free market currency


Wake Forest University held a conference this weekend entitled "The Federal Reserve was a Bad Idea".  The keynote speaker was nobel laureate Thomas Sargent (and one of the real nobels, not like Obama’s or Krugman’s!).  The conference was a balanced look at what good the fed has done, and what harms it has caused.  It’s conclusion was that its harms (uncontrollable inflation, politicization of monetary policy, encouraging profligate tax/spend liberal government, government takeover of or checking accounts) outweighed its positives (you got me, but I think something to do with employing thousands of otherwise unemployable PhD economists).

Now, I’m no Ron Paul fan.  I cheered when redstate banned his ever-annoying minions  in 2007.  And so it always gives me pause to possibly be on the same side of the issue as Ron Paul.  But I don’t think I am here.  Paul wants to gain oversight privileges for his committee over the fed, and ultimately use government power to dissolve it and return to a saner, sounder currency.    But I think a more proper approach to fixing the fed is to follow free-market principles.

Suppose a bank such as BB&T were to offer notes backed by some asset, such as gold or silver.  While these would not be legal tender in the sense that anyone would take them, I would certainly prefer to hold my money in these new notes, and I would be willing to explain to puzzled merchants why paying them in $20 Reagan dollars (or whoever they want to put on the front, Coolidge, Harding, whatever) would be doing them a favor, as they’d know they could exchange it for gold at any time.  Within no time, business would be accepting or even preferring Reagan dollars to actual money.  Soon, I an others like me would refuse to patronize any business that did not accept Reagan dollars, and the remaining holdouts would adapt or go out of business.  Marketed correctly, I think such a currency could become as widely accepted as greebacks within one year.  And banks will compete amongst each other for who can make their money the easiest to use.  I think the result would be a handful of new currencies, all very stable, and the marginalization of the dollar.

Naturally, Dear Leader Obama would start demanding tribute (i.e. tax on non-organic foods) in Reagan dollars, and once that happened, one or more private currencies would be the de facto coin of the realm.  The important difference from right now, is that with privately-administered money, the government really would have to spend what it takes in, rather than printing now-useless dollars.  I’m actually surprised this hasn’t happened already.  Perhaps some activist judge has found some constitutional prohibition to private money already?


Category: ,

RSS feed

3 Comments Leave a comment

Taxes have to be paid in Federal Reserve Notes

carolina Monday, February 14th at 9:49PM EST (link)

Congress says so.
Sounds like you would be interested in learning about monetary policy and the gold standard. Here are several sites that can further your education (and are interesting to read also)

http://www.newworldeconomics.com/

http://polyconomics.com/main.html

http://www.supplysideforum.com/

http://thesupplyside.blogspot.com/

 

just basic understanding of currency trading

dsmurf (Diary) Tuesday, February 15th at 4:06AM EST (link)

would help as well. Before you can talk about a Gold standard again, you need to talk about a 70s treaty banning the gold standard in the first place.

Whether or not a Fed is useful, the Fed and other Central Bank heads are influential market participants. So we may not see an effective head of the Fed in controlling inflation, I was a advocate of all the low interest rate policy = inflation, but I see the flooding and cold issues as bigger or equally to blame for food inflation this year as well. Perhaps the Fed was more useful when they didn’t write off the food and energy components to decide high interest rates, like they did during the Carter administration, all that was taken into account from I can tell, hence the over 12% interest rate set by the Fed in the late 70s and early 80s
The second thing you must remember as an advocate of the RP currency policy fools errand, is that a currencies’ strength can be determined by the bond market and the rates that they are paying as well as future bets as when the Central bank will raise or lower rates.
So when Bernanke mentioned wanting inflation, the commodity index took off and bonds sold off in an effective response to that threat of inflation. You can not mention inflation like Bernanke did and expect a weak currency because inflation issues demand a rising interest rate policy, at least that is what inflation hawks,-you raise rates to combat inflation is considered a hawk, whereas Bernanke is looking at the banks’ health and figured that zero interest rates for the near future is best for the economic central nervous system. Don’t worry about a every falling USD, it hasn’t made new lows since 2007 or 2008. And bonds are clearly spooked according the free blog at stockcharts.com, rising yields can lead to more foreign investment hence a stronger USD.
LOL in implementing the RP gold standard, the ultimate fools errand, and waste of taxpayer dollars.

 

Petrodollars?

belcatar (Diary) Tuesday, February 15th at 11:20AM EST (link)

The idea has merit, but what kind of consequences would it have on the price of oil and other internationally traded commodities?

I don’t know, which is why I am asking.