Alan Greenspan: QE Failed the Real Economy, Unwinding will Unleash Market Volatility, Recommends Gold

As the US Federal Reserve officially “concluded” its QE 3.0 program this month, former Fed chief Alan Greenspan has been quoted by the Wall Street Journal as giving his assessment and predictions from such actions. (hat tip Zero Hedge)

Mr. Greenspan on the QE’s efficacy: (bold mine)

He said the bond-buying program was ultimately a mixed bag. He said that the purchases of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities did help lift asset prices and lower borrowing costs. But it didn’t do much for the real economy.

“Effective demand is dead in the water” and the effort to boost it via bond buying “has not worked,” said Mr. Greenspan. Boosting asset prices, however, has been “a terrific success.”

Mr. Greenspan fails to include the massive debt build up as part of the asset based 'success story'.

Yet it’s one thing to be an insider and it’s another thing to be outside the corridors of power; personal views radically changes. In the case of Mr. Greenspan he goes from defending incumbent policies (as insider) to critiquing them (as outsider). 

Ironically, Mr. Greenspan initiated today's de facto easy money “aggregate demand” policy-standard, which his successor Mr. Bernanke improvised.

On QE withdrawal:

He also said, “I don’t think it’s possible” for the Fed to end its easy-money policies in a trouble-free manner.

“We’ve never had any experience with anything like this, so I’m not going to sit here and tell you exactly how it’s going to come out,” Mr. Greenspan said. But he noted that markets often react to changes in central bank policy unpredictably and not entirely rationally. Recent episodes in which Fed officials hinted at a shift toward higher interest rates have unleashed significant volatility in markets, so there is no reason to suspect that the actual process of boosting rates would be any different, Mr. Greenspan said.

He said the Fed may not even have that much power over the timing of interest-rate increases. The problem as he sees it is an interest rate the Fed pays on the money banks park at the central bank, called reserves. Fed officials plan to use this tool as their primary lever for raising interest rates when the time comes. If bankers decide to put this money to work, creating inflation risks, the Fed may be forced to raise rates, even if the economy isn't ready for it, he warned.

“I think that real pressure is going to occur not by the initiation by the Federal Reserve, but by the markets themselves,” Mr. Greenspan he said.

chart from zero hedge

With world debt levels going bonkers, the path to a relatively tighter money policy would naturally cause 'adjustment strains' which may be characterized as “significant volatility in markets”. 

Of course this won’t be limited to just the financial asset markets.

Finally. Mr. Greenspan seems to have reverted to his pristine position as 'gold bug'.

Mr. Greenspan said gold is a good place to put money these days given its value as a currency outside of the policies conducted by governments.

In 1966, the pre-Fed chair Mr. Greenspan penned this classic Gold and Economic Freedom article on the gold standard, here is an excerpt...

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.

This just illustrates how power changes people. 

But I agree with the Maestro here, in today's massive manipulation of money and markets, gold is an insurance.

Former Fed Chief Paul Volcker on the Gold Standard

Writes Ralph Benko at the Forbes.com (bold added)

There is an almost superstitious truculence on the part of world monetary elites to consider the restoration of the gold standard.  And yet, the Bank of England published a rigorous and influential study in December 2011, Financial Stability Paper No. 13, Reform of the International Monetary and Financial System.  This paper contrasts the empirical track record of the fiduciary dollar standard directed by Secretary Connally and brought into being (and then later administered by) Volcker.  It determines that the fiduciary dollar standard has significantly underperformed both the Bretton Woods gold exchange standard and the classical gold standard in every major category.

