I like the idea of Hugo Salinas-Price regarding a silver coin with a quoted price.
http://www.plata.com.mx/mplata/articulos/articles.asp
The basic idea is that the national mint would make coins of a known weight but no engraved face value. The monetary value would be published and could be changed upwards whenever inflation caused the cost of the metal to become higher than the previous number. But the coins would not be treated as bullion because the monetary value would never be decreased. The coins would be money.
This idea is nice because it is conservative. No great changes need to be made to the existing order. The current US dollar works well as money in every way except as a long-term store of value. The failure of the US dollar to preseve purchasing power is a huge defect to be sure and if it is not corrected, will result in the failure of this type of money. However, I think that the defect can be corrected.
Suppose that a quoted value coin system were established. First let us examine an inflationary senario. If the market price of metal goes up, instead of ceasing production as must be the case with fixed value coins, the Mint/Treasury just publishes a new higher value. The Mint then distributes new coins at the new value. Holders of the coins are also protected as their coins will also have an increased value. So inflation will not hurt the holders of these coins and they will never go obsolete because the Mint will always be able to economically produce them. These coins will be “good” money and will be held on to while the inferior money is traded.
What if there should be deflation? In this case, the coins still retain their monetary value even though their bullion value is lower than before. So the holders of the coins are again protected against loss. The Mint is happier than ever to distribute the coins because their cost of obtaining the metal at market price is lower and they would have more profit as the coins are distributed at the quoted value.
In this situation, some people may speculate and decide to purchase bullion at the market price with the hope that it will go up. But notice that these people are speculators and not savers. This distinction is hard to see at this point of history because we have had inflation for so long that we all have the mind-set of speculators now. Previously, savers and speculators were two entirely seperate classes of people.
As I read things on this site, the basic argument is that the only way to have a gold standard is to declare a dollar to be a certain amount of gold.
Well, that is one way to do it. But that kind of approach had been tried in the past and had certain problems. One was that gold is not the only precious metal. There is silver also and copper and so on. All of these have been part of the money supply. It has been a problem in the past to regulate the exchange ratios between these metals. The regulation was done by the government and it always lagged the market and was thus inefficient.
The other huge defect in the previous precious metal standards was that paper money circulated in tandem with the metallic coinage. While that paper money was in general supposed to be kind of a warehouse receipt for metal, in practice there was no way to really enforce this idea. The factional reserve banking amplified the effect of paper creation and destruction. The expansion and collapse of the amount of paper in circulation was the basic cause of the business cycles.
With a quoted value coin system, there is no problem if paper alternatives circulate along with the precious metal coinage. If the amount of paper increases to a significant degree or if the velocity of circulation increases, markets will notice and prices will go up. Eventually this will be reflected in increase in the quoted value of the coins. It is the market that dictates the change, not the governement so long as the government follows the rule that the quoted value coins must continue to be supplied as the public demands.
So also, the relative value of the gold, silver and copper coins are regluated by market forces. Any time things get too out of balance, one of the quoted values will go up and balance will be restored.
So my belief is that a quoted value system would be superior to any of the metallic coinages which have existed previously. It would tend to stabilize and limit the amount of fluctuation in the paper and notational monies and there would be no longer a way to steal from the savers. It would again establish savers as a distinct class from speculators.
In posting this, I am hoping that someone at the university level will see this and subject the idea to a doctoral level analysis. I would appreciate reading this kind of analysis. Best regards to all.