"A gold standard regime would be a disaster for any large advanced economy. Love of the (gold standard) implies macroeconomic illiteracy," said Chicago Booth's Anil Kashyap.

What? They didn't ask Raystradamus? What WERE they thinking?

Pretty skimpy article- soundbites from unspecified economists and Obama staff, Ron Paul is stupid, end of story.

The price of gold fluctuates because of inflationary fiat currency. You can't denounce the idea by working backwards in logic. If a government can't print a few trillion more in "quantitative easing" then inflation remains low, prices stable. By tying it to gold, that very restriction is assured.

So, they all deny that history happened?

Interesting, guess they all forget that, until 1913 inflation and deflation occured in oscillating cycles (because of the supply and demand for money) around 0% inflation. Then modest inflation from 1913 until 1971, then exponential inflation ever since.

Little wonder these guys are "surprised" every week when their forecasts and consensus is "wrong".

Do they no longer explain the "Theory of Money and Credit" in college these days?

"then exponential inflation ever since."

Link please.

Asked whether a return to the gold standard would lead to price-stability and employment outcomes that "would be better for the average American," 100 percent said no.

Of course not as we already know: imaginary money gets you further than real money. That is why so many live in credit card debt.

Returning to the Gold Standard would, however, secure the value of our money and help prevent another bubble.

Are you telling us that the Great Depression never happened? I seem to recall we were on the "Gold Standard" then...

Are you telling us that the Great Depression never happened?

Did you see me say anything about that? I said "prevent another bubble," not another depression.

RIF.org can help you...provided you find someone to read it to you.

I don't know that we CAN return. My macro-E classes of the 80's aren't still fresh in my brain.

Here's my question for the crowd: assuming we don't or can't return to the gold standard, and knowing full well that our debt is going to continue to spiral upward, how soon before the dollar isn't worth shit? Won't that lead to hyperinflation? Like I said, my macro-E is pretty fuzzy, but as we borrow money, the actual value of the dollar drops, which means it takes more dollars to buy the same thing tomorrow than it does today, and that's inflation, right?

Another question for the smart crowd: With the EU imploding and the US spending like a drunken sailor, what has happened to the derivatives market? I remember hearing that compared the derivatives bubble, the housing bubble was a guppy in a shark tank.

"RIF.org can help you...provided you find someone to read it to you."

Knowing you are 6-4 and Letusboy 5-4, maybe it went over his head?

Yes of course, gold has been a monetary standard for 2500 years. Listen to the same economists whose ideas are leading to the worst financial collapse since the 30s.

Are you telling us that the Great Depression never happened? I seem to recall we were on the "Gold Standard" then...
#7 | Posted by LetUsPrey

What you ignored is that Roosevelt confiscated gold and devalued the dollar against gold by almost 60%.

The lesson not learned is that there is no economic system politicians can't bankrupt.

All stupidity from the OCD imbecile aside, my point is that the gold standard did nothing to prevent the worst economic disaster in U.S. history, so maybe you're embracing it is a little naive. But I'm well aware you never admit you're wrong about anything, so pound sand.

"What you ignored is that Roosevelt confiscated gold"

Oh, did that happen before the Depression?

my point is that the gold standard did nothing to prevent the worst economic disaster in U.S. history,

Maybe the point in your head, but you did not put that in writing. What you posted was a stupid pointless typical Lettuc "gotcha" attempt that failed as they always do.

Even during the Great Depression, the dollar's value remained stable.

"then exponential inflation ever since."
Link please.
#5 | Posted by northguy3

All you need to do is understand the math of compound interest. An interest rate of any magnitude when compounded over a long enough time will eventually go to infinity. It means there are mathematical limits to debt. It also means that the value of the dollar is getting closer to zero. The dollar has lost 98% of its value against gold since 1971.

So go ahead libs. Listen to the economists who have been justifiying infinite government debt. It's your life.

"All stupidity from the OCD imbecile aside, my point is that the gold standard did nothing to prevent the worst economic disaster in U.S. history"

Of course you responded to a post about preventing another bubble and nothing about a depression... Right you fucking mental midget? I would say man up, but I doubt you can reach it...

"Returning to the Gold Standard would, however, secure the value of our money and help prevent another bubble."

