Equivocation fallacy. Nothing has value without people who value it. The difference between gold and FRNs is that people value gold without any government or institution telling them to.
Equivocation fallacy. The market value of a commodity is not what we mean by the institutional "backing" of a currency.The people in Fiji did not value gold. They threw it away. So it was not money and it had no backing.
False. When it was introduced, the people didn't back it. But it had government to back it and now the people accept it.FRN needs the people to back it.
Hypothesis contrary to fact fallacy. You are claiming that the people might decide not to value FRNs even though they are needed to pay taxes, to satisfy court judgments, etc. But that is nothing but a silly notion you dreamed up. If the people need FRNs for those things, they WILL value them.No matter how much government proclaims the value of FRBN, if the people do not value it, it has no backing.
No, the Zimbabwean dollar has no value because the government has printed too many of them, and now has no motive to levy taxes, enforce court judgments, etc. that require Zimbabwean dollars.Zimbabwean dollars was not backed by the People, and it has essentially no value, no matter how much their government decrees.
A ludicrous fabrication.FRBN and Gold hold the same "backing"
Such claims are self-evidently absurd. Confederate paper money became worthless after the Civil War because it had no backing. Confederate silver dimes did not.The only difference, one is mined.
The other is printed.
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us