Forum

This forum requires Javascript to be enabled for posting content

Current User: Guest Login
Please consider registering



Search Forums:

 






Search 

Is a Deflationary Gold Standard Bad?
Read original blog post

Add a New Topic
Reply to Post
User Post

8:35 pm
July 10, 2009

Bron Suchecki

Member

posts 17

I’ve never really got why a gradual deflationary bias was a problem. Consumers know, for example, that just about any electronic good (computers, plasma screens etc) will get cheaper in the future, yet this does not seem to stop them from being made and bought. The fact that only those people who really really want the good will buy it and those are no so enthused will wait until it gets cheaper does not seem to stop business from making money.

If it was conspicuous consumption fueled by debt (and an inflationary bias) that got us into this mess, then would not a system with a deflationary bias be the solution? It has a built in frugality: your money will have more purchasing power in the future, so only buy today what you actually need. People would also only want to take on debt if they were actually going to be productive/efficient rather than just trying to bubble up asset prices. Now maybe if we can convince Greenies that a Gold Standard would work against consumerism and thus be good for the planet, we’ve got a chance.

The above thoughts were prompted by these comments left at this article Gold Standard … Debunked or Another Bubble?:

Dirk, on November 24, 2008 at 12:58 pm, said:

I’m happy someone gets it- that constraining global economic activity based on a single metal that doesn’t really correlate to economic activity makes no sense.

Clearly, the gold standard is deflationary in absence of either major gold finds, or major negative economic shocks. More goods and services chasing a fixed money pool will create massive downward pressure on prices. And downward pressure on prices and assets equals lower incentives for investment, more difficulty paying off debt, and a negative wealth effect that creates real economic stagnation.

Inflation, on the other hand, creates pressure to invest money- not hoard it. As long as a currency promises a future redemptive power, it will keep its value. Perhaps fixing currency values to a “total energy” metric- the sum of all oil, coal, gas, solar, nuclear, etc. reserves- would allow for both economic growth and a guarantee of some future redemptive power for something really useful.

16 Stanley Pinchak, on November 25, 2008 at 2:03 pm, said:

Wow so much muddled thinking in one place. It is amazing that my browser didn’t pop up a warning.

1) Any stock of money sufficient to be accepted by the public as a money and selected as the medium of exchange is capable of serving as money. There is no need to grow the stock of money. Despite this false criticism, the gold stock does grow at a predictable (by mining engineers) and low rate between 1% and 3% per year.

2) The purchasing power of a money is related to the stock of money and the demand for money. Its purchasing power is also related to the supply and demand for all other goods in society for which it is exchanged. Thus as productivity increases, the purchasing power of a stable or slowly increasing money will increase. This has the effect of making daily expenses of those with debts easier to bear.

The only time a debt would become harder to pay off would be if the debtor was in a field of employment where his pay decreased in line with the increase in purchasing power of money. This might be a possibility, but at the same time that human actors today judge their debt burdens based on future expectations of income, those operating under a regime of increasing purchasing power of money would be capable of determining their expected future debt load capabilities. Those who guess wrong in such a situation are no different than those who bite off more debt than they can chew under our inflationary regime.

The biggest improvement that increasing purchasing power has is for savers and those on fixed incomes. Savers would earn interest + the difference in purchasing power between when they started saving and when they start consuming. This is the opposite of today where the difference in purchasing power subtracts from the interest and reduces the incentive to save. This will have the effect of greatly encouraging saving and the stock of loanable funds, driving interest rates to natural and sustainable low levels. This will benefit the saver/consumer in the future as well as the entrepreneur and the durable good consumer in the present.

Inflation on the other hand encourages debt based financing. It favors instant gratification, but since there are fewer savers since debt is the preferred method of financing, the purchases of today are not sustainable. The increase in consumption fueled by new money is not fully offset by the preferences of a ever shrinking class of savers who abstain from present consumption. This results in a business cycle like we see continuously under a system of bank credit expansion (ex nihlo). Inflation encourages capital consumption and not investment as Dirk claims. Empirical evidence of this is present in the dilapidated factories and rotting machinery of the American Rust Belt.

