Nailed it in two. Not bad.
Well, he did title his autobiograph END THE FED.
Be that as it may, it is true that a gold standard would tie in well with libertarian philosophy, mainly because it could facilitate privatization of the currency and coinage. I don’t think most people today are aware of how things worked under the gold standard. It wasn’t like the government mints stamped out gold coins whenever they felt like drawing down their gold stockpiles, nor did they ask the Treasury to send them more gold so they could do so. Instead, it worked almost like a crowdsourcing scheme. Anyone who held gold could bring it to into their nearest mint, which would then stamp it out into coins which were given back to the person, minus a small seigniorage to finance mint operations. This is why mints were established in or near gold mining centers like Denver and San Francisco.
From that business model it’s only a short step to privatizing the mints themselves and presumably reducing the role of government to one of regulating production standards and business transparency.
I’m not saying I think a metal standard could work, but I think that’s the general idea of those who advocate it.
Legal tender laws hardly stop that. And you can pay in Bitcoin or even gold in many places.
And gold is anything but stable.
Regulate business? The government? What have you been reading? The invisible hand will take care of that. The only role of the government is to register deed and title, and to insure that no one else is allowed to touch your stuff without your permission (through a duly chartered, privately operated police force).
A lot of people of all political stripes (including myself), not just libertarians, believe the fed is unconstitutional. And even if it wasn’t it’s not the way monetary systems were supposed to be established in this country. I’m not that concerned with what other countries do before my concern of my own. This explains some things and is entertaining to boot.
But that’s like saying that the U.S. Navy isn’t like it was supposed to be when the country was established, because the ships aren’t made of wood. Economics is a science like any other. Advancements are made.
But that’s how countries get to be great - by looking at what other countries do, and stealing what works. You thing your Founding Fathers didn’t know that? They were, after all, masterful thieves
A lot of people believe Ohio wasn’t properly admitted to the union and so isn’t a state. The rest of the people point out that it could have been done by drunken monkeys but after 200 years you need to just accept it.
And while the founders were multi-talented polymaths their absolute worst subject was economics. That it took until 1913 for a permanent central bank to be established is sheer madness. The only group worse than government when it comes to national finances is the private market.
BTW, I’m not watching a half hour of animation on YouTube. If it’s worth saying, say it here.
Of course not.
The United States has sanctioned, bombed or invaded every country that has tried, specifically because hard money is a threat to the petrodollar and the US is very aggressive about preserving the petrodollar. Almost every country we have taken direct hostile action against has done something immediately proceeding that action that serves as a severe threat to the petrodollar.
Why do you think we hate Iran, support bombing Yemen, and support the Crown Prince who quite clearly murdered Kashoggi? (If you’re unaware, the Petrodollar system is dependent on the cooperation of Saudi Arabia and it’s sphere of influence).
Now, I’m not a libertarian so I can’t speak for them, and I’ll admit a lot of idiots conflate nepotism, oligarchy, and various other economic issues with racial issues, but the fed itself is designed to make poor people poorer. That 2% mandate means, by definition, means rich people (specifically, those who own stocks in banks) are being made rich by direct transfer of purchasing power from the poor to the stockholders.
If you’re okay with that, fine, but you don’t have to be conspiracy theorist to say “maybe the rich don’t need free purchasing power at the expense of the poor.”
Cite that any of these nations were going to go back on the Gold system?
Libya (just google “Gaddafi gold oil” - I’m not playing a game of “do you like this source or that source” when there are literally thousands to choose from). Iraq was also targeted because Sadam was pushing for a Euro/oil exchange. Again, I specifically said “threats to the petrodollar.”
Also note that a fiat standard is extremely profitable. Countries don’t do what’s best for their people, they do what’s best for the people in power. Virtually every oligarch in every country benefits massively from the absence of a gold standard. Why would they want to hamper their own profits? What, so some poor schmuck on the street can afford a cheeseburger? I don’t think so.
OK, I did that. Twelve results, from a mixture of Blogspot and Wordpress websites to a couple from “halaltube.com”. Very compelling.
Yeah, there’s no reputable sources, just gold bug conspiracy theorists. Those aint cites.
What you point at is called a Google vomit. Really, to take you seriously one has to see what sources are the ones you are relying on and what their arguments are, otherwise, one gets then to rely on the ones I have seen as more reliable, like Foreign Policy Magazine:
Indeed, I did not even had to search just the way he stipulated, Google vomits like the ones from etasyde are made to make their targets go into wild goose chases, problem for them is that I have experience on finding what the better sources tell us about about an item.
Yeah, but even if they did price the oil in Euros, that’s not the Gold Standard.
Until some nations do so, it is better not to dwell on conversations about unicorns, I rather talk about horses.
Or to point about how unrealistic some ideologies are.
No.
Only a very small percent of people believe a central bank is unconstitutional, and they are almost all of them libertarians.
If you are personally a non-libertarian believer that the Fed is unconstitutional, you are a sparkling rainbow-tailed unicorn, a precious specimen of mystical rarity.
For those who are unaware, that link goes to a fairly famous Jewish-bank-conspiracy video.
At the 24 min mark, the video implies that the sinister banking powers behind the Fed, previously described as the “Red Shields” (Rothschilds) and depicted as black spidery creatures (yes, really), murdered JFK because he was trying to re-implement a metallic monetary system in the US. “6 months later, John F Kennedy went to Dallas, and neverrr rrreturrrned.” “No! Way! No way they could do that!”
Perhaps it is needless to say, but to state it clearly: Almost every detail of the modern monetary system, as described in that video, is factually incorrect. It gets almost nothing right.
No, see this kind of dismissive crap is why I put exactly 0 effort into sourcing things for you. If I do cite sources (Libya specifically has leaked documents from the effing secretary of state - but heaven help me if I mention her name, because suddenly I’m an anti-hillary conspiracy theorist [nevermind that I voted for her in the primary against obama, and in her presidential run]) I’m a conspiracy theorist. If I don’t cite sources, it’s google vomit.
Okay captain armchair, you win. Go on believing whatever you want and dismissing everyone with a contrary opinion. Great way to pump your ego, not exactly useful for ascertaining reality though.
You seem to miss points wildly, in this case I pointed that indeed you are doing that and still there is no serious source that supports what you claim.
Incidentally: Libya watchers aren’t so sure that Blumenthal was passing the US Secretary Of State solid intelligence.
So, yeah, you do rely on vomits from the internet and unreliable narrators to base your posts.
More recent info of how unreliable those sources from Libya were: