Liaquat Ahamed presents in his book, "Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World" that four of the world's central bankers attempted to rebuild the global economy following World War I but instead contributed to the economic collapse that led to the Great Depression. Mr. Ahamed profiles the central bankers from England, Germany, France, and the United States and examines their collective fear of inflation, their interest in the gold standard, and their failed plans to stabilize the international economy. Liaquat Ahamed discusses his book with Gerald Seib, executive Washington editor of The Wall Street Journal.
The gold standard would constrict spending from borrowed "fiat" money but not from wasteful spending which could be much more harmful depending on the level of stupidity at play.
I disagree with the gold standard because in a sense it is "fiat" money. It does not reflect the true wealth of our nation. Gold is but one resource. The amount of money should reflect the nation's true wealth based on products produced or manufactured.
howudoin27 2 years ago
The gold standard constricts government spending. The FED helping London had unintended consequences. The FED exceeded its intended authority in doing so. By inflating the dollar to help London, it created a boom in the stock market as capital was created, and the excess was used to invest. This was the boom. The bust comes as the steam runs out, that is available capital can not sustain the prices run up in the boom.
pkudlach 2 years ago
Isn't it possible that the four central bankers that "attempted to rebuild the global economy following WWI" intentionally meant to contribute to or initiate the economic collapse that led to the "Great Depression" ? And why is it that the U.S. took itself off the gold standard for a fiat system?
YOELTHEKING 2 years ago