how to sell the gold standard to the left?

[Spider-Man]

Is it only fringe libertarians that support the gold standard? It certainly seems that way. I don't understand why this is. It seems there should be some degree of bipartisan appeal.

[Epic]

Without the money-printing, the warfare state couldn't be financed.

[Spider-Man]

Hey, that's a good one. And simple to understand.

[jake]

Hey, that's a good one. And simple to understand.

erm, I think he's making an argument as to why it doesn't have bipartisan appeal :p

[RonPaulCult]

Liberals are all about the poor - so this is a good issue to discuss with them. But you have to make them understand how fiat money inflates the price of everything. You have to explain the inflation tax and how this hurts the poor most of all.

Most liberals would get behind the gold standard and sound money if they understood this. And I'm not calling liberals dumb here or unable to understand it. I'm just saying most people have never been told this - so...tell them :)

[Krugerrand]

You're not going to get liberals to go for it, because they can't buy votes on a gold standard. The old populist push was that no gold standard would allow for "more money" which would then be available to the poor people.

You might be able to get union advocates to go along with it. It's much easier to paint the UN, IMF and WTO as part of the global "uber rich" that control everything and benefit the most from fiat money. They dislike NAFTA and tend to not like money going anywhere but the union coffers (and strangely enough the DNC coffers)

I think some well placed arguments can really fraction the union vote away from the Democrats to Ron Paul's camp. I think it's crucial to a RP victory. Union workers don't like to see Wall Street get bailed out.

[Brian Defferding]

I would probably first clarify that most people aren't looking for the "gold standard" of old, but rather something where money is represented by a basket of commodities. Have them look into the concept of "Free Enterprise Money" which was talked about by Mises, Hayek and Rothbard.

With that being said, the left is probably the hardest to argue this theory to. I usually don't try to sell it to them, but rather to the people listening in on the debates, aka I "play the crowd." The left believes in deficit spending as a means to what they feel is a utilitarian end, and their belief of stronger federal control means that deficits - to a certain degree - are necessary. See how people like Krugman and his dittoheads downplay the debt and say "We've been at worse debt before and we were fine" then point at the larger progressive tax codes in the 50's and 60's as a ways for the government to help pay deficits off.

It always comes down to that old classic ideological clash. Perhaps maybe point out to them that under commodity-backed money, the meltdown never would have occurred, because banks would then loan only to people whom they know would pay them back with interest, instead of getting involved with those NINJA sub-prime loans.

[AuH20]

This is an extremely difficult challenge. All the various social programs ushered in by FDR and later LBJ are dependent on money supply increases and fiat currency devaluation. I don't know you sell this to them, aside from attempting to explain that the currency controls and the abolition of interest rate manipulation would go a long way in reducing home prices and stabilizing the costs of goods & services. Even that caveat may not suffice for a redistibutionist liberal, who is literally married to this Keynesian system.

[Imaginos]

I'd approach from their angle and language.
I'd say, "If you REALLY want to protect the poor, then you should go for the gold standard because devaluation of currency HURTS THE POOR MOST!"
And I'd explain why the gold standard is the best way to fight devaluation of currency.

[Krugerrand]

I'd approach from their angle and language.
I'd say, "If you REALLY want to protect the poor, then you should go for the gold standard because devaluation of currency HURTS THE POOR MOST!"
And I'd explain why the gold standard is the best way to fight devaluation of currency.

Also, fiat currency encourages the bubble burst cycles. The wealthy get to play this for serious profit. The poor just get abused by it.

[fisharmor]

With that being said, the left is probably the hardest to argue this theory to. I usually don't try to sell it to them, but rather to the people listening in on the debates, aka I "play the crowd."

+1
Ultimately I don't think you're going to get very far with people who wish deep down inside that we didn't have money at all, and that bureaucrats would have the tools necessary to decide the fate of everyone.

Most people I know aren't blessed with the mental capacity to understand any of this. I know people with doctorates who get paid six figures to push government pencils who return only blank stares when confronted with a question like "what discernible benefit is there in being forced, under threat of prison, to use money which is 100% guaranteed to lose its value over time?"

[Michael Landon]

Just tell them that JFK was trying to return the country back to the Gold-Silver Standard.

- ML

[slothman]

If you tell them how it will make them less poor then they will listen.

[WaltM]

How about selling the gold standard to RPFers first?

[WaltM]

Just tell them that JFK was trying to return the country back to the Gold-Silver Standard.

- ML

G Edward Griffin would disagree, or at least disagree he was killed for that reason.

But then again, don't trust a crazy man who thinks B-17 will prevent and cure cancer.

[V-rod]

Is it only fringe libertarians that support the gold standard? It certainly seems that way. I don't understand why this is. It seems there should be some degree of bipartisan appeal.


In order to fund a large military and a huge "safety net" the tax rate would have to be doubled or tripled. The hard left know that Americans would not go for it.

[emazur]

You're not going to get liberals to go for it, because they can't buy votes on a gold standard. The old populist push was that no gold standard would allow for "more money" which would then be available to the poor people.

That can be countered by saying that money created out of thin air is used to bail out the rich big banks.


You might be able to get union advocates to go along with it.
Yes - here is a man who has convinced such union advocates:
http://montanasoundmoney.org/parksvideo.html

[BuddyRey]

I've actually had more success pitching asset-backed currency to liberals than conservatives. Once they understand how private bankers use fiat currency to line their own pockets and buy political favors while sapping the purchasing power of the working and middle class, they're all over it!

[YumYum]

Liberals are open minded people. I am a liberal (progressive). I think we could sell them on competing currencies.

[sofia]

have them read this fun story


www.tomatobubble.com