The cons include a more rigid monetary system, which isn't even a con imo.
Also, you run into the problem where your money, being backed by gold, is much harder to protect from losses. There is no central bank that can print gold, So things like bank runs can be devastating to people. Although we can regulate against such things happening.
@kileer7 The pros include having an monetary system that balances world trade. If one country runs a deficit, then it loses it's gold. Hence causing interest rates to rise, hence promoting saving. This prevents overconsumption and the capital flight that we have seen in this country over the last 3 decades.
Maybe I just don't get it. We make more work for ourselves just to maintain the idea of money, purpose, or value? All contrivances of the mind, and at the cost of social efficiency. Products are made faulty just so companies can stay afloat. Prices are arbitrarily chosen. No one tries to make something perfect the first time around. What is the reason for all of this? Why acquire a large sum of wealth just to die and loss it all?
The system clearly needs some reconfiguring. Perhaps we should pay people simply for being alive, just so they can afford basic necessities, then add on to the earning for achievements and professional knowledge. Also add limitations to how much one can own. Stop making a few individuals control property that they didn't put any work into building or maintaining. Money now is nonsense. How can we owe others? We are all human, so that would mean we owe ourselves something? Sounds foolish to me.
Money was a medium for exchange, since it isn't always possible to barter. But now that we can efficiently acquire information on where necessities and work is needed, I don't see the use of money anymore. Yes, we need to rationalize goods, so a person is fairly compensated for their labor. But, is there really enough work to go around for 7 billion individuals? Not to mention most people lack self-control and blindly pursue their desires at any cost, and don't fully understand how things work.
@AndyMH182 People will still loan the government money ( with a debt to GDP ration of 1:1) if the currency is fiat, because they still want to earn interest.
But if you were giving the government your gold, or a currency unit backed by a commodity, you are trusting that the government will actually deliver that gold + interest back to you. And when it owes 15Tn, you won't be giving it your gold because you know you can't be paid back. 15Tn fiat debt can be propped up by the fed.
@stevo728822 I think you're misunderstood.
AndyMH182 1 month ago
@AndyMH182 You haven't understand whay Gary says. He says debt can be in anything, cash, gold, oil, anything. Nothing to do with fiat currencies.
stevo728822 1 month ago
@AndyMH182 thanks for the info!
kileer7 1 month ago
The cons include a more rigid monetary system, which isn't even a con imo.
Also, you run into the problem where your money, being backed by gold, is much harder to protect from losses. There is no central bank that can print gold, So things like bank runs can be devastating to people. Although we can regulate against such things happening.
AndyMH182 1 month ago
@kileer7 The pros include having an monetary system that balances world trade. If one country runs a deficit, then it loses it's gold. Hence causing interest rates to rise, hence promoting saving. This prevents overconsumption and the capital flight that we have seen in this country over the last 3 decades.
AndyMH182 1 month ago
@AndyMH182 quick pro/cons of gold standard?
kileer7 1 month ago
Maybe I just don't get it. We make more work for ourselves just to maintain the idea of money, purpose, or value? All contrivances of the mind, and at the cost of social efficiency. Products are made faulty just so companies can stay afloat. Prices are arbitrarily chosen. No one tries to make something perfect the first time around. What is the reason for all of this? Why acquire a large sum of wealth just to die and loss it all?
enfomy 1 month ago
The system clearly needs some reconfiguring. Perhaps we should pay people simply for being alive, just so they can afford basic necessities, then add on to the earning for achievements and professional knowledge. Also add limitations to how much one can own. Stop making a few individuals control property that they didn't put any work into building or maintaining. Money now is nonsense. How can we owe others? We are all human, so that would mean we owe ourselves something? Sounds foolish to me.
enfomy 1 month ago
Money was a medium for exchange, since it isn't always possible to barter. But now that we can efficiently acquire information on where necessities and work is needed, I don't see the use of money anymore. Yes, we need to rationalize goods, so a person is fairly compensated for their labor. But, is there really enough work to go around for 7 billion individuals? Not to mention most people lack self-control and blindly pursue their desires at any cost, and don't fully understand how things work.
enfomy 1 month ago
@AndyMH182 People will still loan the government money ( with a debt to GDP ration of 1:1) if the currency is fiat, because they still want to earn interest.
But if you were giving the government your gold, or a currency unit backed by a commodity, you are trusting that the government will actually deliver that gold + interest back to you. And when it owes 15Tn, you won't be giving it your gold because you know you can't be paid back. 15Tn fiat debt can be propped up by the fed.
AndyMH182 1 month ago