Are you telling us that the Great Depression never happened? I seem to recall we were on the "Gold Standard" then...
#7 | Posted by LetUsPrey at 2012-01-19 01:41 PM

Even during the Great Depression, the dollar's value remained stable.
#16 | Posted by adammm

Not exactly. The dollar's price remained relatively stable. That's because improvements in productivity were bringing prices down and masking the monetary inflation.

Another lesson libs haven't learned and probably won't. Prices should have been going down (a more valuable dollar) over the past hundred years as population grew and production increased.

"What you ignored is that Roosevelt confiscated gold"
Oh, did that happen before the Depression?
#13 | Posted by LetUsPrey

What happened before the start of the depression was the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. That's when the era of cheap money began to fuel the boom of the late 1920s.

All stupidity from the OCD imbecile aside, my point is that the gold standard did nothing to prevent the worst economic disaster in U.S. history, so maybe you're embracing it is a little naive. But I'm well aware you never admit you're wrong about anything, so pound sand.
#12 | Posted by LetUsPrey

Let me repeat what I said in #11: No monetary system can stop politicians from bankrupting it. Federal deficits are out of control and you have your head in the sand.

And knowing full well that our debt is going to continue to spiral upward,

Not necessarily.

Bubba
###
All you need to do is understand the math of compound interest.

Ray-what exponential means is 10 fold. So if inflation is 1% in year one, it is 10% in year two, 100% in year 3 and 1000% in year 4.

I'd like to see a link showing this.

The Gold system is a finite money system; credit is infinite. Economists perfer infinite because there is always more. Gold system will limit your growth to what you possess.

There are pros and cons to it, but I think the pros right now out weight the cons.

#22 | Posted by northguy3

look it up yourself

Gold system will limit your growth to what you possess.

That's another myth. Gold does not limit growth because there is no limit to the price of gold and there is no reason why other metals can't complement gold when market needs require it.

In the past gold, silver and copper was common forms of money.

The whole point of a metalic monetary standard is to create a common measurable standard of exchange. All bets are off when politicans and bankers abuse the standard as they are now.

Theoretically, fiat money would work if politicians and bankers could be kept honest.

That's another myth. Gold does not limit growth because there is no limit to the price of gold and there is no reason why other metals can't complement gold when market needs require it.

You misread me. I am saying basically you have what you have with the Gold system; you can't create more out of nothing like we can today.

Ray-what exponential means is 10 fold. So if inflation is 1% in year one, it is 10% in year two, 100% in year 3 and 1000% in year 4.

#22 | Posted by northguy3 at 2012-01-19 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exponential can mean ten fold but the exponent in the equation can be most any real number.

It looks something like this:

Or this:

You misread me. I am saying basically you have what you have with the Gold system; you can't create more out of nothing like we can today.
#26 | Posted by kanrei

Just so we're clear. That's one of gold's virtues as a monetary standard. I get put downs about gold's inedibility. That's another one of its virtues. No one wants a currency that spoils.

All the neo-modern economists are propagandized educationally in keynesian economics. Like many other jobs, if globally we go back to some form of "gold standard" many of them and their jobs will become irrelevant. We will go back to some form of standard since people the globe over with time will never accept the dollar as the future reserve currency again----they no longer want to allow the US to put the rest of the globe at risk like the Federal Reserve did to us this time and before the great depression.

Look at it like this, we never accept anything from one another here without proof or a link. Gold is the link; Gold is the proof our money is worth what we claim it is.

"All the neo-modern economists are propagandized educationally in keynesian economics."

Baloney, Supply Side economics has been the predominantly taught theory of economics for 20 years, right up until it was proven to be completely wrong.

You know who wants to go back to the gold standard? Those who own gold. If we ever did such an insane thing our nation would be almost instantly bankrupted and the few holding gold would be instantly rich, gold would go through the roof in value. Ray would be insanely happy because he'd be wealthy and I'd be a homeless pauper.

You know who wants to go back to the gold standard? Those who own gold.

I own no gold, but keep trying anyway to lump together everyone you don't like.

Bubbles and theri bursting are driven by low interest rates and leveraged speculation.

Where is Ray???

"Ray would be insanely happy because he'd be wealthy and I'd be a homeless pauper."

