Any Time Soon

Guest Post by Antonius Aquinas

goldstandard

Despite trillions of paper currency units poured into the world economies since the start of the financial crisis, there has been no recovery, in fact, all legitimate indicators have shown worsening conditions except, of course, for the pocketbooks of the politically -connected financial elites.  Yet, despite the utter failure of the current money and banking paradigm to resolve the situation, the chance of a return to a commodity based monetary order is highly unlikely especially when one looks at the anti-gold bias found in typical college economics textbooks.

Macroeconomics: Principles, Problems and Policies by McConnell, Brue and Flynn is a leading introductory level college text which has been through, to date, some 20 editions.  Until the financial crisis of 2008, the subject of a commodity- backed money was not discussed, however, after the crisis and the popularity of gold standard enthusiasts like former Congressman and Presidential candidate Ron Paul, the authors of Macroeconomics obviously felt the need to address the resurgence in the interest of metallic money.

McConnell and company’s critique of the gold standard is full of fallacious reasoning that monetary cranks have employed for generations, all of which have been easily refuted by eminent economists.  Yet, the lies and distortions about commodity money continues in academia.

The authors admit that:

To many people, the fact that the government does

not back the currency with anything tangible seems

implausible and insecure.

This logical sentiment and realization of the fraudulent nature of unbacked currency by those outside the economics profession is brushed aside by the esteemed trio:

But the decision not to back the currency with anything tangible was made for a very good reason.

Yes, and we know what that reason was: so that the state and central banksters could have a ready and unlimited access to the creation of money to solidify and expand their power.  The gold standard was always an impediment to this cherished dream of the political elites – the establishment of an irredeemable, paper monetary order.

The authors, not surprisingly, see things differently:

If the government backed the currency with something

tangible like gold, then the supply of money would

vary with how much gold was available.  By not backing

the currency, the government avoids this constraint and

indeed receives a key freedom – the ability to provide

as much or as little money as needed to maintain the

value of money and to best suit the economic needs of

the country.

By all means, the state and central banksters should be given as much “freedom” as possible for we all know that governments would never abuse such license and would always act in the best interests of their citizens.  Certainly, the authors are not aware of any cases in history where such “freedom” was ever abused.

    Nearly all today’s economists agree that managing the

money supply is more sensible than linking it to gold or

to some other commodity whose supply might change

arbitrary and capriciously. . . .  if we used gold to back the

money supply so that gold was redeemable for money . . .

then a large increase in the nation’s gold stock as the

result of a new gold discovery might increase the money

supply too rapidly and thereby trigger rapid inflation.  Or

a long-lasting decline in gold production might reduce the

money supply to the point where recession and

unemployment resulted.

Volumes have been written debunking such stupidity.  The point, however, is that millions of minds have been exposed to such thinking and while most will not become economists (thank goodness!), what is taught in college and university classrooms about the gold standard is negative, to say the least.  Moreover, those who continue in a career in finance or economics will unlikely ever be presented with an accurate assessment of the gold standard.

A return to a sound and just monetary order will only take place after the ideological groundwork has been first laid, just as fiat money and central banking came about after years of proselytizing by inflationists.  It is also not enough to show the economic efficacy and moral soundness of commodity money, the ideas of crackpots like McConnell, Brue and Flynn need to be exposed for what they are.

Under the current academic environment, as generations have been misinformed, deceived, and lied to, it is unlikely that a return to a gold standard will take place.  Until the intellectual battle is won, paper money and the central banksters that manage it will continue their reign of financial terror.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
General
General
August 14, 2016 8:49 pm

To say that the current monetary and banking paradigm is an utter failure is completely wrong. It’s working absolutely fantastically for the bankers and their friends. For us, not so much.

bb
bb
August 14, 2016 9:33 pm

Hold on here a cotton picking minute . Hitler didn’t have gold when he took control of Germany’s Money supply.He issued the currency back by the labor of the German workers. He also issued The currency as value and interest free .Between 1934 – 1940 Germany became a military industrial power house.Maybe we should study that monetary system.

