Truth About Fiat Money

Common Sense Economics as of October 7 is recognizing the most recent record highs as marking the end of the bull market that started in 2009. Unlike all other bull markets in history this one was politically created and maintained with organized support.
The bear market we are about to experience will be far more destructive than most are currently able to fathom. The coinciding depression may be worse than the one during the 1930s.
Guaranteed, all will hear about the evils of fiat money. Don’t believe it isn’t true. There will be calls to return to the gold standard. Few realized that gold certificates were fiat money also. How is that? They were redeemable in only one commodity and government controlled the price. Regular fiat money is also convertible into gold but government doesn’t control the price. It can also be converted into anything else. It is more accurate to call it deregulated money.
So, what is the problem? Governments cannot maintain stable currencies. Why? Governments can’t make economic decisions. They make political decisions so the amount of money in circulation always reflects the needs of the politically elite. The gold standard was constantly tampered with politically. The asset bubbles of the 1920s were directly caused tampering with the gold backed pound following WWI.
Money creation gets out of hand because citizens are unwilling to control government. Chances are good that within the next 50 years a new currency will emerge in the private sector. There is no chance a government will sponsor a trouble free currency. In all of history it has never been done.

This entry was posted in Daily Comments on by .

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.