Comment: Ah yes, the commonly held and

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Watch it again, Still is no fool (see in situ)

Republicae's picture

Ah yes, the commonly held and

Ah yes, the commonly held and commonly promoted idea that the money supply must be PLENTIFUL. What a common misconception and, I might add, misunderstanding of the mechanics of money. The problem with fiat money is that it is beyond actual market influences for it rest within the political grasp of the federal government through its agency of the Federal Reserve. The idea that the supply of money must be plentiful is the promotion of fiat currency supporters, but it has little relationship to monetary and economic realities.

That fact was proven around 300 years ago by David Hume and later confirmed by Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Bastiat, Mises, Rothbard and others. The problem with the idea that the money supply must be PLENTIFUL, is that who decides what is PLENTIFUL. Left to their own devices, governments will always seek to inflate a fiat money supply.

Hume proved that even if you doubled the amount of money in everyone’s “accounts” overnight, that the economic effects of the market would adjust the purchase value of that “extra, plentiful” supply of money and that the recipients of that supply would be no better off than before the supply was made more PLENTIFUL. It is called inflation.

There is a funny thing however about gold, since it is a unlike fiat money in just about every way, it is a commodity that has value and as a medium of exchange it retains a stable value better than any other form of money, since it is difficult to bring into production that too is a benefit. It is evident that stability in a country’s currency is vital to the economic well-being of that country. Also evident is the fact that such stability was prevalent for well over a hundred years, less a few where the government involved itself in an attempt to control the economics of this country. Inflation was almost flat for nearly 100 years, compare that to fiat currency and you can see that is not the case when it comes to fiat money, it is always subject to instability because it must be managed otherwise the system quickly falls apart. There has always been a correlation between fiat money and the rise in both inflation and debt accumulation, the same cannot be said of a gold monetary system free of government intervention. LOOK at the historical charts, which are available online and compare fiat money and gold inflationary trends, as well as debt accumulation trends under each system...it is evident which is stable and which is not.

So, given the choice between fiat money of any kind and gold money, I will gladly choose gold money any day. No Bill Still is no fool, he is an infiltrator, like Ellen Brown, Mike Montagne and others who would ask the People to consider trading one form of fiat oppression for yet another.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun