Re: US dollar: modern history
From: smithaa02 (asdf_at_asdf.net)
Date: 06/30/04
- Next message: dudalb: "Re: Michael Moore for Eisner saying "Saudis did it" or Dick Eastman with the conclusive best evidence of frame-up -- that is the choice this nation faces -- the choice of intellectual leadership"
- Previous message: The Trucker: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- In reply to: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Next in thread: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Reply: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:02:04 -0500
<royls@telus.net> wrote in message news:40e1b08e.5164783@news.telus.net...
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:50:21 -0500, "smithaa02" <asdf@asdf.net> wrote:
>
> ><royls@telus.net> wrote in message news:40e04e30.688816@news.telus.net...
> >> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 13:11:20 -0500, "smithaa02" <asdf@asdf.net> wrote:
> >> >Gold has for nearly all its life existed in fractional form
> >> >and has been supported by government legal tendar laws.
> >>
> >> Flat false. Through most of history, there _were_ no legal tender
> >> laws, and gold and other metal coinage was valued on its weight and
> >> purity.
> >
> >Taxes are a subset of legal tendar laws.
>
> False and stupid.
Legal tender dictates the store of value you use for taxes.
> >So the impetus is on you to find a
> >nation that supported a gold standard while not demanding their taxes be
> >paid in gold.
>
> The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire is just one example of many.
I found sources like the following on the net:
www.bitsofhistory.com/ace/contest_lots/Essay/lot9.doc
"As emperor, Constantine began the important administrative reforms. He
reorganized and separated the civil and military authority. He gave the
Senate back their powers they had lost in the third century. Constantine
moved the capitol from Rome to Constantinople. He had to maintain Rome’s
privileges and the new senate in Constantinople had a lower rank. He did
that because he did not want to upset the old senate of Rome. He issued new
gold coins that remained the standard of exchange until the Byzantine
Empire. Constantine's tax laws were hard for the people. The citizens were
supposed to pay the taxes in gold or silver. The people who were too poor to
pay was beaten or tortured"
>In
> fact, were there any gold standard countries that _did_ require
> payment of taxes in gold? I can't think of any. Gold was usually far
> too scarce for most taxpayers to ever _have_ any of it.
In these gold economies of yours...what did they pay taxes in?
> ROTFL!! If it had utility of 50, who would pay 100 for it?
People like Roy, people facing tax liabilities denominted in gold, people
facing private liabilities to external parties in gold, etc...
> >How can can a defense of gold be that it can be used in the real economy,
> >when currency traders disagree and use it as a store of value?
>
> A store of value is also a use in the real economy.
Not if the people put more into that store of value then they get out of it.
> >> >You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's real simple. The
> >> >demand for gold as a currency will drive up the price beyond what its
> >> >current uses were for non-gold utility uses, such that a portion of
its
> >> >price will reflect gold's ability to tally wealth
> >>
> >> So? That's not overvaluation. That's the market's _accurate_
> >> valuation of gold as a medium of exchange, store of value and unit of
> >> account.
> >
> >A natural market you have yet to illustrate with an example from history.
>
> <yawn> Every time and place where gold coins and bullion have traded
> freely is an example.
Gold notes and watered coins aren't a free trade of gold as a store of
value, nor is gold that has to have government enforce its use as a store of
value. The onus is on you to provide a historical example to the contrary.
> >> Why would it be surprising that a commodity's price would
> >> rise as a result of an additional use being made of it? Just like
> >> silver's value fell when it was no longer used for coins.
> >
> >This is sort of the problem... If gold is not rising in demand to tooth
> >fillings, speaker wire, and other non-store-of-value uses then such a
rise
> >in price must be fiat.
>
> Nope. Flat false. Use as a store of value is just as legitimate as
> any other use.
Which gold isn't because it must raise its price in order for it to act as a
store of value (and on the flip side lower its price when its empties its
store of value).
> >That raise in price is what the gold holders are
> >fleecing from the public in the name of a commoditized-currency.
