"And when he opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature saying,
Come. And I saw, and behold, a black horse; and he that sat thereon had a balance in
his hand. And I heard as it were a voice in the midst of the four
living creatures saying, a measure of wheat for a shilling,
and three measures of barley for a shilling; and the
oil and the wine hurt thou not," [Revelation 6:5-6].
Introduction
The following is a rejoinder to the article that Alan Greenspan wrote on the
subject of whether the United States could return to a gold standard. His article
appeared in the Wall St. Journal on September 1, 1981 [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
With the renewed interest in gold by the investment community at large, and
this writer's personal belief that gold and silver are destined to play a crucial
role in the world's future, gold and silver as Honest Money seems to be an
issue whose time has come.
A couple of caveats are in order. Greenspan offered this proposal during the
Reagan administration. A committee was formed to investigate the feasibility
of such a program. The results have never been made public. Other studies on
gold have been done under other administrations as well, one during Bush 1's
term in office.
As is obviously apparent, no one seems to take helpful criticism or advice
very well when they are the top dog. Hopefully, the fall to the opposite position
will not be necessary before alternative ways are found out of today's monetary,
financial, and fiscal mismanagement.
Until ways and means of Honest Money of gold and silver are finely given their
due chance to shine in the sun.
Sound decisions require a sound mind grounded in a balanced set of ideals
to flourish to their full potential. It is time for We The People to take a
more direct interest in our own well being, and choose representatives and
leaders that are so grounded with their sight keenly cast upon the goals ahead.
To help bring about such a state, we ourselves need to be informed on just
what is in our own best interest, and what is not. If we as citizens do not
know what it is that We The People - the country, needs and wants, then how
can we know if our leaders are making the correct decisions and choices?
They are supposed to represent us. We as good and active citizens need to
let them know what it is we want - in what direction we want our country, and
lives therein - to take. Then as our leaders, they can reflect our goals and
aspirations with their actions, truly representing the people's will, as our
forefathers intended.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks of both the government and We The People
is that we need to have a basic goal and purpose that the country, and our
lives therein, are seeking to realize and become.
It is not enough to merely perpetuate existence - we have known how to do
that for a long time, if allowed to freely obtain such. For man to advance
further we need to progress by realizing our raison d'etre for being, and to
then structure our government and lives to facilitate the actualization of
such purpose and being. To take any other course would be selling out our destiny
short, and We The People, and our children with it.
With these caveats in mind, let's take a look at what Sir Alan has to offer
in regards to a gold standard. Do keep in mind that this dude was born with
a silvery tongue, and he has perfected his natural talent quite well, being
able to joust with the best of them, most provide no match, and fall by the
way, as the titled Sir - so clearly distinguishes.
The Tenor
We will now offer some quotes from Mr. Greenspan's article. Note if you will
the tenor of the words and message, especially the one between the lines, as
the article proceeds. Carefully observing the use of the English language so
employed is like watching a championship ping-pong game - that has been fined
tuned over the years to the degree of an art form of sorts.
"The growing disillusionment with politically controlled monetary policies
has produced an increasing number of advocates for a return to the gold standard
- including at times president Reagan.
In years past the desire to return to a monetary system based on gold was
perceived as nostalgia for an era when times were simpler, problems less
complex and, the world not threatened with nuclear annihilation.
But after a decade of destabilizing inflation and economic stagnation, the
restoration of a gold standard has become an issue that is clearly rising
on the economic policy agenda. A commission to study the issue, with strong
support from President Reagan, is in place." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
Not bad so far, the pitch has been made, the game now underway. We are in
the bottom of the first. Further along we read:
"The increasingly numerous proponents of a gold standard persuasively argue
that large budget deficits and large federal borrowing requirements would
be difficult to finance under such a standard. Heavy claims against paper
dollars, for the Treasury can legally borrow as many dollars as Congress
authorizes.
But with unlimited dollar conversion into gold , the ability to
issue dollar claims would be severely limited. Obviously if you cannot finance
federal deficits, you cannot create them. Either taxes would then have to
be raised or expenditures lowered. The restrictions of gold convertibility
would therefore profoundly alter the politics of fiscal policy that have
prevailed for half a century." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
All in all Mr. Greenspan appears to be looking good. He lays out the supposed
reasoning for a gold standard - "the restrictions of gold convertibility" that
allude to a sense of discipline in creating federal deficits. Note the first
sentence of the second paragraph, which reads: "But with unlimited dollar
conversion into gold, the ability to issue dollar claims would be severely
limited." It will be revisited shortly. Next, we find what Sir Alan refers
to as disturbing alternatives:
"Yet even those of us who are attracted to the prospect of gold convertibility
are confronted with a seemingly impossible obstacle: the latest claims to
gold represented by the huge world overhang of fiat currency, mainly dollars.
