Friday, November 14, 2014

Converting to the Gold Standard

ISIS unveiled its plan for gold, silver and copper coins on Thursday in an effort to distance themselves from the West.


 The currency's value will be based on the actual worth of the metals.
 The plan to use the metal currency could work in theory, but it won't last long.

"They realize the international banking system is not very open to them," he said. "If they use paper currency, they'll have rampant inflation."


http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/14/investing/isis-currency-doomed/index.html?iid=Lead&hpt=hp_t2

9 comments:

  1. I’d say that they are in a catch 22. You have to have assets and a reasonably strong economy before you can have a viable currency… and you must have a viable medium of exchange before you can have a robust economy…. Short of cutting off hands, I don’t think that they will carry much credibility with anyone…. But hey, the US is still managing to push that ‘full faith and credit’ line, so anything is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For those interested the money creation process....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjR6xRN0PjY&feature=youtu.be

    ReplyDelete
  3. " But hey, the US is still managing to push that ‘full faith and credit’ line, so anything is possible."

    They are trying to capitalize on the same thing the US does, namely that if you can rule an area with your military, that is your faith and credit. If you really think about it, ALL money is basically based on perception. Francisco's speech to Reardon is still a favorite of mine, and I appreciate the thinking that the dollar represents an intrinsic value tied to the philosophical postulates of the founding fathers. Does the dollar represent that today? Nope. The dollar represents the reality that our military is the biggest in the world and which means that our currency will retain value as long as we can pay our contractors. No other country in the world could have gotten away with what Reagan did when he lowered taxes and made it okay to be a massive deficit spender. Further, no country could get away with operating on the premise that it will defraud its debtors by paying them back with inflated dollars.

    ISIS will fall and likely be surpassed by some group of thugs who will become even more whacked and extreme.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Since the days of the Roman Empire Fiat currency has been periodically tried and found to be wanting. Empires and nations have crashed and burned when the 'word of the government" is no longer accepted.
    America has assumed the responsibility in modern times to be the reserve currency of the world. The almighty dollar post WW2 and Breton Woods was stable and honored throughout the free world. Nixon was forced to leave the gold standard by France behaving badly, and how history does repeat itself!
    My first lesson in economics was as a small child in WW2.A US soldier gave me a dollar just before he went on the D Day landings. Uncle Sam will change this for gold were the last words I remember from this friend of the family. I believed him then but I could not believe him now. The US dollar has become so debased by political and economic chicanery within your country the world is looking now to China.
    Forget the ISIS ideals, in common with the Black Panther movement they will fade away in time. Look rather at the way in which your currency became so debased and with it your economic credibility. Repeal of Glass Siegel was a door once ajar, now thrown wide open and from there until the collapse of Leemanns and the propping up of those banks too big to contemplate failure, the support for the dollar was irreparably weakened. The past decade has been nothing but a worthy but futile effort to stabilize the situation.Greenspan and his successors bought bigger and bigger printing presses to print an unending stream of worthless paper and the term Quantitative easing became part of the lexicon for the first time since the days of the Weimar Republic.
    China is almost at the apex of the dung heap now; they too will take their turn as the biggest pig with the biggest snout at the trough. From a purely local and somewhat selfish viewpoint, I believe Australia is making the correct moves in getting a foothold in the basement of Western Chinese relations.

    Cheers from Aussie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arguably, Kingston, Greenspan did a lot of what he did in the name of pushing the idea that markets will regulate themselves and that competition will keep everyone honest. I don't think his efforts could have been a bigger failure and he admitted so himself after the whole crap show went supernova. People in this country came to deify him in the same strange way they deify Reagan and the only time he ever faced any grief was when he was grilled by Ron Paul during banking committee testimonies. Bush Sr. was the last honest Republican who understood it's lunacy to run deficits and cut taxes.

      Your comment about comparing ISIS with the Black Panther movement is curious. It's one thing to meet violence with violence, it is another entirely to dismiss the backdrop that gives rise to people willing to die for their cause. I'd be a little interested in hearing what ideals ISIS has in common with the Black Panther movement.

      Delete
  5. Max my thanks.
    You appear to have placed undue emphasis on one small part of my post while ignoring most of the remainder!
    To respond to your question Both Black Panthers and ISIS are revolutionary parties sharing a willingness to embrace violence in order to achieve their aims. It was this comparison that I used. I made no other imputations against either organization but I do abhor any group which embraces the concept of violence to achieve their aims. Of course, if a nation, properly governed and supported by the majority of its citizens engages in violence, then the nation as a whole must bear the consequences or share in the somewhat dubious rewards if any.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "You appear to have placed undue emphasis on one small part of my post while ignoring most of the remainder!"