HTF would going back to the gold standard make you homeless? I know I am asking one of the few fools stupid enough to believe her 30 year mortgage payment would go up if the debt cieling wasn't passed, or because of the credit downgrade. Help us out and explain how you would be any less of a pauper...

Bubbles and theri bursting are driven by low interest rates and leveraged speculation.
Where is Ray???
#35 | Posted by nutcase

You don't look far enough. Credit expansion drives low interest rates, speculation and busted bubbles. If you don't understand how credit money affects business cycles, you don't understand money.

#22 | Posted by northguy3

look it up yourself

#24 | Posted by Ray

Translation-"I'm tired of getting my ass kicked".

###
Exponential can mean ten fold but the exponent in the equation can be most any real number.

Translation: " I got nuthin'". Even if the first exponent is 1, the next is 10 times and the third is 100 times. At what point was inflation 100 times higher than 1971?

Ray would be insanely happy because he'd be wealthy and I'd be a homeless pauper.
#33 | Posted by danni

Let me know when you are a pauper so I can celebrate. I hope to hang around DR long enough to see libs and neocons cry about how poor they are. Nature has no sympathy for ignorance, delusion, stupidity and greed.

Nature has no sympathy for ignorance, delusion, stupidity and greed.

#39 | Posted by Ray at 2012-01-19 04:04 PM

You're still here. That must mean you're lucky.

Translation-"I'm tired of getting my ass kicked".
#38 | Posted by northguy3

If you believe that, you're so stupid, it's funny.

Baloney, Supply Side economics has been

#32 | Posted by danni at 2012-01-19 03:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you even know the differences (as insignificant as they are)?

You're still here. That must mean you're lucky.
#40 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY

Good genes.

#38 | Posted by northguy3 at 2012-01-19 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Dude. Next time someone bemoans the abolishment of the Dept of Education, I can just point to you as an example of its abject failure.

Many economists disagree. "A gold standard regime would be a disaster for any large advanced economy. Love of the (gold standard) implies macroeconomic illiteracy," said Chicago Booth's Anil Kashyap.

Isn't the benefit that it would limit the so called advanced economies to a point where growth would not be near as high, but neither would the downfalls. We also wouldn't have a situation where capital is being created out of thin air in order to prop up a financial system that probably will fail either way.

This explains how inflation works...

#38 | Posted by northguy3 at 2012-01-19 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Dude. Next time someone bemoans the abolishment of the Dept of Education, I can just point to you as an example of its abject failure."

lol... Michigan's finest on display.

#45 | Posted by daniel_3 at 2012-01-19 04:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think they are equating steady prices with economic growth, but a stable currency provides for rapidly deflating prices, which, of course benefits the poor and middle classes (everyone but the rich). If the Fed had not suppressed the interest rates in the late 1920's and fueled a credit expansion in order to bolster prices and prevent poor folks from buying more stuff, the initial bubble would not have been formed in the stocks and banks.

Of course, Hoover's "spend like a drunken sailor" management of the initial recession and FDR's continuance of said policies made the whole thing a disaster but it was the Fed's initial domino of credit expansion that was just one of the causal factors.

A physical standard will not and cannot hinder expanded productivity, consumers (umm... demand anyone) will infinitely demand more product, better product at a lesser price regardless of the medium of exchange. One of the qualities that a commodity must have in order to serve as a medium of exchange (money) is infinite divisibility (why diamonds have never been good money... you break it into pieces and its not worth much) which means that as prices fall, the units of gold/silver/platinum needed to buy stuff just get smaller.

For example... everyone knows how much a car was in 1971 (or has heard an old crank talk about it)... with a stable currency your wages may have been the same between 1971 and now, but the car would have gotten cheaper. In 1913 the old fucks talked about how much less they used to get for a dollar, in 2012 the old fucks talk about how much more they used to get for their dollar.

You would still have ups and downs in the economy but not as severely as the great depression and what we're experiencing today. The average worker would benefit more through fair wages and not being put at risk by their government, federal reserve and banksters. There would be less bubbles----the only people it would impact adversly would be the banksters and others that become wealthy by financial engineering/gambling and putting the average man on the street at risk when the economy implodes. Poor Danni rails repetitively about behavior that got us into financial difficulty and then rails against the very changes that need to be done to prevent that behavior in the future. The woman has no sense.