The immediate problem of restoring a gold standard is fixing a gold price
that is consistent with market forces. Obviously if the offering price by
the Treasury is too low, or subsequently proves to be too low, heavy demand
at the offering price could quickly deplete the total US government stock
of gold, as well as any gold borrowed to thwart the assault. At that point,
with no additional gold available, the US would be off the gold standard
and likely to remain off for decades."
"Alternatively if the bid price is initially set too high or subsequently
becomes too high the Treasury would be inundated with gold offerings. The
payments for the gold drawn on the Treasury's account at the Federal Reserve
would add substantially to commercial bank reserves and probably act, at
least temporarily, to expand the money supply with all the inflationary implications
thereof." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
Hmm, the infamous change up pitch, a.k.a. a change of tenor. Just when everything
was moving along splendidly, we now get a bit of pessimism of things that might
occur, seemingly impossible obstacles even for the master magus.
The Problem
So exactly what is the problem? The chairman, or the undertaker as Ayn Rand
referred to him, offers the following possible explanation:
"Monetary offsets to neutralize or "earmark" gold are, of course, possible
in the short run. But as the West German monetary authorities soon learned
from their past endeavors to support the dollar, there are limits to monetary
countermeasures.
The only seeming solution is for the US to create a fiscal and monetary
environment which in effect makes the dollar as good as gold, i.e. stabilizes
the general price level and by inference the dollar price of bullion gold
itself. Then a modest reserve of bullion coin could reduce the remaining
narrow gold price fluctuations effectively to zero, allowing any changes
in gold supply and demand to be absorbed in fluctuations in the Treasury's
inventory." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
Bummer of bummers - a definite change of tenor. We have gone from saving the
world with a gold standard to "the only seeming solution" is to "stabilize
the general price level and by inference the dollar price of bullion gold itself."
Well, tis time to get serious, no more mere pretty quotes, now we need to
dig deep to find out exactly what is being said, what is meant, and if any
of it is correct or not - or if it is all the mere clanging of cymbals in the
wind.
Retracing Our Steps
Let's begin the hunt by working our way back from whence "the problem" of
returning to a gold standard first reared its ugly head; and to see and understand
the significance thereof. Lo and behold, we only have to go back to the preceding
three paragraphs by Mr. Greenspan:
"Yet even those of us who are attracted to the prospect of gold convertibility
are confronted with a seemingly impossible obstacle: the latest claims to
gold represented by the huge world overhang of fiat currency, mainly dollars.
The immediate problem of restoring a gold standard is fixing a gold price
that is consistent with market forces. Obviously if the offering price by
the Treasury is too low, or subsequently proves to be too low, heavy demand
at the offering price could quickly deplete the total US government stock
of gold, as well as any gold borrowed to thwart the assault. At that point,
with no additional gold available, the US would be off the gold standard
and likely to remain off for decades."
"Alternatively if the bid price is initially set too high or subsequently
becomes too high the Treasury would be inundated with gold offerings. The
payments for the gold drawn on the Treasury's account at the Federal Reserve
would add substantially to commercial bank reserves and probably act, at
least temporarily, to expand the money supply with all the inflationary implications
thereof." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
What Did He Say
The Master Magus admitted that he was one of "those of us" who are "attracted
to gold convertibility" that are faced with an almost impossible task.
The impossible task is then said to consist of " the huge world overhang
of fiat currency, mainly dollars " that in a gold standard would all
represent "the latest claims to gold." Yes, this most undoubtedly
would be a tough nut to crack. But does it have to be cracked? Let's find
out.
Remember awhile back, we quoted Mr. Greenspan, and said we would return to
the issue involved in the quote? Well, the time has arrived. Let's return to
the scene of the crime:
"But with unlimited dollar conversion into gold, the ability to issue
dollar claims would be severely limited." [Can
the US Return to a Gold Standard? by Alan Greenspan]
Now, Sir Alan correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't saying "with unlimited
dollar conversion into gold" pretty much equate with "the huge world
overhang of fiat currency, mainly dollars" that in a gold standard would
all represent "the latest claims to gold."
Unless the present "huge world overhang of fiat dollars" is as great
or greater than "unlimited dollar conversion into gold" isn't the Chairman
contradicting himself by saying that we face an impossible task of converting
the existing supply of dollars into gold?
Well, perhaps the answer is both yes, on the one hand, and no on the other
- but yes altogether. Here's why.
From the initial point we began to trace our steps back from, Mr. Greenspan
also said, "the immediate problem of restoring a gold standard is fixing
a gold price that is consistent with market forces." He then gives examples
of setting the price too high or too low; and the problems each scenario could
entail.
There really is no need to go into the problems he alludes to by fixing the
price too high or too low. The potential problems are inherent in any scheme to
fix the price of gold - period.
One cannot set or fix the price of gold that "is consistent
with market force" unless one is the market, which I don't think Chairman
Greenspan, or the Federal Reserve - qualify as such.
Perhaps in their own minds they may believe they are as omnipotent and omniscient
as the market, but such misguided pride would be nothing more than a case of
illusion and delusion - as "pride goeth before a fall."
And more importantly, fixing the price of anything is the antithesis of free
markets. In a free market price does not get fixed or rigged, the market
determines the market price by the laws of supply and demand, subjective and
objective valuation, and other free market principles.
Fixing The Price
The setting or fixing of the price of gold is the stuff of illusion and delusion,
nothing more, and arguably something less. As has been shown in Honest
Money; GOLD:
Sovereign of Sovereigns; and in Silver
IS Money - the dollar of the Constitution is a specific weight of silver,
commonly known as the Silver Dollar or 371.25 grains of silver.
Legal tender decrees by the government are not the workings of free markets.
The fixing of the exchange rate between gold and silver, as was done in the
Original Coinage Act of 1792 was a mistake, whether it was intended or not.
The legal tender value between gold and silver was set at a fixed rate.
Yet, at the same time the market price of gold and silver was not
fixed but moved back and forth daily.
Such a monetary policy is an accident waiting for a time and place to happen.
It is completely opposed to the honest principles of free trade and free markets.
Go into the market place and let it tell you what the
Price or exchange rate is - not some government decree or fixing.
But Mr. Greenspan believes that: "the immediate problem of restoring a
gold standard is fixing a gold price that is consistent with market forces." How
wrong he is - and he knows it.
The current money of the 18 th century was originally a weight of silver -
the silver dollar. Silver and gold were not priced in dollars; dollars were
defined by a specific weight or standard of silver.
The circulating unit of money should be both the unit of account, and the
current medium of exchange of the existing monetary system. This specific issue
of the money-unit-of-account and medium-of-exchange, will be dealt with in
much more detail in a soon to be released paper.
Suffice it to say that Honest Money should only be defined by a specific weight
of silver and gold coin. The precious metals are best left to a floating exchange
rate between the two, to be determined by the market.
The coins should only be denominated by their weight: as in an ounce of gold,
or a pound of silver, not by any other names or measures - by weight and weight
only. Nothing more, and nothing less: Honest Money.
We do not daily change the definition of a foot - it is, and remains - 12
inches. We do not daily change the definition of a ton - it is, and remains
- 2000 lbs. Would you buy gas for your car or home by the gallon if the amount
of ounces in the gallon changed daily? Would you give your child medicine if
the numbers of teaspoons in a tablespoon changed daily?
Then why do we accept the fact that the measure of value, the purchasing power,
the very definition of our money, is allowed to change daily? Is this not foolishness?
But who is perpetrating such foolishness, and on whom? What is the intended
purpose? Cui Bono?
Greenspan Revisited
If we now go back to Sir Alan's previous statement that "the immediate
problem of restoring a gold standard is fixing a gold price that is consistent
with market forces", we see that the quote not only goes against free
market principles, but it also leaves a minefield in its wake; and the destructive
aftermath caused by such foolish babble.
Perhaps the gold standard of foregone days included fixed or rigged markets,
however, it is only within a truly free market that gold and silver can blossom
to their full potential - when left alone, to do their own thing: the free
markets own thing: Honest Money's own thing.
Whenever the ratio of monetary values is fixed or set by the government, by
legal decree or tender - free market principles go out the window, the baby
gets tossed out with the bath water.
It is a questionable and arguable issue as to whether such fixing was by mistake
or design. Once again, the constraints of time and space do not allow for the
exploration of such issues in detail, however, these issues will be dealt with
in depth, as the weeks and months go by - of that you can rest assured.
The main point presently being made is that Mr. Greenspan was wrong to think
or say, "The immediate problem of restoring a gold standard is fixing a
gold price that is consistent with market forces." Perhaps this is true
in the dream world of paper fiat land that the elite bankers envision and lust
for, but such is an anathema to a free society or market.
If gold or silver is to be our money, then it is our money. It does not, and
should not, be priced in anything else - it is the value, it is the price of
all other goods - by Honest Weights And Measures alone.
To put any other additional nametags on money such as dollars, yen, euros,
and renminbi , only confuses the entire basis of all monetary systems, and
hence all financial systems and economies based upon them as well; especially
if the name also denotes a legal tender or face value different then the free
market price of Honest Weights and Measures alone.
Is it not enough to call an ounce of gold - an ounce of gold? Is it not enough
to say that the price of a horse is an ounce of gold? The price of a loaf of
bread is a quarter ounce of silver? The price of a house is so many ounces
of gold or silver? Keep it simple: Honest Weights and Measures. Such will keep them honest
as well.
Inflation
I'll be damned if I know what Greenspan is talking about when he starts throwing
around terms like inflation; a gold-based monetary system; price stability;
or unlimited dollar conversion into gold. The Greenman is good at that, using
all kinds of terms he never defines, so nobody really knows exactly what he
is talking about or means; and whether any of it makes sense or cents.
Well, I'll let you in on two secrets of the master magus of the temple: he
knows what he is talking about - and what it means. And he knows that it is
WRONG - dead wrong.
He also speaks like that because that's what he gets paid to do, to make it
all so unintelligible that nobody questions it or him - except for Congressman
Ron Paul and a few other true patriots. The rest are sycophantic idol worshippers
bowing at the feet of their master.
As I, and many others before me have written, there are many types of inflation.
Mises has one of the best definitions when he states:
"In theoretical investigation there is only one meaning that can rationally
be attached to the expression inflation: an increase in the quantity of money
(in the broader sense of the term, so as to include fiduciary media as well),
that is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money (again
in the broader sense of the term), so that a fall in the objective exchange
value of money must occur.
Again, deflation (or restriction, or contraction) signifies a diminution
of the quantity of money (in the broader sense), which is not offset by a
corresponding diminution of the demand for money (in the broader sense),
so that an increase in the objective exchange value of money must occur.
If we so define these concepts, it follows that either inflation or deflation
is constantly going on, for a situation in which the objective exchange value
of money did not alter could hardly ever exist for very long." [ Ludwig von
Mises - Theory
of Money and Credit, The]
But be it noted: Mises is talking about monetary inflation, which is the first
inflation to rear its ugly head, as the others are born thereof. There is also
price inflation, asset inflation, wage inflation, etc.
Monetary inflation is a built-in defect of paper fiat debt-money, an inherent
genetic gene of mutation if you will - the seed of its own undoing is within,
an inherent mutated gene of self-destruction.
Many analysts and writers speak of monetary inflation as in an increase of
the money supply; others speak of price inflation as in the CPI or PPI; some
discuss asset inflation as in the real estate market or the bond market.
Seldom is the rider of the pale horse mentioned, all are wary to utter his
name. His name is debasement - the destruction of the purchasing
power or quality of the currency, of Federal Reserve Notes or dollar
bills (note the word bill in the name - as in that which is owed).
It is the debasement of the currency by loss of purchasing power that is the
creature born of the beast of paper fiat. By such debasement, a hidden tax
is placed upon our heads, as wealth is siphoned off from us all by the loss
of the value of our money. Debasement is the worst form of inflation - an abomination
that walks the earth by night.
What would you say if you were taxed 95% of everything you earned? Well, because
the debasement of the currency you have been so taxed - it's just that you
do not see it, hence you do not realize it. This is the reason why prices go
up - because the value of your money goes down. Now you know. Vote accordingly.
The Keynesian mindset has been so entrenched into our schooling and way of
life that seldom are such misguided beliefs ever questioned. And even when
they are, never is the great lie of gold being priced in dollars understood
and explained. Nor is the story of how the debasement of the currency transfers
wealth from We The People to the would- be-rulers of the universe dare spoken
of.
Quantity vs. Quality Theory
The quantity theory of money portrays an illusion of false beliefs. One such
belief is that having more units of the currency makes one wealthier.
Another false belief is that to be in the possession of houses, and cars,
and boats, and all are other things, makes us wealthier. Does it really?
Do we truly own all of the things we have? Or does the banker who holds the
title to all the property really own it all? This makes us wealthier?
To be indebted is wealth?
If we do not hold the title free and unencumbered, do we truly own the things,
or do we own the debt of the loan that allows us to take possession of those
things?
Are we not really "leasing" or "renting" that which appears
to be ours, but until the entire mortgage and loans are paid off in full the
banker really owns? By accumulating more and more debt, are we becoming wealthier,
or deeper in debt - deeper in servitude? And just whom are we serving? Cui
Bono?
It is a lie. It is a delusion. It is not wealth. It is debt. We do not own
the stuff - the bankers own the stuff. The bankers hold title. We hold the
bill, the promise to pay - the obligation to be fullfilled by our labor, our
life's work; and perhaps even the life's work of our children and their children.
And Greenspan knows this all too well. For whatever the reason he has turned
his back on that which he knows.
He knows that what many call price inflation is simply the debasement of the
purchasing power or quality of our money to such a degree that no increase
in the quantity makes up for the loss in the quality or value of our money.
He knows that debasement is what causes prices to go up, and the value of
our currency to go down.
The fact that the value of our money is going down is the evil curse that
makes it take more units of our hard earned money to buy the same amount of
goods - thus other goods are said to cost more. To cost more means it takes
more units or quantity of money to purchase the same amount of goods.
Why, because the quality or value of the money has been debased. As the Chairman
has written:
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings
from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If
there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was
done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all
his bank deposits to silver, copper, or any other good, and thereafter declined
to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing
power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on
goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no
way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold.
Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold
stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of
property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding
the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard." [Alan
Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom (1966)]
Wealth
Although Greenspan speaks much truth in the above, there are still some delusions
running amuck. He makes the very honest assertion that "Deficit spending
is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth." This is most honest
for a political beast or for the undertaker to admit.
Yet a few sentences earlier he states that if citizens "declined to accept
checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power
and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods" and
that "the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of
wealth to protect themselves."
Yes - it is the Truth. If confidence in the currency disappears, bank deposits
would lose all of their purchasing power, becoming worth less and less, until
worthless as claims on goods. It is the creature named hyperinflation - of
runaway inflation.
But what of the statement that there would be no way for owners of wealth
to protect themselves. Protect them from what - thieves and vandals, creatures
of the night?
Yes, in an odd sort of way. It is the creature of currency debasement that
scours the earth searching for its next meal of wealth, which it devours and
brings back to its master - at least it did when under the control of the master.
But now the beast is out of control, it no longer obeys its handlers - now
it only obeys a greater creature - the god of Lucre.
The beast of a higher order of the left hand path is now leading the order
of Lucre. They who worship at the altar of Lucre - a false god that will turn
on them when the time comes, and come it will. It is called the reckoning -
the weighing in the balance. The abyss is waiting below. Behold the rider on
the white horse - when night will be no more.
Roadblocks
So, the maestro - the master magus - sees some roadblocks ahead in restoring
the gold standard of days gone by. Let's peek closer at the tenor of the tune
being sung:
"The major roadblock to restoring the gold standard is the problem of re-entry. With
the vast quantity of dollars worldwide laying claim to the US Treasury's
264 million ounces of gold, an overnight transition to gold convertibility
would create a major discontinuity for the US financial system. But there
is no need for the whole block of current dollar obligations to become an
immediate claim." [Greenspan]
This is true. There is an ocean of paper fiat dollars floating about the world
- claims, as Mr. Greenspan alluded to - to our wealth. Does that sound like
the function of money, to be a claim or bill upon our wealth? That sounds more
like a debt or obligation upon our wealth.
An overnight transition to gold convertibility would indeed create a major
discontinuity for not only the U.S. financial system, but the world financial
system as well. Lest we forget, we have conned the world into accepting Federal
Reserve Notes as the world's reserve currency.
Such was the fatal stroke d'egras that can only be wielded by a master magus
of the highest order of Lucre - the sword of Damocles swinging down hard.
Ah, but he isn't Sir Maestro for nothing, for the undertaker, as Ayn Rand
called him, speaks quite clearly when he says, "But there is no need for
the whole block of current dollar obligations to become an immediate claim." In
deed, there is no reason at all. It can be done slowly over time. But according
to what speed?
By whatever speed the free market dictates. Go into the free market, there
you will find whatever means are best suited for the workings of free market
principles - of honest supply and demand factors; of honest export trade factors;
of honest foreign exchange factors; of honest balance of trade factors.