As summarized by Forbes.com contributor Charles Kadlec, the Bank of England found:

When compared to the Bretton Woods system, in which countries defined their currencies by a fixed rate of exchange to the dollar, and the U.S. in turn defined the dollar as 1/35 ^th of an ounce of gold:

• Economic growth is a full percentage point slower, with an average annual increase in real per-capita GDP of only 1.8%
• World inflation of 4.8% a year is 1.5 percentage point higher;
• Downturns for the median countries have more than tripled to 13% of the total period;
• The number of banking crises per year has soared to 2.6 per year, compared to only one every ten years under Bretton Woods;

That said, the Bank of England paper resolves by calling for a rules-based system, without specifying which rule.  Volcker himself presents as oddly reticent about considering the restoration of the “golden rule.” Yet, as recently referenced in this column, in his Foreword to Marjorie Deane and Robert Pringle’s The Central Banks (Hamish Hamilton, 1994) he wrote:

It is a sobering fact that the prominence of central banks in this century has coincided with a general tendency towards more inflation, not less. By and large, if the overriding objective is price stability, we did better with the nineteenth-century gold standard and passive central banks, with currency boards, or even with ‘free banking.’ The truly unique power of a central bank, after all, is the power to create money, and ultimately the power to create is the power to destroy.

The coming horrid consequences from the rampant unsound money policies based on the incumbent fiduciary dollar-central banking standard will eventually force the world to look and consider not only the re-adaption of gold standard but even possibly a depoliticization of money (which means End the FED, end central banking).

End the Fed movement have been sprouting even in Germany (see video below)

Video: Mises Institute's Mark Thornton on the US "Government Shutdown"

Mises Institute's Senior Fellow and Professor Mark Thornton clarifies the sensationalism over the alleged "government shutdown" (source Mises Blog)

Video: Fiat Money End Game, Gold and Sound Money

Global central banks have been pushing inflationism to the limits. 

Unless curtailed, the ultimate result will be massive cascading debt defaults across the world that leads to deflation or to hyperinflaton or the terminal phase of today's paper money standard or to a combo of run-away inflation amidst defaults.

I call this the Mises Moment. From the admonitions of the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises:

But the boom cannot continue indefinitely. There are two alternatives. Either the banks continue the credit expansion without restriction and thus cause constantly mounting price increases and an ever-growing orgy of speculation, which, as in all other cases of unlimited inflation, ends in a “crack-up boom” and in a collapse of the money and credit system. Or the banks stop before this point is reached, voluntarily renounce further credit expansion and thus bring about the crisis. The depression follows in both instances.

(hat tip Zero Hedge)

Video: Ex-French President Charles de Gaulle Predicted a US Monetary Crisis in 1965

In the following video below, ex-French president Charles de Gaulle delivered a speech on the risks of a US monetary crisis in February 1965 (hat tip Prof Bob Murphy) [Transcript from Canada News Libre]

The fact that many countries accept as a principle, dollars as good as gold for the payment of the differences existing to their advantage in the American balance of trade, this very fact, leads Americans, to get into debt and to get into debt for free at the expense of other countries. Because, what the US owes them, it is paid, at least in part, with dollars they are the only ones allowed to emit. 

Considering the serious consequences a crisis would have in such a domain, we think that measures must be taken on time to avoid it. We consider necessary that international trade be established, as it was the case, before the great misfortunes of the World, on an indisputable monetary base, and one that does not bear the mark of any particular country. Which base? In truth, no one sees how one could really have any standard criterion other than GOLD 

[bold mine]

 

Quote of the Day: Golden Handcuffs

When the public had access to gold coins prior to 1914, individuals controlled banking policy. They also controlled government fiscal policy. They could take their coins out of commercial banks if they did not approve of government policy. This is why national governments annul or restrict gold-coin redeemability whenever a major war breaks out. They do not want to face the citizens' veto. 

With the repudiation of any gold-coin standard since 1914, citizens no longer understand the case for a gold-coin currency. They do not understand that widespread gold ownership was the number one restraining factor on the expansion of state power in the economy. The uncoordinated individual decisions of millions of people could overturn any government policy that required central bank inflation to fund it. The politicians resented this. So did the central bankers.

The politicians were under restraints: golden handcuffs. They decided that it was better to turn the money-creation power over to the bankers. The central bankers promised to buy government bonds at low rates: lender of last resort. This made the central bank the counterfeiter of last resort.