    Not trying to split hairs here King, but I did address the other part with a para that was twice as big. I steered clear of making an assumption of what your point was as I have read many of your posts and feel I have some understanding of your views on race. I do not consider you a racist. Still, while I get your point and empathize with your abhorrence of violence, I just found it to be a curious linking, particularly given the history of poor race relations in this country. The United States started as a violent revolution.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Max.
    I have no argument with your critique of Greenspan,I said the efforts were well meaning and in unprecedented conditions which existed at the time, I think we must allow that Greenspan tried his best.Greenspans best was simply not good enough.
    What is of some little concern now is your post which I have perhaps misconstrued. As with the second amendment upon which I hold strong and unpopular views I also hold strong views on race. Let me state categorically that I abhor racism in all its forms, both overt and covert. That I have not actually done anything to demonstrate my opposition is perhaps wrong of me. In so many ways the history of your country and mine has compelling parallels. You secured independence from G.B and with your new found power and with values learnt from the English parliament, you managed to decimate the native Americans and by confining those who remained following the wars and white mans illnesses you created a culture with restrictions not entirely dissimilar to those from which you had struggled so hard to escape.

    Now look at Australia; our history is certainly just as bad, perhaps worse. At about the time you were fighting for independence, Australia was receiving her first convict settlers (1787).Prior to your revolution; England used America as a dumping ground for convicts. The settlement of Australia was brought about by the need to find another destination for the convicts. In typical English fashion with conquest taken as a right, Britain declared the Australian continent to be Terra Nullius meaning empty land. The aboriginal race were simply ignored or slaughtered when ever they caused trivial offence. Measles and other diseases, with which the local population had no experience, decimated the race.

    There were of course many survivors and in some cases they lived in isolation up until the middle of last century. In mid 1950 the last remaining group of full blood aborigines was contacted for the first time by white men.
    Since settlement there has been a movement towards assimilation of the Aboriginal race and in 1967 all aboriginals were granted full voting rights. Of course the aboriginal race is at the lowest point in the social scale, jobs are mostly menial and itinerant and wages are low. Life expectancy is 30 percent less than white Australians and educational levels are very low.

    So, yes our two countries have dealt grievously with the “natives” (my emphasis) and I cannot imagine how any of us can be other than ashamed at the actions of our forbears. In the case of America, you have further problems with the origins of the Afro American members of your people. I wish I could understand this problem but despite trying for over two decades, understanding remains as far away as ever. I have assiduously searched for those involved with the “Freedom Riders” but without success. There does appear to be a reluctance on the part of the Afro Americans to discuss those times and events with a foreigner. I respect their wishes and have reluctantly given up trying to understand the history post slavery.

    I hope this helps you to understand my position. One thing we can agree on perhaps is that both your revolutionaries and an immature but headstrong boy of 16 had the right idea when we threw off the chains of “Mother England” to find freedom elsewhere.

    Cheers from Aussie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Historically, freedom seems to be a thing that is never given but instead is taken when a person or group decides they have had enough of living under someone else rules. Historically, it also frequently includes blood shed. I have no sympathy for the beheading bastards of ISIS that we slaughter with drone strikes whenever we get a chance. Yet, I can't help but feel this isn't going to solve anything in the long term. Within our borders, there has been brutal mistreatment of African Americans and unlike ISIS, who near as I can tell want their own country, the AA's who were inclined to support the Panthers or join them simply wanted the same rights as anyone else. When I look at all the white people that showed up with firearms at the Bundy ranch, I see little difference really.

      I suppose I questioned the link a little bit because when it comes to ISIS, I simply don't understand the seeming lust they have for slaughtering people in the most gruesome of manners. Certainly, they have objectives of securing land and creating their own rules and considering they are willing to slay people they are ethnically tied to as quickly as they will slay Americans, I see something unique here that needs to be attempted to be understood. This is neither a militant demand for equality, as displayed by the Panthers, nor does it seem completely in line with the imperialistic slaughter of the British or the US in the name of building empire. While I do think recent history suggests ISIS could very well be replaced by some other group who is equally attracted to slaughter in the name of religion, I feel there is something different here and there is a need to not overreact but also not entirely dismiss this group as just some angry group of militants. For whatever that's worth. But again, I've never considered your remarks to even approach racism and I quite agree with you on your second amendment views.

      As a final word on Greenspan, he was already gone when his monster finally devoured the system. That has was the Fed chief from 1987 to 2006 was way way too long. Under his watch, the financially industry enjoyed massive deregulation, unprecedented increases in leverage and creation of instruments that Greenspan himself admitted he simply didn't understand. When it all went kaboom, all he could say was, "I found a flaw in the model that I believed had been working flawlessly for 40 years" . I will never have anything charitable to say about one the chief contributors to the inequality that exists in this country today.

      Delete