To: Paul Berliner who wrote (1036 ) 11/20/1998 9:52:00 AM From: Chip McVickar Respond to of 3536
Hello Paul, The arguments for and against a basket of "hard assets" of variuous kinds to anchor currencies has been bantered about for many years. The believers in gold and silver backed currencies are often drawn to this compromise when up against the free market incumbents. It is a complex subject that has driven many of the arguments over fiscal responsibility. An excelant book on the subject is by Judy Shelton "Money Meltdown". At the very beginnings of this thread there are a series of discussions on this subject. In those earlier posts, I came to express my thoughts that the current international monetary system is essentialy built on sand and vulnerable to the shifting foundations. Something that has become very clear......But also the established free market system has benefited the world by increasing the availability of capital to developing markets. Hard currence systems could not do this as efficiently. I suspect the answer is to retain the free market system, but add greater accountability, transparency, democratic government, policing of corruption and improved legal systems. Dictators and greed are a foundation of the human condition and will not be leaving the world. The remarkable creation of wealth in developing countries, fattened the rulers pockets, but also broadened the middle class wealth. But hard currencies like gold and silver coins, by the very nature of there scarcity, restrict the creation of wealth and concentate that wealth. I suspect if statistics were available today, the proportion of wealth held by Popes and other respective leaders of their times would far more concentated......then can be imagined in todays Warren Buffets and Bill Gates. Personally I like to hold gold and silver coins and feel the intrinsic value and appreciate their quality. But....they are difficult to carry around and difficult send electronically. Chip