Fiatman60
Fiatman60
  bb
August 15, 2016 12:02 am

bb Germany was on the gold standard until WW1 and they were the first to abandon it when the war broke out. It’s in the history books…

Walt
Walt
August 14, 2016 9:38 pm

“Nearly all today’s economists agree that managing the money supply is more sensible than linking it to gold..”
Because thousands of years of history hold no lessons for us, and besides, this time it’s different. It’s the current year, you know.

[imgcomment image[/img]

A tiny coin measuring 8mm across has been unveiled as the smallest created by the Royal Mint in nearly 1,000 years.
Available in gold or silver, the delicate coin weighs a 40th of an ounce and has been minted as part of a wider collection produced to celebrate Britannia, who first appeared on coins in Roman times.
The coin – the smallest the Mint has produced since the Norman Conquest in 1066 – is just under half the diameter of a 5p piece, which measures 1.8cm.
(((The coin is legal tender, with a face value of 50p))).

David
David
August 14, 2016 9:43 pm

The return will happen, but it won’t be pleasant.

I always like asking my leftist “friends” (getting harder to consider them such) how the USA was able to go from a start up to the highest GDP, both absolute and per capita, at a higher growth rate than we have now and less inequality, under the gold standard.

Unspent
Unspent
August 14, 2016 10:20 pm

If you own some, no need for a “return to standard” because fiat has fluctuated against it (up and down) from the time man first crushed grapes.

General
General
August 14, 2016 11:00 pm

Except that we get paid in funny money. Plus pay capital “gains” taxes for the value of the fake dollar dropping.

Fiatman60
Fiatman60
August 15, 2016 12:12 am

It may not happen soon…. but it will happen….
Slowly and quietly, people will only trade silver and gold, and fiat will return to the dustbin where it belongs, until the next generation comes up with the idea again….. history always repeats,…. always…..

IndenturedServant
IndenturedServant
August 15, 2016 12:51 am

I wish I could figure out what the September 1st implementation of the SDR system will do to gold prices. There are plenty of rumblings and pushing for gold to be included in the valuing of SDR’s which should support prices but if gold is not included I’m expecting gold to drop.

Internally, the dollar is likely to be devalued by as much as 60% in the coming decade or less. A 20%-30% will be likely in the next year or two.

I’m tempted to sell some gold short term and buy it back at a lower price.

jamesthewanderer
jamesthewanderer
August 15, 2016 3:38 am

The value of gold is determined by its properties – mass, purity and quantity. The value of fiat is determined – by what it buys or can be traded for. Once the Crunch hits, the value of gold will remain the same (at least); the value of fiat will hit zero. Choose wisely.

Troy Ounce
Troy Ounce
August 15, 2016 5:51 am

A friend of mine, master in economics, recently told me that he is “against sound money”. How can this be? How can one be against sound money? Only, I guess, if you want to fleece the system. Oh, and it works! (But not for you and me). Also, nobody understands this difficult subject in any case.

If I work as a let’s say 15 year old and wash cars in the neighbourhood for a month I want the US$ 500 earned to have the same buying power as when I am 65 and not US$ 0.05. Why can I not retain the fruit of my work for eternity?

But, let’s wait with this discussion till after the inevitable collapse of the financial system and thereafter the confiscation of pensions and deposits, creating a hyperinflation environment.
Lets discuss then. Promise, then suddenly everybody understands they have been fleeced. People will then insist on a gold standard. How would one know? Just count the bodies of banksters hanging from your lamp posts on the market square.

A. R. Wasem
A. R. Wasem
August 15, 2016 11:34 am

IS – Suggest you utilize the various ETFs for your “trading” ideas. Physical pm holdings should be “forever” – or until restoration of constitutional govt. and pm-backed currency/free-market economy.