Re: [A-List] The Peso is a "Derivative" of the Dollar

["Annewilliamson" <Annewilliamson@xxxxxxx>]

Christian,

I have responded to some of your comments in my reply to Henry.  As to your
other points:

1.  A Roman coin could be accepted today because it's gold content gives it
instrinsic value aside from it's value as a rarity.  Of course, no one would
"spend" such a coin - but paper money of the Hapsberg empire has value only
as a collector's item - it is not possible to spend that money.

2. No, gold money does not return us to an Eden, and I do not hold that
view.

3. Yes, there were bank runs under the gold standard.  The beauty of it was
that only a single bank was affected - unlike a fiat system in which an
entire monetary system is put at risk.  Under the gold standard, depressions
were sharp and quick - watch how long the next one reigns.  It ain't gonna
be sharp and quick, nor were any of its predecessors under the fiat system.

4.  I am not saying that all economic collapses are political events alone.
The fiat system operates in defiance of economic laws, and the price is
eventually paid, alas - from the population's collective hide.

5.  Yes, historically metal has played a great role in much injustice (Henry
astutely raised one of the most notorious incidents in his earlier comment
to Mark, i.e. Spain being flooded with mostly silver (and gold, but not so
much) from the New World.)  Injustice and cruelty have played a role in
development generally over time.  I do not argue that those vast hordes of
gold once held by potentates proved mighty tempting to others, and led to
much war.  (Though you can not bribe gold, or seduce gold, you can steal it,
or......lose it - gasp!)  But we had a little over a 100 years of the
classical gold standard in which monetary and trading systems had matured
and mankind made tremendous economic progress in a comparatively peaceful
epoch.  It is this era to which my comments regarding the gold standard
refer.

6.  No, I do not ask that government convert its paper money into gold.  I
do not want government issuance of any money.  I advocate a free banking
system, in which the market will decide what money is preferable -- and
which, in turn, gives the issuer a reason to remain honest.

7.  All legal tender laws should be repealed immediately.  They are evil
incarnate.

Anne

----- Original Message -----
From: <christian11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [A-List] The Peso is a "Derivative" of the Dollar


> Anne,
>
> Although Austrian theory may be taken to be a theory of
tyranny-prevention,
> since by its definition all governments are tyrannical, the distinction is
> basically moot. The market is supposed to  reflect the natural order with
> which "tampering" is dangerous and/or malevolent. Gold money is good b/c
it
> returns us to an Edenic state, where we don't have to deal with the
> complications of an imperfect, man-made world, but simply let the
untainted
> intelligence of the market deliver its judgements. If that leads to
volatile
> boom and bust cycles, meagre growth, poverty and private corruption, well
so
> be it; that is the human condition. And too bad if we want a better, if
less
> morally pure, world.
>
> To say that every fiat money system has collapsed or is collapsing is to
say
> nothing. The same is true, though moreso, for commodity money. To say that
> this collapse is the result of the fact that all economies are political,
as
> you do, is bizarre. Commodity money, you may have noticed, is political
too:
> or do not the interests of late 19th century American silver miners, for
> example, count? Of course, with the gold standard, you would never have
> anything like wildcat banks, and wildcat banks would never confiscate the
> money of the "common man." Right? Except that they did.
>
> There is a difference between money and legal tender. One may hold value
and
> another also accepted as a means of payment. With a gold standard, the
> government promises convertibility of one into another, which doesn't get
it
> out of the value loop, but involves it more intrisically.
>
> Christian
>
>
> Christian
>
> > Annewilliamson wrote:
> >
> > It is not the purpose of government to
> > "create" employment, or
> > money.  Any employment organized by
> > government is government
> > employment and has to be supported by tax
> > revenues.  The market,
> > human activity creates beneficial employment
> > - and that is reality.
> > Austrian theory is not a theory meant to
> > prevent revolution,
> > but rather to prevent government tyranny,
> > generally speaking.
> >
>
>
> > > And money must be a store of value; otherwise
> > commerce and industry can not
> > > flourish,
> > > and the common man is endlessly cheated
> > through currency confiscation
> > > in the fiat system.  What Henry outlined is,
> > in fact, fantastically
> > > idealistic
> > > because no government is not made up of
> > well-meaning robots working for
> > > the common good, but of flesh and blood human
> > beings who seek their
> > > own self-interest (in democracies they seek
> > re-election through the
> > > buying of votes with money confiscated from
> > other people, for example)
> > > and succumb to parasitism.  This is why every
> > paper money system ever
> > > devised has collapsed to its intrinsic value
> > (zero) or is collapsing.
> > >
> > > I am travelling and am constrained from
> > responding more fully, but could
> > > not allow such misrepresentations of the
> > Austrian school and the purpose
> > > of money without making some noise.
> > >
> > > Anne
> >
>
>