![Hang the bankers [1306x834 - 88KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/SW8fYR.jpg){kind=link}
Last I checked, you cant print gold.
Backing a currency with gold or something else doesn't make inflation go away. It may perhaps keep a currency more "stable" in the way that it will force the money supply to contract when there isn't any more gold to issue on and economic systems to go into depression cycles. Our modern inflation problems are from the fact that our entire system is just monetized debt, and that debt is allowed to grow exponentially and not according to the actual production needs of the country. The paper money used in colonial Pennsylvania is a real good example of how fiat money, when introduced into the economy in accordance with production needs, is very stable AND eliminates the predatory debt aspect
Inflation is an expansion of the money supply. Rising prices is a side i Effect of an expansion of the money supply. Debt cant grow exponentially without Fiat. Deficit spending cant happen on a pure gold standard. Gold puts limits on the crooks in office, so they did away with all anchors to gold. Every Fiat in world history has eventually returned to its intrensic value of ZERO. All 600 Fiat currencies. How did Hitler turn Germany around from depression debt and suffering to the most prosperous country in 10 years? Fiat? Or money backed with intrensic value?
Yes, gold does put a limit to the debt growth but, we had deficit spending during the time we had the gold standard because the fed is still charging interest on the money, regardless of when it was gold backed or fiat. The fiat currencies that got hyperinflated many times can be traced to the currencies being "floating" and determined via the "market" but then are essentially short saled by hedge funds...Soros is famous for doing this. But with regards to Hitler, the WAS technically fiat currency, because it was backed by the intangible production of the German people and thus was credits for work done. This is what I am saying actually controls inflation, money that responds accurately to the production needs...and also it was issued not as debt, unlike anything we've had in this country besides when Lincoln inserted greenbacks and Kennedy briefly attempted silver-backed US notes...So anyways I do agree that what money should be backed by is the peoples productivity but also a very important part, is the money should not be lent from private sources
(post is archived)