This is from author Gary North on the religion of inflationism-central planning versus free markets at the Mises.org.

Sanctions Against Iran Spurs Burgeoning Use of Gold as Money in the Middle East

US sanctions against Iraq has been promoting the use of gold as medium of exchange in the Middle East, particularly the Iran-Turkey-Dubai corridor.

From Reuters:

Couriers carrying millions of dollars worth of gold bullion in their luggage have been flying from Istanbul to Dubai, where the gold is shipped on to Iran, according to industry sources with knowledge of the business.

The sums involved are enormous. Official Turkish trade data suggests nearly $2 billion worth of gold was sent to Dubai on behalf of Iranian buyers in August. The shipments help Tehran manage its finances in the face of Western financial sanctions.

The sanctions, imposed over Iran's disputed nuclear program, have largely frozen it out of the global banking system, making it hard for it to conduct international money transfers. By using physical gold, Iran can continue to move its wealth across borders.

"Every currency in the world has an identity, but gold means value without identity. The value is absolute wherever you go," said a trader in Dubai with knowledge of the gold trade between Turkey and Iran.

The identity of the ultimate destination of the gold in Iran is not known. But the scale of the operation through Dubai and its sudden growth suggest the Iranian government plays a role.

The Dubai trader and other sources familiar with the business spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, because of the political and commercial sensitivity of the matter.

Iran sells oil and gas to Turkey, with payments made to state Iranian institutions. U.S. and European banking sanctions ban payments in U.S. dollars or euros so Iran gets paid in Turkish lira. Lira are of limited value for buying goods on international markets but ideal for a gold buying spree in Turkey.

ROUTING VIA DUBAI

In March this year, as the banking sanctions began to bite, Tehran sharply increased its purchases of gold bullion from Turkey, according to the Turkish government's trade data.

Direct gold exports to Iran from Turkey, long a major consumer and stockpiler of gold, hit $1.8 billion in July - equivalent to over a fifth of Turkey's entire trade deficit in that month.

In August, however, a sudden plunge in Turkey's direct gold exports to Iran coincided with a leap in its sales of the precious metal to the UAE.

Turkey exported a total $2.3 billion worth of gold in August, of which $2.1 billion was gold bullion. Just over $1.9 billion, about 36 metric tons, was sent to the UAE, latest available data from Turkey's Statistics Office shows. In July Turkey exported only $7 million of gold to the UAE.

At the same time Turkey's direct gold exports to Iran, which had been fluctuating between $1.2 billion and about $1.8 billion each month since April, slumped to just $180 million in August.

The Dubai-based trader said that from August, direct shipments to Iran were largely replaced by indirect ones through Dubai, apparently because Tehran wanted to avoid publicity.

Perhaps US imperialist policies will backfire in the context of the degeneration of the US dollar as the world’s foreign currency reserve.

Steve Forbes: Bring Back the Gold Standard

Steve Forbes, editor in chief of business magazine Forbes calls for the return of the gold standard 

From Forbes.com

A new gold standard is crucial. The disasters that the Federal Reserve and other central banks are inflicting on us with their funny-money policies are enormous and underappreciated. An unstable dollar is wreaking havoc on our capital markets, depriving us of money for productive enterprises and future enterprises while subsidizing government debt on a scale never before seen in U.S. history. The zero-interest-rate policy destroys capital by punishing savers and enabling the central bank to allocate where capital goes. By definition such central planning means subpar or negative returns. No one believes, given the finances of the U.S. government, that a ten-year Treasury bond should yield only 1.8%.

The promiscuous printing of money in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere is enabling governments to put off pro-growth structural reforms and giving them incentive to increase the burdens on the private sector. The poster child here, of course, is France, raising its maximum income tax rate to 75%. Not since the early 1930s have governments of major countries collectively acted so destructively. The only difference between then and today—and it is a gargantuan one—is that we haven’t destroyed the global trading and capital systems. But even they are facing increasing strains and will continue to do so unless policies are changed.

