On Jan 24, 2008 10:38 PM, Von Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Justin Findlay [Thu, 24 Jan 2008 at 21:45 -0700] > > > Getting off the gold standard is bad. > > > > I guess we've been in a bad situation for the past 112 years. > > As a matter of fact... >
Actually the Gold standard has more than it's fair share of warts. It's largely flawed as equally as the pure GNP (Fiat) standard we run now. This is one of the thing that really annoys me with the politics of the libs/cons/ and other political groups I normally associate with. They point at our old standard and how it must be better because of the problems we have now. Well we had problems them, which are massively compounded by certain events that happened in WWII (global gold ownership, etc), plus the effect this has on the more struggling economies. Frankly, the gold standard is only good for those countries that currently own the gold, and will put existing third world countries in an even harder spot, making trade *much* more difficult. And that's some of the smallest concerns in terms of problems with the gold standard. It has merits, but no more that what we are currently running (which I don't care for either). Some good Econ courses can help learn about other systems, especially in the relatively new concept of global economics. -- Jayce^ /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