3) All business cycles (as in repeated and not caused by something like war or famine) are the result of fractional reserve banking and its concomitant ex nihlo credit expansion. There can be no stable and sustained economic growth under a fractional reserve banking regime. There will always be over-expansion combined with malinvestment, and and then retrenchment as the bad investments are liquidated. Attempting to tie a money to a commodity standard while maintaining a fractional reserve banking system is unsustainable. There will inevitably be calls for the creation of a central bank and lender of last resort as the bust causes bank runs.

The only viable solution is to realize that fractional reserve banking on demand deposit money is clearly a case of conflicting views of a contract and thus an untenable and invalid contract. How can a depositor demand a physical object which the banker (rightly?) assumes is lent to him for his purposes. A physical object must have a clear owner and can not be subject to control simultaneously by two parties of differing opinion under which direction to place the object. Thus demand deposits must be maintained in a warehouse fashion with 100% reserve maintained at all time. This eliminates the possibility of a bank run (in the historical sense and in the practical sense of potential damage to the depositor). Furthermore by limiting bank loans to funds deposited in time accounts (i.e. true saving) there will cease to be a business cycle.

4) The idea of a world central bank is superfluous with a free monetary system and 100% reserve banking. The main purposes of the central bank are to ease governmental expansion and to act as a lender of last resort. A world central bank will only lead to world bureaucracy. If banking is on a firm economic and legal foundation, there is no need for a lender of last resort. A world central bank is only an excuse for the establishment of world government. It can not prevent world wide business cycles while maintaining a fractional reserve banking system. Furthermore, if it maintained a 100% reserve banking system, it would still be subject to political considerations in open market operation and would still cause misallocations of resources, though not of the intertemporal kind as explained by the business cycle theory. The misallocations would result in privileged borrowers being able to bid resources from those who obtain the increase in the money supply last.

5) The myth that a gold standard would limit growth is preposterous. One of the greatest periods of economic (and population) expansion was obtained under a gold standard and under a period of increasing purchasing power of money (Cf. the 19th century). There is no theoretical nor physical restriction on the growth of economy based on a sound monetary system besides the subjective actions of individuals to save which allows for the implementation of longer and more productive production techniques.

The claim that unemployment is higher under a gold standard is also ridiculous. All non voluntary unemployment is the result of artificial restrictions on the movement of labor or its price. One must be careful not to make the mistake of comparing the unemployment rates of a central bank and fractional reserve banking boom period to an average or bust phase unemployment rate under the fractional reserve banking system which has persisted in the United States prior to its inception. Under a free market, all labor wishing to be employed will be. All state intervention attempting to reduce the ranks of the unemployed can only be obtained by reducing the well being of other actors in the economy. As such interventionist attempts to reduce unemployment, though they may increase productivity (doubtful), will not be optimal as compared ex ante in terms of the satisfaction of wants of all economic actors. On utilitarian and natural rights grounds, state intervention in the labor market is counterproductive, misguided, and should be avoided.

6) The idea that there is not enough gold to back all of the fiat currencies of the world is the most foolish statement of all. Logically one can take the stock of gold available and divide it by the weighted sum (by exchange rate) of the currencies of the world. This could provide backing for every single dollar, ruble, yen, etc. However, this is a bad policy, for the market should be left free to choose its own money, it should not be instituted from on high via state decree or central bank policy.

All that needs to be done is to eliminate legal tender laws and taxes on market selected monies. Since we have several thousand years of history showing that Gold and Silver are typically selected as money, we should start by eliminating taxes on them. If there is a push for a different medium of exchange, it should be treated in the same fashion. At the same time, all fractional reserve demand deposit banking must be subjected to traditional legal principles regarding property rights.

This means a reversion to 100% reserve banking. From these two changes, the market will perform the transition to a sound money with the minimum disruption and transfer cost. A state imposed system can only result in higher costs, as well as a retention of particular privileges for the state, most commonly in the form of a central bank, liable to interfere in the money supply through open market operations and subject to the political whims of demagogues.