When you look at history before the creation of the Fed in 1913, the average man did quite well and there were no stock market bubbles. There was the panic of 1907 (before the Fed) and the people mainly hurt were the banksters and minimally mainstreet. It was then that JP Morgan and other banksters swore that they would not be put at risk again and that began the push for the Federal Reserve. In their cunning, they put mainstreet at risk like it had never been before.

Yup... Then cue Jekyll Island.

Rock-a-fellas!

bipartisan economists

Chicago Booth'ss Anil Kashyap

Austan Goolsbee, former top economist to Barack Obama and now a Chicago professor

Caroline Hoxby of Stanford University.

Doesnt look like they are "Bipartisian" to me..

"Dude. Next time someone bemoans the abolishment of the Dept of Education, I can just point to you as an example of its abject failure."

lol... Michigan's finest on display.

#47 | Posted by crispee_oc

Given that I finished university two years BEFORE the Dept. of Ed. was created and I never went to school in MI it would appear both you guys are really nucking futs. But carry on, nobody expects sense from the right.

Hey Sheeple-from your link.

"Government and Fed Actions Have Narrowed Hyperinflationary Great Depression Timing to Next Five Years

High Risk of Ultimate Dollar Crisis Unfolding in Year Ahead (That would have been 2010-did I miss something?)
###

speculation creates busted bubbles.

Even during the gold standard era, Ray.

btw-Not to stick any reality into you goldbug's rants, but inflation is lower than it was in much of the past, exponentially or not.

speculation creates busted bubbles.
Even during the gold standard era, Ray.
www.investopedia.com
www.investopedia.com
www.investopedia.com
#55 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3

Speculation on that order isn't possible without an excess of money to speculate with. You're a liberal. So I expect you to be incapable of understanding the root causes of speculation and inflation. And I see you still don't understand the exponential limits of rolling over debt year after year, decade after decade.

What sort of record do economists have in predicting economic trends and in designing programs that work? What is economics called the "dismal science?" Is it a science at all.
Would it make it harder to inflate the money if we had a gold standard?
Why people and governments might have to live within their means and we can't have that. The Pols would lose so much of their power to buy elections with public dollars.

Ray,

Credit expansion is intimately linked to speculative leveraging and low interest rates. But, your answer is clearer and more expansive. The Fed has the authority and power to control these behaviors, denied their existence and did nothing.

100% said "no I like getting my cut of the thefts better". Its in the fucking constitution and every POTUS who stood up to the Satanists of fake fiat $ has been assassinated just like Jesus.

GOLD FUCK the MONEY CHANGERS! - and support the US constitution or you'll end up slaves. Note being slaves is not a Christian thing to do you anti-choice-enslavement-
pharisee assholes.

Are you telling us that the Great Depression never happened? I seem to recall we were on the "Gold Standard" then...
#7 | Posted by LetUsPrey at 2012-01-19 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

**** Makes you wonder why so many Rich & Savvy people are buying up GOLD & SILVER like there's...No Tomorrow?

Lets destroy the Earth to get a rock and call that money. So, the more you destroy the Earth the wealthier you are.... and so it went. Greed will destroy America.

Greed will destroy America.

#63 | Posted by TwoCents

'Oh, gweed will destwoy America...waaa'

Greed is what makes us you human, you idiot.

Greed will destroy America.

"New car, caviar, four star daydream
Think I'll buy me a football team"

"www.zerohedge.com
When we were on the gold standard, the value of a dollar actually went UP, and we had way fewer wars or military actions."

Holy fuck

Civil war, Indian wars, Spanish American war, ww1, ww2, Korean war, Vietnam

Are you serious?

In 1849, an ounce of gold could buy you a really nice suit. An ounce of gold can still buy you that same suit today.

Try that trick with paper dollars.

In 1849, an ounce of gold could buy you a really nice suit. An ounce of gold can still buy you that same suit today.
Try that trick with paper dollars.

#67 | POSTED BY BLOODSACRAFICE AT 2012-01-20 01:28 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Try that "trick" with a job.

"In 1849, an ounce of gold could buy you a really nice suit. An ounce of gold can still buy you that same suit today. Try that trick with paper dollars."

