CAN THE U.S. RETURN TO A GOLD STANDARD?

Wall Street Journal ^ | September 1, 1981 | Alan Greenspan

[Jaysun]

That is what Greenspan was talking about. We would have to have a mechanism to protect ourselves. I don't know what that it but I think Greenspan was hinting at a political/legislative solution.

Right, but in my opinion Europe wants to see us flat on our backs. So it will be interesting to see what is proposed. If the idea involves cooperation from Europe, I think we can forget it.

[fourdeuce82d]

I don't know much about the GOLD STANDARD but I would like to learn more about the GOLD STANDARD because it sounds as though the GOLD STANDARD could be a good thing.

Would a GOLD STANDARD be better than not having a GOLD STANDARD? A GOLD STANDARD might be better than a nonGOLD STANDARD. Once we left the GOLD STANDARD things were worse than before, when we had a GOLD STANDARD.

I Dont Imagine Other Things could be worse than a GOLD STANDARD. As Soon aS Humanly pOssible, Lets Examine returning to the GOLD Standard.

[I got the rope]

You might be an Airborne Soldier if...

You say "Hooah" whether you understand or not

[endthematrix]

We've been duped here! We are talking about the history/future of money, while it is best to discuss the historic and future motives of international finance institutions.

[Nick Danger]

It ain't gonna happen, folks. When Greenspan wrote this, the inflation rate was 12%. It had been in double-digts for two years. If that wasn't bad enough, the unemployment rate was 8%, on its way to 10%.

If ever there was a time to sell the people of the United States a reform like returning to the gold standard, that was it. Greenspan even took a stab at "how to get there from here."

If it didn't happen then, it's not gonna happen. I know there are people for whom this is their life's crusade, but broadly speaking, there is no energy on this subject. There wasn't even much energy on it after two years of double-digit inflation.

If Reagan had wanted this, he would have had it. He was elected in a landslide with a very clear mandate to fix the economy, and fix it fast. He did fix it, and he was re-elected in an even bigger landslide. But no gold standard.

I think we can guess why. We do not have a king who is overspending. The best argument for the gold standard is that it keeps kings honest. But we, meaning the "body politic," do not want an honest king, because we are the king.

We vote for this crap. Well, maybe not us Freepers, but a majority of voters in the United States cannot get enough of government spending. The day the people want this to stop, it'll stop. But hey, it's fun spending money. Let's go the Moon! Hell, let's go to Mars! Let's buy all the old people their medicine! Let's have more endowments for the arts! Let's have a million-dollar swimming pool for tadpoles!

No gold standard is going to stop this. Any legislation that puts in a gold standard can take out a gold standard. The truth is, "We, the People" do not want spending restraint. If "we" did, we would have spending restraint and we wouldn't need gold to do it.

[neverdem]

At this hour, when the Treasury is printing as much paper as it pleases, and we have a debt of about 7 trillion, not counting unfunded obligations, you must be kidding. Rest tight, Airborne!

[Heartbreak of Psoriasis]

Obviously if you cannot finance federal deficits, you cannot create them.

That sorta says it all, doesn't it?

[Free Vulcan]

Only when the current order crashes into dust, assuming there is anything left.

[M-cubed]

Why bother with a gold standard?...Greshams law and supply and demand are providing a simple "gold standard"....the price of gold and silver is inversly proportional with the race to inflate all the "fiat curriencies" throughout the world...gold and silver are doing what they have always historically done...provide a "store of value" for ones labor

[Xthe17th]

Since gold is the only Constitutionally-authorized money

I don't think the Constitution specifically mentions gold. However, the word "dollar" is mentioned twice, and it thus refers to the dollar in common circulation at the time, i.e., the Spanish milled silver dollar (which was later specifically defined by the Coinage Act of 1792 to be precicely 371.25 grains of silver in weight).

[ChefKeith]

It will never happen because the gold would be to hard for the politicians to steal because they could not carry it around like they can transfer funds from place to place.

[jla]

^

[Jim Noble]

CAN THE U.S. RETURN TO A GOLD STANDARD?

No.

[Jim Noble]

I don't think the Constitution specifically mentions gold

But you're wrong.

Article I, s. 10 is very clear.

[Mulder]

I don't think the Constitution specifically mentions gold

The Constitution gives the Federal government the authority to coin money. It does not give them the authority to print it.

It doesn't specifically mention gold, but the word 'coin' refers to either silver or gold.

[Mulder]

gold and silver are doing what they have always historically done...provide a "store of value" for ones labor

An ounce of gold would have bought a man a new suit and a new pair of shoes in the days of the Roman Empire.

And an ounce of gold will buy you the same thing today.

Can anyone name a fiat currency which has that staying power?

[Mulder]

I started this thread because of what was happening here. The poster had a good idea, but he didn't get his point across, because he was basically advertising a product on FR. Maybe we can discuss it here.

THere is a really good book that explains all this stuff (gold, federal reserve, etc....)

It's called "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffith.

[Mulder]

Go read " CRUCIFIED ON A CROSS OF GOLD ".

Where do you find that book? I did a search on amazon and couldn't find it (I've noticed lots of good books on amazon haven't been 'out of print' recently, but maybe they've taken the next step and simply purged the good ones).

Who was the author? Maybe I can find it doing a search on the author.

[the invisib1e hand]

yes, lets peg the dollar to gold again. then let a motherlode be discovered in, say, egypt.

yes, that would be wise. imagine the political repercussions of tying one's currency to a commodity that is mined in other nations.

You talk about 'no borders!' You piss and moan about the UN!? Right off the bat you'd be fast tracked to a single world currency just to maintain 'peace.' And I wonder who would be in charge of that project...

like the '55 Chevy, the gold standard has come and gone.

[general_re]

False. Compare the price of consumer goods - e.g., the CPI - to the price of gold for a definitive refutation of this oft-repeated, but incorrect, bit of trivia...