Read original blog post

3:08 am
June 9, 2010

byronlewis

Guest

Post edited 3:09 am – June 9, 2010 by byronlewis


The fact that gold is an excellent hedge against inflation should have established itself more or less as common knowledge. Investors use it to protect themselves against the erosion of their purchase power. However, the development of gold in a deeply deflationary environment has not been subjected to much analysis. The only relevant period that would lend itself to comparison is the Great Depression of the 1930s. However, those were the times of the gold standard, i.e. the gold price was fixed.

4:15 am
June 20, 2018

a

Guest

asd20180620 under armour outlet online oakley outlet north face coats birkenstock sandals pandora jewelry lebron 15 shoes new jordans coming out balenciaga beats headphones air max 97 ultra yeezy boost 350 v2 pandora charms the north face jackets jordan 12 nike store skechers outlet online louboutin shoes calvin klein underwear yeezy blue tint nike vapor max barbour curry shoes timberland boots for women yeezy boost north face jackets clearance nike kd nike outlet online underarmour uggs on sale tommy hilfiger outlet red bottoms louboutin ray-ban yeezy boost 350 v2 salvatore ferragamo kate spade outlet jordan 11 red polo ralph lauren outlet fake rolex watches off white jordan pandora rings pandora jewelry kevin durant shoes gym red 11 nike factory store kyrie 4 confetti air max 2018 oakley sunglasses yeezy beluga 2.0 red bottom shoes timberland boots north face coats nike air max 95 red bottom kd shoes asics gel michael kors outlet online supremenewyork kd 10 fitflop sandals nike outlet store online jordan retro 12 pandora pandora rings pandora bracelets clearance longchamp handbags adidas shoes birkin bags huarache shoes ugg boots for women lacoste polo shirts vans store coach factory outlet mbt shoes clearance fitflops sale clearance ray bans birkenstock outlet pandora yeezy yeezy boost 350 v2 birkenstock sandals asics gel lyte curry 4 shoes rayban sunglasses kobe 12 birkenstock outlet pandora jewelry birkenstock shoes nike kyrie off white shoes nike air vapormax adidas yeezy coach handbags outlet rihanna puma louboutin outlet celine balenciaga shoes air max plus pandora charms calvin klein online nike outlet golden goose sneakers air max 97 silver bullet birkenstocks ecco shoes for men curry shoes ugg boots ray-ban sunglasses kyrie 4 soccer cleats air max 97 lacoste outlet wholesale jerseys china louboutin north face jackets kyrie 3 basketball shoes adidas shoes for women balenciaga shoes air max 270 the north face outlet online michael kors outlet clearance win like 96 michael kors canada reebok shoes air force one curry 4 pandora sale nike clearance adidas outlet store longchamp outlet ferragamo shoes polo outlet uggs slippers kyrie 3 air max 2018 cheap nfl jerseys jimmy choo shoes nike outlet store red bottom heels cheap soccer cleats christian louboutin shoes red bottoms timberland outlet stores blue tint yeezy jordan 11 win like 82 skechers shoes adidas outlet pandora bracelets clearance air max plus kd 10 polo ralph lauren outlet nike clearance yeezy zebra v2 pandora charms sale pandora charm pandora charms vans pandora jewelry ray ban sunglasses sale valentino shoes air force 1 cheap nike fenty puma uptempo fake yeezy boost red bottoms for men skechers shoes michael kors handbags outlet

Reply to Post


Reply to Topic: Is a Deflationary Gold Standard Bad?

Guest Name (Required):

Guest EMail (Required):

Topic Reply:

Save New Post Smileys

Guest URL (required)

Math Required!
What is the sum of:
8 + 6
   

 
Confused
Cool
Cry
Embarassed
Frown
Kiss
Laugh
Smile
Surprised
Wink
Yell

Search 

About the Citizen Economists forum

Most Users Ever Online:

114

Currently Online:

6 Guests

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 12

Topics: 1091

Posts: 1520

Membership:

There are 1907 Members

There have been 139 Guests

There is 1 Admin

There are 0 Moderators

Top Posters:

Ajay Shah – 67

Christopher Briem – 59

Eldon Mast – 47

The Gold Report – 44

SimonGrey – 33

The Energy Report – 28

Administrators: B.P.T. (399 Posts)