What the Fed is doing through its binge buying of bonds is enabling Washington to consume our national wealth. Instead of creating new wealth we are beginning to destroy that which exists. No wonder tens of millions of people feel—rightly—that their real incomes are declining and their financial situations are coming under more pressure. In real terms the stock market is lower today than it was in the late 1990s, and even in absolute terms it still isn’t where it was in 2007.

Can we move forward on a gold standard before a real catastrophe à la the 1930s results?

A big part of the problem is that economics classes no longer teach the fundamental importance of stable money. The gold standard, if men tioned at all, is derisively dismissed as a relic, like the Egyptian pyramids or the Ford Model T.

Read the rest here 

While I am delighted to see more people acknowledging the importance of the return of sound money, mostly through the efforts of Ron Paul and the Austrian School, I would first prefer the de-politicization of money or empowering free markets to ascertain monetary standard.

Quote of the Day: Fed is Like the Arsonist Disguised as a Firefighter

Remember: the Fed is like the arsonist disguised as a firefighter who claims only he can put out the fires he started. Yeah, maybe the firefighter can’t rescue people from the building if he doesn’t have an axe to break down the door, but giving him a way to break in makes it far more likely that he’ll set fires in the first place.

Claiming that a gold standard ties the Fed’s hands is exactly the reason to favor it, not oppose it. The Fed was primarily, though not solely, responsible for getting us in this mess in the first place precisely because its hands were free to flood the market with artificially cheap credit.

The discretion of Big Players like the Fed is the problem, and the solution is not somehow hoping that next time they will use that discretion only for good and not evil. Tying Federal Reserve Notes to gold would take away some of that discretion, and eliminating the central bank completely in favor of a competitive monetary system with commodity backing of any sort would take it all away.

When the arsonist can’t set fires, we don’t need to worry about whether or not he has the tools to put them out. That is the fundamental argument for constraining both central banks and competitive ones by making the money they create redeemable in gold.

This is from Professor Steve Horwitz’s refutation of Ezra Klein’s critique of the Gold Standard.

Infographic: History of Money (1821-2012)

This wonderful infographic from Goldmoney.com (Thanks to Paul Buitink of Goldmoney)

To know more about the history of money check out Murray Rothbard's What has Government Done to our Money

The Major Risk from Currency Union Breakups: Hyperinflation

At the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Mr. Anders Aslund has an interesting paper on the historical aftermaths of the dissolution of currency unions.

Mr. Aslund opens with a refutation of the Nirvana fallacy of the Keynesian prescription on the currency devaluation elixir. Here Mr. Aslund rebuts Nouriel Roubini. (all bold highlights mine)

While beneficial in some cases, devaluation is by no means necessary for crisis resolution. About half the countries in the world have pegged or fixed exchange rates. During the East Asian crisis in 1998, Hong Kong held its own with a fixed exchange rate, thanks to a highly flexible labor market. The cure for the South European dilemma is available in the European Union. In the last three decades, several EU members have addressed severe financial crises by undertaking serious fiscal austerity and reforms of labor markets, thus enhancing their competitiveness, notably Denmark in 1982, Holland in the late 1980s, Sweden and Finland in the early 1990s, all the ten post communist members in the early 1990s, and Germany in the early 2000s. Remember that as late as 1999, the Economist referred to Germany as “the sick man of the euro.”

More recently, the three Baltic countries, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, as well as Bulgaria have all repeated this feat (Åslund 2010, Åslund and Dombrovskis 2011). Among these many crisis countries, only Sweden and Finland devalued, showing that devaluation was not a necessary part of the solution. The peripheral European countries suffer in various proportions from poor fiscal discipline, overly regulated markets, especially labor markets, a busted bank and real estate bubble, and poor education, which have led to declining competitiveness and low growth. All these ailments can be cured by means other than devaluation.

