It's very alluring isn't it. A fiat money system is fine, just so long as you have the discipline to never produce any more money than the initial supply. You will not find any civilization in history which has ever had this discipline.
The problem is, there's always a very compelling reason to produce more money. These reasons occur during the most desperate times and seem to be reasons which only the most hard hearted could turn their back on.
You can listen to William Jennings Bryant make his fervent case for monetizing silver in addition to gold, in 1896. _ historymatters.gmu.edu
"Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."
The reality is, creating more money isn't a miracle cure - its merely a transfer from savers to those you intend to have the new money.
You do make a mistake in assuming all wealth must be monetized with an equal amount of money. There must be enough money to provide for the needs of savings and exchange, which is a small percentage of a society's total wealth.
An economy with a fixed money supply is much different to the economy you know. Yet it is the economy which most mankind has lived and prospered with. As the society becomes wealthier, the price of most things fall, that is to say manufactured and produced things. Generally, the price of labor, real estate and other primary factors of production remain constant in terms of money over time.
One result is the banking system cannot issue as much debt, due to the fact that the value of collateral does not rise as money is devalued. This results in a less fragile economy.
. |
