Robert, the very title of this topic says The Myth, so I have to assume
there is enough gold in the world to allow everybody to exchange their paper
for gold (as long as the governments didn't print more than its worth).
Patrick, now I understand why you want to pay your taxes in gold: you want
George,
Actually the title refers to the argument by paper advocates that there
might not be enough gold on the planet to facilitate all the daily
transactions, international trade, etc, and that hence a liquidity crisis
would follow if gold was used ad only denominator of exchange.
Most here
Patrick,
Danny, in your 9-Oct post you described how In some places it [money]
somehow evolved from gold towards paper currency in a rather smooth
transition. I would like to hear about those places and times.
Probably renaissance Italy is the best example, but again I didn't live in
these
A money can have value, just based on its widespread acceptance and a
sound
'open books' management.
What is 'sound open books', please?
Robert,
It means the people who are managing the currency show the books how many
(new) currency they are issuing, and give justification for the
Money is not added to the circulation by printing it and throwing it out of
a helicopter over the people's houses.
Instead it is being printed and either used by the gov to pay bills (most
countries) or loaned to the gov to pay bills with (USA).
However, if you look at the requestion costs of
But in the United States, the thugs outlawed redeeming currency for gold.
Patrick, why is this redeeming word so important? Can't you just say you
*exchange* paper money for gold on the free market? Or maybe you're saying
it is illegal (now) for people to own gold in USA (so, they can't exchange
George,
I hope Patrick doesn't mind if I answer this one.
Redeemability implies that the issuer of paper has the corresponding
amount of gold in stock. This in turn means that the paper is synonymous
with gold and that there can be only as much paper as there is gold.
Exchange is something
On Sunday, October 12, 2003, at 02:18 PM, FileMatrix wrote:
But in the United States, the thugs outlawed redeeming currency for
gold.
Patrick, why is this redeeming word so important? Can't you just say
you
*exchange* paper money for gold on the free market? ...
I understand what you have in
Danny,
Unfortunately vendor finance and lease back are common practice in many
stores here for ages, already. While they don't call it rent per say, it
boils down to monthly installments and the word interest appears nowhere.
Most notably though, if an item costs say $500 cash, then the vendor
Patrick,
No. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never harm me.
Force and verbiage are two different things.
Not everybody will agree that words cannot harm.
Just ask the people who sue in court for public slander.
But since Jim has agreed with your definition, I have now
On Saturday, October 11, 2003, at 10:27 AM, Danny Van den Berghe wrote:
Indeed, but making it independant from gold backing is not necessarily
done
by force.
It may have been done by force in the past, but that does not mean it
is the
only way.
Danny, in your 9-Oct post you described how In
Danny,
You know I am someone who says that when all is said and done, I still pay
my bills with fiat and it's pretty difficult, even in Malaysia to buy a
piece of land paying in gold coins and bars (no, joke, I tried - and
succeeded, after going to a bank and getting the gold valued in the local
The US populace pays $62 billion of interest on credit card debts per
year!
Imagine, if people were not able to use credit for consumables.
Robert, does anybody force these people not to use debit cards? The same
goes for the credit cards you said will be used in Malaysia.
Regards,
George
Danny wrote:
And if your venture capital system is available as well, then I have all
possible choices, just in case I doesn't want to carry all the risk.
Exactly, if both options exist, it is likely that the VC option would over
time largely replace the commercial banking option in all
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 07:53 AM, Danny Van den Berghe wrote:
In fact we could as well say that the interest this person pays is in
fact
rent he pays to use the item until it becomes his own at the end of the
contract.
Ah, now I have given you a great business idea how to offer consumer
Thanks for an exceptionally civilized discussion.
You see it is possible to talk about things without calling each other
a
thug as soon as there is a disagreement.
And with more fruitful results.
It seems that Jim defines thug as an individual who advocates or
participates in the
On Friday, October 10, 2003, at 02:07 PM, Danny Van den Berghe wrote:
Yeah, but isn't publicly calling someone a thug (or any other
insulting
statement) already a case of initiation of force against a person, and
hence
the person who utters these words has declared himself a thug by his
own
I actually enjoy the objections of both Patrick and Frank because they are
contructive and make sense.
Here we go: Patrick, if you lend someone a piece of gold and get the piece
bank plus a smaller one, you won't be hauled to prison - BUT - might be
forced to donate the smaller piece to a charity
On Thursday, October 9, 2003, at 03:01 AM, Robert B.Z. wrote:
I actually enjoy the objections of both Patrick and Frank because they
are
contructive and make sense.
Here we go: Patrick, if you lend someone a piece of gold and get the
piece
bank plus a smaller one, you won't be hauled to prison
And that is then when you have no risk, the guy who borrowed carries the
complete risk of failure and still would have to pay you anyway. And that
is unfair.
While you should get something for investing in him, the amount he owes
you should be fixed there and then. Indeed, if you invest a gold
On Thursday, October 9, 2003, at 02:47 PM, Danny Van den Berghe wrote:
Rather unnecessarily complicated constructions are being made to avoid
the word 'interest'...
What we call 'interest' in the West will be given other names like
'rent'
Person 1 pays rent for the use of a house over a certain
Danny wrote:
And if your venture capital system is available as well, then I have all
possible choices, just in case I doesn't want to carry all the risk.
Exactly, if both options exist, it is likely that the VC option would over
time largely replace the commercial banking option in all fields
And one that is entirely taken out of the air, I might add :o)
The argument (without stating it) is based on the idea that people would
sit on the gold and not use it, which is a weird idea if you ask me,
because people would still need eat and pay rent and gas and things.
Now, if we there was no
On Wednesday, October 8, 2003, at 05:49 PM, Robert B.Z. wrote:
So, for a gold currency to really and truly work, one has to hammer the
laws of physics into the masses and make them see that gold can't be
made
from thin air and hence, interest has to be outlawed ;o)
So if I hand a piece of gold
Robert, how do you account for the simple concept of the time value of
money from the standpoint of persons who wish to lend gold, and consumer
preference on the part of those who wish to borrow it?
I myself am totally opposed to any debt which is not going to make me
richer, and as a general
25 matches
Mail list logo