Well, I'll substitute 1862 for 1849, since the paper dollar bill wasn't introduced until then, but I'd bet if you had one pristine dollar from 1862, you could get a lot more than a suit for it. Latest book values show four types of dollar, valued between $200-$2000.

Joking aside, I get your point: inflation perniciously eats away at value.

Gold is its own "real value" with "compound interest" built in.
Paper is a token of "assigned value" with "loss" built in.

With paper money it requires someone else's faith in the printing government to get them to compound the money for you (or they take faith in you via mortgage, etc that you'll pay back more (interest)). But the price of gold will continue to rise with inflation no matter who's pocket it sits in.

And as we see with our national debt crisis vs what the constitution says about gold - the criminals in government have been disrespecting the constitution for a long time, even though they swear buy it. That's called "lip service" not support, and from an elected official who swears to uphold the constitution its treason (just cause others do it doesn't make it ok).

King Obamanation belongs in jail. Sure he may get away with another great heist of the USA's money, now featuring the softer name of "Quantitative Easing". But it means the people of this nation are not responsible for the debt. Sure there's attachment in keeping on paying it so things like retirements don't crash and food deliveries don't stop. But other than that welcome to the criminal world empire - seems the "little Anti-Christs" are quite busy in the USA.

Oh and we hear rumors that someone cleaned out the Gold from Ft Knox too - with that French guy who got accused of rape. Otherwise we'd here how much gold we got sorta like we hear we got a lot of oil stored.

"Gold is its own "real value" with "compound interest" built in."

Nonsense. Gold can lose value as well, and dramatically.

IMHO its been too many years with too many criminal POTUSs having opportunity to heist while covering up via "state secrets", etc. I'd be surprised if there's more than the outer layer of gold bricks with the rests of the bricks being masons' bricks. Or worse, only gold plated bricks on the outer layer.

GOld is like everything else in reality- it is only worth what somoene is willing to pay for it. Even Gold can suffer a bubble. Its value is not contained with the gold, but in the mind of man and that is an illusion that we all happen to agree on.

#71 danforth all you're saying is the price of gold can get inflated in a fiat market. Regardless the highest-quality metal has inherent value that doesn't rust/age or disintegrate like paper. Sure public perception can drive market-prices, but not "real value". That's more a matter of what its good for. Like notice when $ becomes near worthless people try to do things with it - like paper the walls or lite fires - kindling.

"all you're saying is the price of gold can get inflated in a fiat market. "

I'm saying making the claim gold has anything compared to "compound interest" is proof you don't have the first clue what you're talking about.

#75 bullshit. Your paper money won't compound - or increase value unless its loaned to someone. But the gold in your possession has inherent value and a long history of increasing over time. That's because its soooo technologically useful. Like even HDMI cables feature gold plated contacts, not fiat-plated.

But of course the FUCKING MONEY CHANGERS want to ignore those realities so that their thefts continue. TARP/QE = treason and trying to confuse Gold as though there's no inherent value to it demonstrates ignorance or criminality, not the other way around (=honesty).

"the gold in your possession has inherent value and a long history of increasing over time."

It also has extended periods where it drops like a rock and stays there.

For example, if you bought gold in 1980, you haven't even kept up with inflation.

Gold's price as a commodity, in dollars, is irrelevant to its suitability to its use as a money. It may have played a factor in its introduction as a common medium of exchange but bares no relevance on its suitability as a continued medium of exchange.

Scarcity, durability, divisibility and portability are the major aspects of gold that have made it a suitable material to be used as money for thousands of years. What changed in 1971 that changed thousands of years of history?

For example, if you bought gold in 1980, you haven't even kept up with inflation.
#78 | Posted by Danforth

Tell me about it.
~ Ray

Credit expansion is intimately linked to speculative leveraging and low interest rates. But, your answer is clearer and more expansive. The Fed has the authority and power to control these behaviors, denied their existence and did nothing.
#59 | Posted by nutcase

The Federal Reserve is equivalent to a Soviet Union central planning beaurocracy. And like the Soviet Union, it is destined to fail. Markets are much to complex to conform to the whims of bureaucrats.

For example, if you bought gold in 1980, you haven't even kept up with inflation.
#78 | Posted by Danforth
Tell me about it.
~ Ray
#80 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

That's so stupid as to be laughable. I started buying at the lows in 2001 at the peak of the stock market.

