We don't have a gold or silver standard, but I'd even settle for a copper standard.
Back in the days when a dollar was one ounce of silver a penny was made of copper. SIlver is worth more than copper and this is because there is only about 0.07 ppm of silver in the earth's crust compared to an estimated 50 ppm of copper. Therefore there is a difference of about 700 times more copper than silver availible in the earth crust for mining.
An interesting fact is that there is about 6,800,000 tons of copper mined annually world wide, compared to about 9,000 tons of silver. Making for a ratio of 700 to 1 copper mined to silver mined.
In the past a penny was worth $0.01 of a dollar and weighed 3.1g with a mixture of 95% copper and 5% tin/zinc. There was around 9 pennies to and ounce or 11 ounces of copper to a dollar. Still at least there was silver and gold for storing wealth.
Today a modern U.S. dollar weighs 8.10 g with a mixture of 77% copper 12% zinc 7% Manganese and 4% nickel.
Since 1 ounce = 28.3495231 grams, it means that current dollar coin is about 1/3 of an ounce.
They can't even give us a $1 dollar coin backed by copper!!!
So I suggest we start trading our copper coins and drive out the FRNs.
Never turn in your coins, but don't use the FRNs, our taxes don't have to pay interest on minted coins to be issued by the government, use coins for local services and goods, spend your FRNs for paying taxes.
grant
Go to bank get coins, then trade for dollars, then trade for Ag.
Today a modern U.S. dollar weighs 8.10 g with a mixture of 77% copper 12% zinc 7% Manganese and 4% nickel.
Since 1 ounce = 28.3495231 grams, it means that current dollar coin is about 1/3 of an ounce of copper.
So with silver trading today at 13,43 and gold at 823,20 that is pretty close to 70 times the price of silver to the price of gold.
Now since our current modern dollar takes three units to make an ounce of copper than 4 ounces of copper = ounce of silver.
Who wants to trade 4 ounces of copper for an ounce of silver?
grant
There is no need to fix the
There is no need to fix the rate, it is just a matter of educating the masses to the relative avalibility of copper to silver to gold. We are the ones that are trading an ounce of silver for four ounces of copper. Or even worse a piece of paper for an ounce of silver. I prefer to accept and trade silver, and I am not going to give up my freedom by selling my silver for paper.
grant
No takers?
What? Nobody wants to trade 4 ounces of copper for an ounce of silver?
grant
I'd be delighted
...and astonished by the foolishness.
But!
If the offer is sincere, then I'm certainly game.
Send me all the silver you want, and I will cheerfully return four times that weight in copper.
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
stop and think
Today a modern U.S. dollar weighs 8.10 g with a mixture of 77% copper 12% zinc 7% Manganese and 4% nickel.
Since 1 ounce = 28.3495231 grams, it means that current dollar coin is about 1/3 of an ounce of copper.
So with silver trading today at 13,43 and gold at 823,20 that is pretty close to 70 times the price of silver to the price of gold.
Now since our current modern dollar takes three units to make an ounce of copper than 4 ounces of copper = ounce of silver.
Who wants to trade 4 ounces of copper for an ounce of silver?
grant
Bi-metal versus tri-metal system
We should have a tri-metal system using a copper, silver and gold. We just have to use the right rate of exchange for each. A three legged table for balance is much sturdier than a two or even four legged table.
In the past when using bi-metal or tri-metal systems there has been a screwed over valuation of copper compared to silver or silver compared to gold. Therefore the tendency has been to trade up and get the one of greater value. However if there was a system that reflected a truer relationship in the value of copper to silver and silver to gold, then there would be no advantage of trading a copper coin for a silver coin except as a means of storing wealth.
As a consequence there would be little stimulus to search for gold, since an increase in gold on the market could just as easily be offset by an increase in copper.
A true rate of exchange of copper-silver-gold should be based on the availability of each in the environment. Since there is about .0011 ppm of gold in the earth's crust as compare to silver with .07 ppm and copper with 50 ppm in the earth's crust, then these must be the rate of exchange.
The system would therefore consist of 700 ounces of copper to one silver (ounce) unit and then 70 silver units to one gold (ounce) unit. Gold itself would probably not circulate much since it would be a true store of wealth. Now this doesn't mean that it is necessary to have 700 copper coins minted for each silver coin, since copper coins tend to circulate more often and therefore would be found on the market more easily. On the contrary since copper is a relatively common metal, these would be constantly circulated or easily introduce by private means through the government in exchange for silver or gold, or likewise gold or silver for copper.
grant
No fixed exchange
Fixing the exchange rate between metals is a bad idea just like all other government price fixing is a bad idea. If the real market value of one of the metals changes (and it inevitably will due to changes in mining operations, industrial uses, etc.) the fixed price will result in shortages of whichever coin has a bullion value exceeding its face value.
I think the best idea is to allow the market to set the exchange rates. If you want government to mint coins - and I have no problem with that - the coins should simply state the fineness of the metal it contains. No "name" for the monetary unit should be used. No need to even have the weight on it since accurate scales are cheap and encouraging people to evaluate coins on the basis of actual weight would reduce problems associated with wear and intentional clipping.
Then you can have your tri-metal system. Or even a poly-metal system, in which relative values of different metals float and adjust to supply and demand.
Correct, the only thing that
Correct, the only thing that should be fixed is the weight and fineness of each coin.
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
I agree with you, Republicae.
