statement concerning the gold standard

[miketheidiot]

gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

 

[LegendKiller]

True.

 

[bamacre]

The Fed hasn't been able to find a way to print gold yet.

Seriously, I don't think anyone is really calling for a gold-backed dollar. Even Ron Paul just wanted a hard-backed dollar.

This has been discussed in many other threads btw.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

do you even know what a free market is?

*if you think its a market that is free of government intervention, you don't know what a free market is

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

do you even know what a free market is?

*if you think its a market that is free of government intervention, you don't know what a free market is

If you're speaking in absolutes then no. The free market, in the strictest sense, is laissez-faire economics. Allowing the government to participate in the free market moves it toward a controlled market because the government is ultimately a coercive entity. By forcing taxation, there is a form of market manipulation that is not voluntary between two individuals.

So in absolute terms, no. In relative terms, sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

do you even know what a free market is?

*if you think its a market that is free of government intervention, you don't know what a free market is

If you're speaking in absolutes then no. The free market, in the strictest sense, is laissez-faire economics. Allowing the government to participate in the free market moves it toward a controlled market because the government is ultimately a coercive entity. By forcing taxation, there is a form of market manipulation that is not voluntary between two individuals.

So in absolute terms, no. In relative terms, sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

free markets assume perfect competition, perfect competitioon is little more that an economic hypothetical.

 

[miketheidiot]

aside from its use as a productive capacity or as jewelry, what intrinic value does gold have?

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

do you even know what a free market is?

*if you think its a market that is free of government intervention, you don't know what a free market is

If you're speaking in absolutes then no. The free market, in the strictest sense, is laissez-faire economics. Allowing the government to participate in the free market moves it toward a controlled market because the government is ultimately a coercive entity. By forcing taxation, there is a form of market manipulation that is not voluntary between two individuals.

So in absolute terms, no. In relative terms, sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

free markets assume perfect competition, perfect competitioon is little more that an economic hypothetical.

No, not necessarily. Sometimes monopolies exist in a free market. The only thing a free market requires are voluntary transactions.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
gold is too valuable of a productive commodity to be wasted as a currency.

thought/opinions/fud?

Why not we let the free market decide that?

do you even know what a free market is?

*if you think its a market that is free of government intervention, you don't know what a free market is

If you're speaking in absolutes then no. The free market, in the strictest sense, is laissez-faire economics. Allowing the government to participate in the free market moves it toward a controlled market because the government is ultimately a coercive entity. By forcing taxation, there is a form of market manipulation that is not voluntary between two individuals.

So in absolute terms, no. In relative terms, sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

free markets assume perfect competition, perfect competitioon is little more that an economic hypothetical.

No, not necessarily. Sometimes monopolies exist in a free market. The only thing a free market requires are voluntary transactions.

Which is why they can not exist.