For example, if you bought gold in 1980, you haven't even kept up with inflation.
#78 | Posted by Danforth
Tell me about it.
~ Ray
#80 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

That's so stupid as to be laughable. I started buying at the lows in 2001 at the peak of the stock market.

#82 | Posted by Ray at 2012-01-20 11:04 AM | Reply

It all depends on when you buy an asset whether it's bonds, stocks, precious metals, real estate, etc. They all have their cycles. Precious metals are now in their cycle while real estate and equities have languished and will continue to languish. It's precious metal time and it'll be with us for the near future. When one can still triple the value of their depreciating dollars over the next 5 years by buying gold and silver, one is very wise. Doc and hollyforth can keep their dollars in their mattress and watch it depreciate over the next 5 years; I prefer to make my dollars work for me by buying precious metals in order to buy more dollars in the future as they depreciate.

Love of the (gold standard) implies macroeconomic illiteracy,” said Chicago Booth’s Anil Kashyap.

Of course they can't have a gold standard. That would stop the ability to print monopoly money. We can't have the world living within its means that would mean we would have to live within ours.

#5 | Posted by northguy3 at 2012-01-19 01:36 PM | Reply | Flag: High school freshman.

Ray would be insanely happy because he'd be wealthy and I'd be a homeless pauper.

#33 | Posted by danni at 2012-01-19 03:45 PM

And whose fault is that?

That would stop the ability to print monopoly money. We can't have the world living within its means that would mean we would have to live within ours.

#85 | Posted by Washboard at 2012-01-21 01:57 PM | Reply

It would stop lobbyists in their tracks, would decrease the influence of big business on Washington, would increase the influence of the middle class, would over time increase the living standards and wages of the average Joe, and would decrease the influence of investment banksters and return banking to their its real responsibilities. But Danni and other lefties want the status quo and want to continue to shove money toward the rich, the powerful, banksters, big business and steal from the middle class.

Gold's price as a commodity, in dollars, is irrelevant to its suitability to its use as a money.
#79 | Posted by SHEEPLESHEPERD at 2012-01-20 10:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Seems you said that backwards.

Its BECAUSE Gold is so useful to making things, scarse, durable, etc that gold's been ideal for $ since $ was first invented. The only thing about gold that's not good for $ is that its hard to just print more in order to bail out your nations spending problems. And yea Rome did that by gold-plating the coins - that ended badly.

So not being able to print-money to pay off over-spending is not an aspect of a good medium for currency - its a negative. "Economists" should know that, and getting a bunch of them to say its not true just proves they're into being money-changers not truth-tellers. Like happening to Greece and has happened to many nations - confiscated by the money changers to enslave the nations.

That's another myth. Gold does not limit growth because there is no limit to the price of gold and there is no reason why other metals can't complement gold when market needs require it.

#25 | POSTED BY RAY

Why does gold represent a better value in relation to the representative value of the production and output of a country?

Why is gold supposedly better than other metals which can be mined traded or have a commodity value other than currency?

Your premise is flawed Ray and history refutes your assertion that gold is stable as it falls prey to the same processes as fiat currency including being debased. You also cannot have a currency that is subject to other outside influences that cause instability in the price function.

More economic collapses and depressive situations have arisen from using a gold standard than has ever occurred under fiat. That is a fact. Deny, obfuscate or outright lie..its a fact.

GOld is like everything else in reality- it is only worth what somoene is willing to pay for it. Even Gold can suffer a bubble. Its value is not contained with the gold, but in the mind of man and that is an illusion that we all happen to agree on.

#73 | POSTED BY KANREI

You are preaching to the quire, but you will never change the minds of the fanatics that believe all the economic issues erupt from the use of fiat currency and gold is the savior of our economy.

Here are a list of the Economic disasters in US history on the lauded gold standard.

Panic of 1797
Recession of 1802-04
Depression of 1807
Recession of 1812
Depression of 1815-1821
Recession from 1822-1834

depression of 1839-1843
multiple recession in between
Panic of 1857
Panic of 1873- The long depression 1873-1879
Long string of recession's until 1920-1921
Depression of 1920-1921
Recessions then the Great Depression

MULTIPLE recessions afterwards.

all on the lauded gold standard. There is nothing stable about gold.

quire= choir..fucking spell check.