You were sure making a pest of yourself at www.dailypaul.com/node/58374 with your incessant cries of outrage that I was "peddling" an economics book on an economics forum.
However, you are right in this case: The only thing that should be fixed is the weight and fineness of each coin.
So, what do you guys think of my easy ten-step program for establishing a free-banking regime?
www.axiomaticeconomics.com/golden_calf.php
____________________________________
Shaka, you so crazy! www.axiomaticeconomics.com
I would settle for
a nuts standard. I have nut trees in my yard. I would be stinking rich. LOL
Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.
I agree with you too, Quiltingsando.
On this forum, nobody is nuttier.
____________________________________
Shaka, you so crazy! www.axiomaticeconomics.com
The important thing is not to use FRNs.
Keep the Federal Reserve notes off your local market place as much as possible and circulate coins, with them off the market they become worthless. Turn them into the bank and get coins. If there comes a time when there are no FRNs on the market then pay your taxes with coins.
grant
Based on true availability.
True...
49000 coppers = 1 gold
700 coppers = 1 silver
70 silvers = 1 gold
Current...
4900 coppers = 1 gold
700 coppers = 1 silver
70 silvers = 1 gold
Better than paper.
Since there is around 50 ppm copper in the earth's crust and around .0011 ppm gold in the earth's crust that is around 49000 to 1 ration. However there is selective mining of gold because of it's value, so with an annual 6,800,000 tons of copper mined there is about 1400 tons of gold supposively mined, making for close to 5000 ounces of copper available on the market to gold. Consider with new home construction falling, celular phones replacing fixed lines for communication and recycling, copper isn't worth much either. But at least it's better than paper.
grant
I've called....
...for an ochra standard before.
people just don't get it........we must have a standard.
something more permanent perhaps than ochra....how about depleted uranium? the u.s. would be hugely rich then....
LOL
Not depleted Uranium...Iraq now has tons of the stuff buried in their desert.
What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!
http://www.youshouts.com/index.php
Perhaps you're on to something
It would be impossible to back our currency with a single commodity, but perhaps a commodity index could be created to back it.
For example...a $1.00 bill would buy you X amount of gold + X amount of silver + X platinum + X copper. Given, these would all be very small amounts but it would at least tie our dollar to something more stable.
What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!
http://www.youshouts.com/index.php
Bimetallism is Constitutional
Our Constitution states that only Gold or Silver Coin be considered a legal tender in the united States. For the first half century of our Confederacy we used a strictly silver standard, which morphed into bimetallism, which finally morphing into a pure gold standard (silver being relegated to a statutory fraction of gold) before the counterrevolutions of 1913 and 1971.
There is still time, if our Fe'ral Govt wishes to reclaim any semblance of integrity, to reinstate the bimetallic standard. I propose that
ONE DOLLAR be defined as the sum of
One-Half Gram of Silver plus One Centigram of Gold
This would result in equivalent definitions of value of Fifty Dollars per gram ($1555 per troz) of Gold or One Dollar per gram ($31.10 per troz) of Silver.
A dollar tethered between two metals will be more stable than a dollar backed by either one. Tethering will mitigate fluctuations in supply and value of either specie.
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
For once...
I think we can agree that this is an area of the constitution that may be a little outdated.
Back in the late 1700's, gold and silver were the only practical precious metals to be found...palladium, platinum, and a number of other materials weren't known or used for anything.
I like the idea of bimetalism, but would it not be more stable value to tether the currency to a whole basket of commodities?
Just a thought, don't bite my head off on this one...just throwing stuff against the wall for some discussion provocation.
What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!
http://www.youshouts.com/index.php
I tend to agree with you, an
I tend to agree with you, an Amendment to allow Gold, Silver, Platinum, Palladium would be a rational step to take, however, the problem would be purposing a Constitutional Convention that would be limited to that and only that proposal.
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
Tethering Stability
...increases with additional commodities, yes, but so does econometric complexity. Apparently, the experience of fiat Continental Dollars and the overwhelming lessons of history led the drafters of our Constitution to conclude that bimetallic tethering, using only silver and gold, was optimal. Two is sufficient to stabilize a currency through most fluctuations, but not so horrendously complex as to send hapless cashiers to run screaming into the night.
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
I'm no expert in constitutional law
But I think you could simply draw up an amendment stating that congress may mint coins based upon the following materials.
Don't know that you'd have to throw out the entire constitution and start over.
What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!
http://www.youshouts.com/index.php
We need a dollar backed by
We need a dollar backed by something.
Whether Gold, Silver, Copper, or all of the above, and more.
Davy C Rockett
http://www.thelibertypost.com
http://screamfreedom.blogspot.com
http://christianquest.net
Davy C Rockett
http://liberty-central.blogspot.com
http://screamfreedom.blogspot.com
http://cystic-fibrosis-symptom.com
http://medical-definitions.com
Copper, Cotton, or Corn Flakes
It makes little theoretical difference what particular commodity is used to back up a currency. Copper is a little cumbersome as its supply is a more volatile than the heavier conductor metals. The relative stability in the supply of gold and silver support their use as monetary metals. Nothing magical about them, it's just that history has demonstrated their efficacy over other foundations of a stable currency.
I tend to like the Brass Bucks because they, unlike paper notes, at least have some material value beyond the consumers' confidence in political integrity. I also prefer a base metal token for our dollar over one of actual gold or silver because the small value of our present dollar would require an inconveniently small precious metal coin for commerce.
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus