Adam Smith vs. the gold standard?

I’m finished reading The Wealth of Nations (finally!), but Adam Smith’s ambivalence towards gold money leaves me scratching my head. I though for sure that he would be more supportive of the gold standard than he actually was.

For example, this quote:

“The domestic business of every country, it has been shown in the second book of this Inquiry, may, at least in peaceable times, be transacted by means of a paper currency, with nearly the same degree of conveniency as by gold and silver money. It is convenience for the Americans, who could always employ with profit in the improvement of their lands a greater stock than they can easily get, to save as much as possible the expence of so costly an instrument of commerce as gold and silver, and rather to employ that part of their surplus produce which would be necessary for purchasing those metals, in purchasing the instruments of trade, the materials of clothing, several parts of household furniture, and the iron-work necessary for building and extending their settlements and plantations; in purchasing, not dead stock, but active and productive stock.”

Elsewhere in his work, he explains that using paper money for local commerce frees up silver and gold for use in international trade, thus extending the market and raising the standard of living.

Is Smith correct in saying that gold and silver coinage is “dead capital” that would be better spent in “productive capital”? Doesn’t using paper money necessarily subject one’s savings to destruction through inflation?

What say ye?

~AG

“Elsewhere in his work, he explains that using paper money for local commerce frees up silver and gold for use in international trade, thus extending the market and raising the standard of living.”

i dont know why international trade would make any difference at all.

“Is Smith correct in saying that gold and silver coinage is “dead capital” that would be better spent in “productive capital”? Doesn’t using paper money necessarily subject one’s savings to destruction through inflation?”

dead capital doesnt make much sense to me. if the process of using gold/silver money is used to get gold/silver out of the ground and then turning some if it into additional money is a process that lends it self to better overall economic stability/prediction and discipline…i am not completly sure about that either.

as for paper money destroying savings through inflation…i am not sure if that is true either. mises has a page that says many vital goods have fallen in price over that last 3 decades once adjsuted for inflation. often between 20 and 40 percent. clothes , food etc. if you mean saving money to put put money aside, welll..if you bought food or clothes and pay 20 to 40 percent less for those items it seems that savings is not destroyed but enhanced.

but i am not sure what you mean by savings. would gold and silver money do a better job of that??? thats what i am trying to find answers to.

He is referring to the obvious cost benefit of fiduciary media, witnessing the rapid development of his nation under mostly free banking.

Scotland didn’t develop quite as rapidly as its neighbor though.

Paper Money started off as a paper receipt redeemable for a certain amount of gold on deposit at some secure place as in a bank vault or a castle. This paper money was much easier to transport, handle, and provide change than gold bullion. This could have been a receipt for grain in some silo, or any other commodity. Other commodities are not as durable and need constant maintenance and/or care to assure that their value does not diminish or become destroyed completely. Gold needs less maintenance and is harder to be destroyed completely or damaged.

When President Nixon wanted to borrow money greater than the value of the gold that he had on deposit at Ft. Knox, to pay the government expenses, he had the congress pass laws to stop redeeming US dollars for Gold Bullion from Ft. Knox, and stating that US dollars would now be redeemed with the “full faith and credit of the US government”, meaning that every US dollar could be redeemed for any privately owned property, business, commodity, or anything else of value in the USA.

The US Government only has $11B of gold left in Ft. Knox according to the AP Dec. 21, 2009, 3:44PM, and the US government is continuously allowing our freshly printed US Bonds, US Dollars and other Securities owned by foreigners to be redeemed by purchasing title to privately owned businesses, factories, casinos, hotels, farms, land, ports, breweries, refineries, forests, ports, breweries, refineries, and other privately owned wealth and assets located in the USA that were created by previous generations of US citizens, before the deindustrialization of the USA, instead of redeeming these currencies with gold.

As the USA runs out of title to privately owned real estate, businesses and other existing assets in the USA that foreigners redeem their freshly printed paper US Bonds, etc. that foreigners were paid by US import/distributing/retail companies to created with their labor to manufacture the things that US citizens consumed, these productive foreign industrial nations will then pay less and less US dollars for the freshly printed paper US Bonds, etc. that the US government wants these foreigners to buy at the periodic FED auctions. This is creating worthless currency with the printing presses, except that these new currencies are redeemed with title to US assets instead of Gold from Ft. Knox.

The US government is operating on borrowed money. This is a Ponzi scheme.

Maybe the US government should hire Jeff Skilling, Bernard Madoff, Scott Rothstein, Eddie Fastow, and Sir Allen Sanford plus some of the lesser known Wall Street Master Criminals and financial wizards as consultants to advise the US treasury department and the Federal Reserve Board concerning “How to operate a Ponzi Scheme”! These gentlemen might be the best qualified individuals in the USA with the specialized knowledge and skills required to run the US Treasury department’s Ponzi Scheme.

What will the US government do when the foreign industrial nations no longer pay US dollars to purchase freshly printed paper US bonds, or if they pay only few pennies on the dollar face value or present worth for these freshly printed paper US bonds.

The US government will print up and auction off twice the value desired if the foreigners are only paying 50 cents on the dollar, or 100 times if the bids are 1 cent on the dollar, and then your life savings might not buy you a single loaf of bread!

The Greek government has been providing their population with all sorts of free government provided services, government payroll jobs, and have paid for all of these government expenses with “borrowed” funds? Did the Greeks stop generating national wealth in the past few decades, and decide to start deficit spending to mimic the US financial operations that appeared to be very successful?