More economic collapses and depressive situations have arisen from using a gold standard than has ever occurred under fiat. That is a fact. Deny, obfuscate or outright lie..its a fact.

#90 | Posted by Legio at 2012-01-21 04:53 PM | Reply

Legio, you're full of it. There is no way of knowing since there's a dearth of economic statistics prior to the 20th century and info was pretty much collected about general conditions from newspaper articles, etc. In fact statistics like GDP and the unemployment rate weren't collected on a regular and standardized basis until world war II.

#91 | Posted by Legio at 2012-01-21 05:03 PM | Reply

Like I said, there is no data to confirm earlier "recessions" and if they did occur, how severe they were. Without that, you're just talking anecdotaly and through your hat.

#90 | Posted by Legio at 2012-01-21 04:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Legio, I dissagree with your assesments. In reply:

Why does gold represent a better value in relation to the representative value of the production and output of a country?"
Gold has value regardless of a nation's production. And you can't just print more - mining it is expensive and does actually determine the cost of it.

Why is gold supposedly better than other metals which can be mined traded or have a commodity value other than currency?
Id say that's primarily its a matter of quality. Like yea silver and other metals are viable currencies too. But gold is more valuable so it takes less of it to carry your value with you in your pocket, doesn't rust/tarnish, etc.

Your premise is flawed Ray and history refutes your assertion that gold is stable as it falls prey to the same processes as fiat currency including being debased. You also cannot have a currency that is subject to other outside influences that cause instability in the price function.
No governments can't de-value gold to pay debts. What they did was reduce the gold in the coins to devalue coin-currencies. Just like we put less and less silver in our quarters till now there' not anywhere near the value of a same-sized silver coin (about $10 for 1/4 oz).

More economic collapses and depressive situations have arisen from using a gold standard than has ever occurred under fiat. That is a fact. Deny, obfuscate or outright lie..its a fact.
Where/how do you get that concept? Most economic collapses I hear of start with money-printing currency devaluations (theft of the nation's wealth by the fiat-money-changers).

I wonder if Legio is a money changer.

Returning to the Gold Standard and rejecting fiat currency is a non-starter.

That noted, "Economists Pan Gold Standard" is some good stuff.

S'rsly. No love for the headline?

Wow, tuff room.

Be Well.

S'rsly. No love for the headline?

I noticed it. But I just got from visiting Sutter's mill a couple of months ago.

Your premise is flawed Ray and history refutes your assertion that gold is stable as it falls prey to the same processes as fiat currency including being debased. You also cannot have a currency that is subject to other outside influences that cause instability in the price function.
#90 | POSTED BY LEGIO

"The lesson not learned is that there is no economic system politicians can't bankrupt."
#11 | POSTED BY RAY

That's why gold and silver are the safe havens of choice.

That's why gold and silver are the safe havens of choice.

#98 | POSTED BY RAY

That is wholly irrational as it has no value except what we assign.

No governments can't de-value gold to pay debts. What they did was reduce the gold in the coins to devalue coin-currencies. Just like we put less and less silver in our quarters till now there' not anywhere near the value of a same-sized silver coin (about $10 for 1/4 oz).

#95 | POSTED BY REITZE

actually a government can and will to suit its economic and national agenda. Keep smoking on the specie crack pipe. You and Ray are irrational in love with an alternative method for exchange that has human derived value extrinsic from reality. You can deny all you wish but again I will state with certainty that more economic collapses have occurred under specie than fiat... period. If you assert otherwise or deny it then this conversation is over.

Theoretically, fiat money would work if politicians and bankers could be kept honest."
#25 | POSTED BY RAY

#99 | POSTED BY RAY

same with specie you old fucking fool.

Well I see Legio has given up on intelligent discussion, in his own words, "old fucking fool".

same with specie you old fucking fool.
#102 | POSTED BY LEGIO

What a jerkoff! I already said that in #98 and #11.

That is wholly irrational as it has no value except what we assign.
#100 | POSTED BY LEGIO

We? Who is we? You many assign no value to gold. You ain't we.

All this emotion over gold. It's as if I insulted his mother.

Here's how we settle this. You stick to dollars. And I'll stick to gold. I think events will prove you to be a big time loser. If I'm wrong, you can have bragging rights.