Re: [gang8] Dollar Hegemony Revisited

["Hugh Whinfrey" <econ@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wiliam Hummel notes:

> The story of money has been one of constant evolution.  We are now in
> the era of fiat money systems.  Gold as money is an anachronism.  What
> you are referring to above is the days of mercantilism, when gold was
> equated to national wealth.  Today gold does not flow at all except
> among speculators, industrial users, and the few who still think of
> gold as the only "true money."

The question really is, now that the era of fiat money is in turn evidently
drawing to a close - what will follow it. This seems to be what has brought
your "gold nuts" back out of the closet in that they seem to be hopeful
that gold will be part of the next 'regime'. So while I understand the reluctance
to entertain the failure of the present system, it nevertheless would be prudent,
as I see it, to get on with the business of working out a viable successor system.
You know, there are many folks out there who have children and grandchildren
who aren't going to be pleased when they realise that their 'legacy' from our
time consists mostly of a leaky plastic bag dripping of all sorts of proveribal
'toxic waste' that likely will take generations to fix. History will not be kind to
us, but there is no point in making it worse for them than it has to be.

> Mercantilist thought of this sort has no place in the modern fiat
> money era.


Okay. Sorry for the disturbing the force. I won't think that thought again.
Problem now solved and prosperity is right around the corner :-)

Hugh