As many others and I have advocated: there is no need for all paper fiat obligations
to be converted into gold immediately - in fact, there is:
No need for any paper fiat dollar obligations to be converted
into gold.
Restoration vs. Replacement
What Mr. Greenspan proposes is a restoration of the monetary system - restoring
it by what he calls a return to the gold standard, which to him means that
Federal Reserve Notes or dollar bills are to be convertible into gold.
But why should FRN's be convertible into gold? Are all of the notes to be
so converted? According to what price or exchange will a dollar bill for gold
take place? And who decides all such particulars - the undertaker, the same
as who got us here to begin with. I think not. I for one will pass.
For a full in depth, studies of the issue see: Honest
Money, GOLD:
Sovereign of Sovereigns, and Silver
IS Money.
There is a way out of this mess, however. The Foundation For The Advancement
of Monetary Education [FAME - About
FAME | What's New], along
with many others, advocate the return to the hard money system of our Constitution,
where silver and gold coin was our money - not paper claims that were fractionally
backed by it.
Open the mint to the free minting of silver and gold bullion brought there
by the citizens of the country - minting of bullion into coin according to
Honest Weights and Measures. Let the gold and silver coin circulate alongside
of the present day Federal Reserve Notes. Then let the free market of We The
People decide which they prefer to use.
The original use and intent of the mint when first founded was to mint silver
and gold bought in by the citizens, the citizens held title to the silver and
gold - not the government or the mint.
The United States Government was never vested with any powers
by the Constitution to hold title to all of the money of the country and
its citizens.
This most questionable policy came about through the debasement and devolution
of the monetary system through the various monetary acts, some of which are
arguably unconstitutional.
The present day U.S. Code and Uniform Commercial Code have lent their two
cents worth of nonsense regarding such issues. Where else can you find a statute
that states that Federal Reserve Notes are redeemable in lawful money, which
means the FRN's must not be lawful money, otherwise why would they need to
be redeemed in lawful money, if they already are such? For a more detailed
analysis see Honest
Money, Part I: The Constitution and Honest Money .
To even consider backing today's near worthless Federal Reserve Notes with
gold and silver based on the amount of purchasing power retained by such notes
(5%) since 1913, is but another step down the slippery road of monetary debasement,
headed directly towards perdition.
They are not worth backing - it would be throwing good money
after bad money.
Either Greenspan isn't as smart as I think he is, or he is still towing the
political line - anchor, ship, and all. If he doesn't soon cut bait - he may
find the anchor dragging him down. Tis an expensive price exacted to do the
Sir Lordship gig.
Lest We Forget
Chairman Greenspan ends his paper with the following admonition:
"Those who advocate a return to a gold standard should be aware that returning
our monetary system to gold convertibility is no mere technical, financial
restructuring. It is a basic change in our economic processes. However, considering
where the policies of the last 50 years eventually led us, perhaps these
are the lessons to be learned from our more distant golden past." [Greenspan]
The ironies that a silvery smooth tongue can utter without choking are a wonder
to behold. So Mr. Greenspan believes, or at least he states - that to "return
our monetary system to gold convertibility is no mere technical, financial
restructuring. It is a basic change in our economic processes."
Well of course, it is - and so it has been. The change from a gold standard
to a gold exchange system was one of significance. And now the present monetary
system, which is based on debt and more debt, represents at least a basic change
to our economic processes, if not to the very fabric and soul of our country.
And lest we forget, there was another system prior to any gold convertibility
system or gold standard: the original hard money system of The Constitution
and the Original Coinage Act of 1792 -
The Silver Standard coupled with a bimetallic coinage system
of silver and gold coin, and no bills of credit.
A gold convertible monetary system or gold standard
IS NOT THE MONETARY SYSTEM VESTED BY THE CONSTITUTION.
Be not deceived by all the smooth talk and rhetoric, it is nothing more than
sophisticated babble, meant to confuse and distort the Truth. The Truth is
written in our Constitution - go there in search thereof.
Apparently, Mr. Greenspan has not studied our most glorious piece of literature,
or he has forgotten his lessons, or no longer believes in them. Congressman
Ron Paul has, and does, and says so all the time. He even asks Mr. Greenspan
questions before Congress about such matters. How is he answered? By the speaking
in tongues of babble - Greenspeak some dare call it.
It is time for straight talk. It is time for Honest Money. It is time that
Night Shall Be No More.
|