Bill Still criticizing Ron Pauls idea about sound money

[thoughtomator]

Would our economy grow faster or slower on a gold standard? Or it would grow slower but it would be steadier over time, so long term it would do better than debt free money?

This may come as a surprise to you, but our economy has not grown at all since 1983. ALL the "growth" since is demand pulled forward by debt. All of it.

[Curry]

debt free money can work problem is you would have to drag the rest of the world kicking and screaming, for me i think Paul knows he cant change everything to quickly, i think Paul is trying to unwind the clock of time by returning to silver and gold backed money, Paul has to balance the budget before any ideas that Bill has can see momentum.

[onlyrp]

I don't think I agree with your point here. First of all, freely transacting would necessarily require that there were no tax consequences from transacting in gold. Tax, extracted by government coercion, is the precise opposite of a free market.

Secondly, there are myriad ways that the government meddles with the currency markets to ensure that the playing field is not level:

• attacking competing currencies with propaganda, confiscation, prosecution and/or onerous regulation (e.g. e-gold, liberty dollar, goldmoney as three examples that spring to mind).
• legal tender laws
• taxation of "gains" measured in another, government currency
• excessive (or in fact) any reporting requirements
• requiring payment of taxes in US paper dollars.

These are all ways in which the government inhibits rival currencies from free competition.

RebelYell

so as long as competing currencies are taxed, it'll be useless and not any freer? is there a country that doesn't have income, sales, value added taxation? If not, doesn't it mean they too, have no free exchange no matter how much freedom they're allowed to choose thier currency or exchange method?

[onlyrp]

So we would want gold because we know bankers can't increase the supply at will? It keeps them in check and our economy stable.

this is why Bill Still opposes the gold standard, gold is already in too many concentrated hands and therefore, a gold standard gives a direct advantage to gold owners.

[nedomedo]

I also found it interesting that they brought up Japan, which supposedly has somewhat of similar system like North Dakota. Interesting thing is that Japan has the biggest debt to GDP ratio than any nation, yet they are still here after decades. I mean, their economy is still very powerful. Yet some countries like Greece and Italy aren't even a third as bad as Japan with debt and total breakdowns occur as we can see...austerity etc. By free market standards Japan should have been completely bankrupt by now?

Japan is in twice as much debt as Italy, and Italy is supposedly next on the list of collapse now.

[RebelYell]

The only way a debt free money system would even function is if all the people were experts in money and we all paid attention what the government does and kept it in check ourselves.

The only way any civilized society can ever function is if all the people educate themselves and pay attention to what the government does. Civilization and freedom are incompatible with widespread ignorance.

Kind of like the whole benevolent dictator argument lol it's rare but it happens.

Not sure I agree that there can be a benevolent dictator by definition. Some dictators are perhaps less rapacious than others - but a truly benevolent individual cannot ever, I believe, be a dictator.

When we reach that point I don't think we will even be having discussions like this anymore. Saddest thing in the world in my opinion is lack of facts and truth. Its so stupid we have to even debate this, why can't there be one factual system that we know works.

What are the facts? What is the truth? Does it exist? How can we ever know we have found it? Those I think are eternal questions - and it is only the search which truly makes us human, and perhaps makes life enjoyable, even for those who only dimly realize what they are searching for. As Douglas Adams so amusingly pointed out, any answer man could give to the fundamental question of life the universe and everything could never be complete, nor any less ridiculous than his answer "42".

RebelYell

[onlyrp]

The only way any civilized society can ever function is if all the people educate themselves and pay attention to what the government does. Civilization and freedom are incompatible with widespread ignorance.

what do you suggest? criminalizing ignorance?

[RebelYell]

so as long as competing currencies are taxed, it'll be useless and not any freer? is there a country that doesn't have income, sales, value added taxation? If not, doesn't it mean they too, have no free exchange no matter how much freedom they're allowed to choose thier currency or exchange method?

Not necessarily useless. Just less useful than it otherwise would be.

And yes, all government interferences in markets mean that those markets are not free. A market is either free or it is not. If it is subject to coercive force then it is not free. I suppose there is value in the concept of more free or less free to the extent that the government distortions have a greater or lesser impact on the voluntary transactions that otherwise would be carried out.

RebelYell

[RebelYell]

what do you suggest? criminalizing ignorance?

My own belief is that that would be immoral and also wouldn't work. As Ron Paul so well expressed the concept that freedom cannot be spread from the barrel of a gun, neither can enlightenment be spread from tail of a whip or through the bars of a cage.

I think educating, explaining and inspiring is the way to go. It may not be a speedy solution, but it is the surest and best way to change the world.

RebelYell

[RebelYell]

This may come as a surprise to you, but our economy has not grown at all since 1983. ALL the "growth" since is demand pulled forward by debt. All of it.

You might be right, but how on earth do you know?

I can't even figure out what it means to measure the size of an economy let alone how to measure it. I'm darn sure that GDP isn't the right way to measure it though, even if there were clear agreement about how to measure inflation and consequently modify GDP.

What is the "size" of an economy? Shouldn't we really be measuring the overall wealth of an economy, or perhaps the wealth per capita? Is that what you mean by the size of the economy. If not, wouldn't it be a better measure of a nation's prosperity? Or perhaps the rate at which that wealth is growing - the savings rate?

In any event, I am certain you cannot measure the health of my economy, or my country's, by counting how much money is being spent.

And then, even if I could figure out what the size of an economy was and how to measure it, how on earth would I decide how to apportion any growth to one cause or another?

RebelYell