Real wealth, jobs, industry, and real monetary value is created and/or acquired ONLY when the members of a family (or a nation, tribe, city-state, etc.) plant, grow and/or harvest something of commercial value from the earth, extract something of commercial value from the earth, provide professional services (medical, legal, dental, engineering, architecture, accounting, land surveying, technology, etc.) to others outside of that family, and/or manufactures or constructs something of commercial value that is consumable (or permanently useful for income or rent) and then sells, leases or rents these items and/or services to parties outside of their family, in return for a net transfer of gold, currency or commodities from other parties outside of their family into their own family. The members of that family can reflect their real wealth and financial security with the accumulation of grain, gold, cattle, jewels, land, buildings, commodities and/or other marketable products for reserve use in times of emergency and/or also to raise the standard of living for the members of that family.

Which neighbour? It basically caught up with England’s almost double per capita income in a century.

Between 1740 and 1850 the population of England (and Wales) doubled twice, as well as becoming far more urbanised and industrious. You may be correct about income though.

“The US Government only has $11B of gold…”

does 11 billion dollars of gold here mean the weight definition of gold or is that a current market price of gold or does the 11 billion dollars of gold mean something else??

“He is referring to the obvious cost benefit of fiduciary media,…”

has the term fiduciary media been used outside of these mises sites and books?? has any other noted economist ever used the term???

would a note for a certain amount of vaulted or stored gold be considered fiduciary media?

“He is referring to the obvious cost benefit of fiduciary media,…” most references to fiduciary media i have read about here have been describing a non circualting money…somethign called checkbook money.

has the term fiduciary media been used anywhere outside of mises sites and texts?? by any other economists???

would a note saying redeemable in a given weight of silver/gold be considered fiduciary media???

i dont know about scotish rapid development…there was significant migration out of scotland in the 1700s…i believe my ancsters may have fled. if you mean the uk their growth could probably attributed to bloody conquests of people in other lands to get cheap capital.

Adam Smith correctly identifies the simple fact that the wealth of the nation is solely in it’s labor. The point of economics is consumption and production. Gold is neither and represents a totally arbitrary and totally inadequate substitute for value. Gold has no intrinsic value. The only value of gold is gold. The wealth of a nation is in it’s labor. Trying to fix value on gold is an unnecessary and harmfull restriction on the real value of a nations wealth, it’s prodiuction and ability to trade. There are only three principles, “self interest”, “division of labor”, and “free trade”. The gold standard violates all three principles.

Labor, it must be remembered, and not any particular commodity or set of commodities, is the real measure of the value both of silver and of all other commodities."
Adam Smith

that’s ‘labour theory of value’ junk that smith was saddled with…

Just because some may choose paper currency (money substitute, not necessarily fiduciary media), doesn’t mean that gold is not used as the base commodity.

Base commodity? You mean unofficial standard. You can work your way around it but it still comes back to gold has no intrisic value. It does not add to the value or wealth, but rather takes value out of the system. Spain went broke with huge reserves of gold because it is production which has value. not any reserve commodity. Exhange paper, exchange gold, it doesn’t matter. The value of a token is in what it represents. Exchange of labor’s production and the desire of people to comsume. Yes, gold is pretty and has artificially enhanced market value because it is held in reserve, that is, out of the markets. The only value of gold is the same as all other products of labor. Do people want to buy it? Yes, people will value any commodity more if some one else is allowed to manage the market for that commodity, e.g. restrain free trade. Yes, any commodity where there is a demand will go up in value of if someone is allowed to remove a substantial fraction of that commodity out of market. Wheat, oil, gold, it simply does not matter. All commodity based value systems are simply false tokens of value manipulated by people in power. The whole poing of oligopoly is managing markets for the gain of a few powerful people.You may choose “managed markets” or “free markets”. Managed by government like in the Soviet Union or managed by Corporate Executives is a choice that really doesn’t matter economically. Either way, the managers suck all the value out of the system for themselves. It is the difference of the fraction of “Free Market” economics vs “Managed Market” economics practised in the U.S. as opposed to the Soviet Union that made a difference. Not anything to do with gold standards, or standard political ideology catch words, or other politically divided ideas that float around.

FreedomNow42,

You write,

Base commodity? You mean unofficial standard.

I am talking about a free market in money, not a ‘standard’. My comment was to show that paper currency and gold can go together. As per the rest of your post, I’m not sure what your point is or how it is relevant to gold versus paper. But, one comment on the following,

All commodity based value systems are simply false tokens of value manipulated by people in power.

Both Carl Menger and Ludwig von Mises prove this incorrect. Commodity currencies came into existence through the preference of individuals (the free market), not government.

**

Then don’t own/buy what you don’t value, and leave others to do the same. Stick to saving/owning push-ups and use them to pay for lunch.

Z.

Inflation is independent of the token used to make transactions, be it either gold or paper. It is caused by people willing to pay more of the token for what they want. It is exacerbated by having part of the economy skimmed off to people in positions of power manipulating the markets. Making a commodity such as gold a standard and putting a significant portion of that commodity into reserve is just a market manupulation that drives up the price (not value) of the gold artificially and gives power to yet another select group of powerful people who will skim the market and remove value from the economy.

So what?

If I am not mistaken during his time America could not compete as effective as major powers to acquire gold. “Mercantilism” was the economic ideal at the time.

During the first years of self free issuance of paper money by the colonists…they prospered. This was a major reason why Britain Abolished American free paper based banking and led to the war of independence.

Interesting…the colonits were able to control the only bad thing of paper money…over issuance.

So we can conclude when government meddles with the media of exchange bad things happen?