[OT] Foreign Policy

Von Fugal von at fugal.net
Fri Jan 25 12:05:14 MST 2008

* Jason Hall [Fri, 25 Jan 2008 at 11:29 -0700]
> On Jan 25, 2008 11:05 AM, Von Fugal <von at fugal.net> wrote:
> >
> > Certainly not equally. Google for dollar value, and see what your
> > precious fiat is worth.
> If you'd please note, I said I don't like fiat currencies. I'm merely
> stating the equivalent flaws of a single standard such as gold.

I'm saying it's worse than gold. Sorry about personalizing it.

> > > is one of the thing that really annoys me with the politics of the
> > > libs/cons/ and other political groups I normally associate with.  They
> > point
> > > at our old standard and how it must be better because of the problems we
> > > have now.  Well we had problems them, which are massively compounded by
> > > certain events that happened in WWII (global gold ownership, etc), plus
> > the
> > > effect this has on the more struggling economies.
> >
> > Eh? We weren't on any gold standard in WWII. The Fed was well
> > established by then. Some even say that it was America that dragged the
> > rest of the world into the great depression. I guess those countries
> > dropping us like rocks now couldn't do better for themselves.
> We were still on a partial gold until Nixon (15% iirc).  Heck, one of our
> first actions in WWII was to save the French Gold, which we then used to
> push our dollar higher and finance the ship/military buildup.

That's interesting, and explains a little more the character of some of
those graphs in the previous links I sent.

> At least they actually have something.
> Do they?  The whole point is most don't.
> > The counterfeit money standard is only good for those that print the
> > money and those that sell stuff directly to those that print the money.
> > In this case, it's the government and warmongers whom the government
> > buys weapons from (among others, as we all know it's not JUST the war,
> > that's just an example).
> And yet it always seems to get frontlines in the trite statements thrown
> around.

It's something people can understand and put a finger on. Otherwise you
just end up saying "all those silly things the government does" which is
true, but it's hard to grasp how all the stuff adds up and what we could
do about social security and health care and trade and ... and ... and
... and ... and ... and ... Fact is the war is probably the single
largest contributer, even if it doesn't constitute a majority.
We have to tackle it one piece at a time. Like you say, doing it all at
once would be catastrophic.
I'm really sorry if the war rubs you the wrong way, but it really is a
big issue and probably the easiest thing to fix right away.

> As I conceded at the beginning, the gold standard probably has it's own
> > faults indeed. But why should we have any one standard? Especially in a
> > global economy? We should put our monetary system to the same principles
> > as the rest of our economy. Free Market.
>  Free Market? How long have we had one of those?  No, far from it.  Sure RP
> is one candidate trying to remove many of the false influences on that
> (though all at once would be catastrophic) but we by no means have a free
> market.

Well, the principle, if not the practice.

> And as for not having one standard?  Well, it's quite difficult.  In the
> basic situation though, if we switched to say Gold, and China didn't.  Each
> dollar they receive they can in essence redeem for that value of gold. Each
> time they do, we get less.  They has to be some other commodity to trade
> out, and agreements between the countries we deal with.  Which btw, *is*
> where the Federal Government should have a say in.
> Now, there are more advanced ways to look at it, and those are what we more
> should be looking at.  That is part of why the hybrid dollar *was* doing
> better before we scrapped it.

I'm not an economic expert, as you might guess, but I know a bit and I
know that inflation isn't just a fact of life like some people believe
and others would have us believe. We can fix it and frankly I think
anything we try next would be better than what we have now. But it has
to go hand in hand with smaller government and less spending and debt.

> I can't believe the Fed ever
> > got the exclusive monopoly on all things money, nor that it has kept it
> > for this long. It's time to throw it out the window.
> They don't, that's just it.  Believing they do is just part of the game.
> Even with the Hamilton reforms (Central Bank, etc) we still have every right
> to make our own money, with our own backing.  Most people don't want them
> though because they believe an all-powerful nanny state is better for that,
> along with everything else.  You can print your own currency, with your own
> backing.  You just need others to accept it, just like the dollar does.
> Heck, you can go get US gold and silver backed currencies, some actually get
> decent acceptance in parts of the country.  The problem is exchange when and
> where you want.

They may not technically have it, but they sure act like they do.

Von Fugal
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://plug.org/pipermail/plug/attachments/20080125/71986f6d/attachment.bin 

More information about the PLUG mailing list