>
> Garbage. The gold holders paid for the stuff to be extracted, refined
> etc. They paid for an increase in total real wealth. It's not
> "fleecing the public" to bet that real wealth will hold its value
> better than fiat currencies.
Don't you see how your land arguements contradict your gold arguements?
> >On the
> >flip side when a 'commodity' like silver falls out of favor as a store of
> >value, its price returns to reality taking with it all those fools that
> >bought into its market price at that time.
>
> Well, silver is not as good a store of value as gold, so it is riskier
> to bet that way. So what?
Silver, gold, whatever... When it stops being used as a store of value, the
result is the same and the ponzi balloon pops.
> >> >(a fiat currency just like paper notes).
> >>
> >> False and stupid. You can't multiply gold coins or bullion by ten by
> >> adding a zero.
> >
> >Governments would print arbritrary numbers on gold coins all the time.
>
> That is not a gold standard, and in point of fact, governments
> _have_not_done_as_you_claim_. When did any government ever get away
> with stamping "10 oz." on a 1-ounce gold coin, or even _try_ it?
>
> I'm waiting.
You needn't wait long...
http://www.mosler.org/docs/docs/innes.htm
The ancient coins of Rome, unlike these of Greece, had their distinctive
marks of value, and the most striking thing about them is the extreme
irregularity of their weight. The oldest coins are the As and its
fractions, and there has always been tradition that the As, which was
divided into 12 ounces, was originally a pound-weight of copper. But the
Roman pound weighed about 3271 grammes and Mommsen, the great historian of
the Roman mint, pointed out that not only did none of the extant coins (and
there were very many) approach this weight, but that they were besides
heavily alloyed with lead; so that even the heaviest of them, which were
also the earliest, did not contain more than two-thirds of a pound of
copper, while the fractional coins were based on an As still lighter. As
early as the third century B. C. the As had fallen to not more than four
ounces and by the end of the second century B. C. it weighed no more than
half an ounce or less.
> >As
> >would private consumers assign arbritrary amounts of real wealth to a
> >corresponding weight in gold.
>
> ??? Stupidity. The things you claim _must_ happen have in fact
> _never_ happened.
A wants to trade a services with B. C has the gold by which such trade can
take place. Prove objectively how C will get his exact quantity of service
in ratio for gold.
> >> >Most rich countries are western countries
> >> >with a history of colonization and landgrabbing, with an emphasis on
> >gold.
> >> >These early gold/land grabs allowed these western countries to obtain
the
> >> >power they have today.
> >>
> >> Which proves you are wrong. The greatest colonizing and gold grabbing
> >> powers, like Spain and Britain, now have modest gold reserves, and
> >> concommitantly weaker currencies. Countries like Switzerland and
> >> Taiwan, that _never had colonies, have strong currencies because they
> >> have large gold reserve fractions.
> >
> >Spain and Britian are rich countries.
>
> But their currencies have not been particularly strong since their
> gold reserves have declined.
They are among the top in the world. The British pound was like the 4 or
5th most popular international reserve currency last I saw and Spain is part
of the Euro.
> >Switzerland and Taiwan are money
> >laundering countries (that take wealth from former gold countries like
the
> >US and Britian),
>
> False and ridiculous. You just make all this stuff up.
Taiwan (not as much as Singapore nor Hong Kong) is a hotspot for Asian
flight capital. Switzerland is renown for being the hot money haven for the
world.
> >so this is the real source of their strong currencies and
> >not their preference for gold.
>
> Garbage. Germany is another example. Every actual fact of monetary
> history proves you wrong. You have provided _no_ facts to support
> _any_ of your wild claims.
Germany's Mark tended to be a competitive store of value on the
international market because their central bankers had been leery of
inflation.
- Next message: dudalb: "Re: Michael Moore for Eisner saying "Saudis did it" or Dick Eastman with the conclusive best evidence of frame-up -- that is the choice this nation faces -- the choice of intellectual leadership"
- Previous message: The Trucker: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- In reply to: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Next in thread: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Reply: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: US dollar: modern history"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
