eg once there is a fixed amount in circulation, no new money can be created
so it operates like a gold standard, where you cannot increase the money supply at your whim
Stop making new threads for every new statement or question. Put them all in the Newbies forum under one thread.
could you have used a shorter topic header?
what do you mean?
Don’t make any new threads please. You already have 3 that are barely intelligible.
I’ll give you an answer:
It’s economically sound, like a gold standard, and indeed, will allow more gold to be used for productive uses, and thus would be mildly beneficial.
However it’s ethically unsound as it requires violent aggression in order to maintain confidence in its use.
A gold standard is the natural currency.
your snobbiness is actually offensive
i will report abuse , it does nto make you looki ntelligent by being snobby
you ultimately get consumed in your own follies by being a snob
inquistiveteenager, the reason that it seems like you’re getting ‘snobby’ replies is you’re not following ‘forum ettiquite’.
As LibertyStudent mentioned, you could of opened one thread in the newbies section titled “questions about inflation” and put all of your questions in there. It clutters up the boards and makes them look messy to have a bunch of new threads with very long titles for each little question you have regarding one topic.
I probably could have added some please(s) and thank you(s).
Sorry for any hard feelings, but the gist of what I was saying holds true. Your questions can be grouped together and please shorten your thread titles. 5 or 6 words is ideal.
I agree. This is worse (even less amusing) than Elliot’s “debunk my parents” threads.
After reading his responses, I considered that perhaps the poster is quite young and this is a new experience for them.
I don’t know that, but it’s possible.
His name is suggestive of that idea as well.
Actually, “Elliot’s “debunk my parents” threads.” sounds like a nice trademark…a bit long perhaps, but I like it.
Oh, come on, I stopped those a while ago.
And by the way, there are not two L’s in my name. E-L-I-O-T
I am trying to make start new threads that are interesting. However, it is sometimes tricky, like finding a new, workable entreprenuerial idea.
I personally was not bothered by them, honest.
Because it doesn’t operate like the gold standard. The gold standard has a certain amount of flexibility, in that if prices change suddenly the supply of the commodity that serves as currency will react. If it happened that technological advances allowed industrial production to boom for a short time, then prices would begin to drop fairly rapidly, this would cause would discoordination. Granted, after some time has elapsed this discoordination (meaning, the effect of the increase in production, disequilibrium is always present in the economy) would no longer persist. However, if gold supply were to increase the effect would be, to some extent, negated and the discoordination would be less severe.
Me neither but it was more so the volume than the content.
I’ll give an answer, but agree about ettiquette.
First, for society to accept something as money, it must first have some pre-existing price. Commodities can emerge as money because they have economic value before their use as money. If I just started printing Bob-Dollars, they would have no common market price, and could never gain acceptance as money, without resorting to coercion, such as requiring people to accept them as payment through legal tender law.
Second, even if some non-commodity money was already being used as money, it would have to be administered by some party. How can you be sure this party is trustworthy? In other words, how do you know that they aren’t increasing the money supply, even if they say otherwise?
Finally, how does this monetary administrative party stay in business? For instance, how will it afford to replace its worn notes with fresh ones? How does it afford to fight counterfeit? If it’s money supply were truly fixed, I guess it would have to charge people in real goods, which is bound towards inefficiency, the same as a barter economy.