Mr. Aslund on the currency union dissolution during the gold standard eon.

It was rather easy to dissolve a currency zone under the gold standard when countries maintained separate central banks and payments systems. Two prominent examples are the Latin Monetary Union and the Scandinavian Monetary Union. The Latin Monetary Union was formed first with France, Belgium, Italy, and Switzerland and later included Spain, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Venezuela. It lasted from 1865 to 1927. It failed because of misaligned exchange rates, the abandonment of the gold standard, and the debasement by some central banks of the currency. The similar Scandinavian Monetary Union among Sweden, Denmark, and Norway existed from 1873 until 1914. It was easily dissolved when Sweden abandoned the gold standard. These two currency zones were hardly real, because they did not involve a common central bank or a centralized payments system. They amounted to little but pegs to the gold standard. Therefore, they are not very relevant to the EMU.

“Abandonment of gold standard” simply suggests that some members of these defunct unions wantonly engaged in inflationism which were most likely made in breach of the union’s pact that had led to their dissolution.

Mr Aslund tersely describes on one account of “successful” post gold standard breakup…

Europe offers one recent example of a successful breakup of a currency zone. The split of Czechoslovakia into two countries was peacefully agreed upon in 1992 to occur on January 1, 1993. The original intention was to divide the currency on June 1, 1993. However, an immediate run on the currency led to a separation of the Czech and Slovak korunas in mid-February, and the Slovak koruna was devalued moderately in relation to the Czech koruna. Thanks to this early division of the currencies, monetary stability was maintained in both countries, although inflation rose somewhat and minor trade disruption occurred (Nuti 1996; Åslund 2002, 203). This currency union was real, but thanks to the limited financial depth just after the end of communism, dissolution was far easier than will be the case in the future. In particular, no financial instruments were available with which investors could speculate against the Slovak koruna

It seems unclear why the Czech and Slovak experience had been the least worse or had the least disruption compared to the others.

Yet considering that inflation is a monetary phenomenon with political objectives, “limited financial depth” seems unlikely a significant factor the “success”. Instead it may have been that political authorities of the Czech and Slovak experience, aside from the “early division of currencies” which may have given a transitional time window, may have likely implemented some form of monetary discipline which lessened the impact.

Mr Aslund finds that the the incumbent European Union seems more relevant with three recent accounts of currency disintegration which had cataclysmic results.

The situation of the EMU is very different from these three cases. It has no external norm, such as the gold standard, and it is a real currency union with a common payments mechanism and central bank. The payments mechanism is centralized to the ECB and would fall asunder if the EMU broke up because of the large uncleared balances that have been accumulated. The more countries that are involved in a monetary union, the messier a disruption is likely to be.

The EMU, with its 17 members, is a very complex currency union. When things fall apart, clearly defined policymaking institutions are vital, but the absence of any legislation about an EMU breakup lies at the heart of the problem in the euro area. It is bound to make the mess all the greater. Finally, the proven incompetence and slowness of the European policymakers in crisis resolution will complicate matters further.

The three other European examples of breakups in the last century are of the Habsburg Empire, the Soviet Union, and Yugoslavia. They are ominous indeed. All three ended in major disasters, each with hyperinflation in several countries. In the Habsburg Empire, Austria and Hungary faced hyperinflation.

Yugoslavia experienced hyperinflation twice. In the former Soviet Union, 10 out of 15 republics had hyperinflation. The combined output falls were horrendous, though poorly documented because of the chaos. Officially, the average output fall in the former Soviet Union was 52 percent, and in the Baltics it amounted to 42 percent (Åslund 2007, 60).

According to the World Bank, in 2010, 5 out of 12 post-Soviet countries—Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan—had still not reached their 1990 GDP per capita levels in purchasing power parities. Similarly, out of seven Yugoslav successor states, at least Serbia and Montenegro, and probably Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina, had not exceeded their 1990 GDP per capita levels in purchasing power parities two decades later (World Bank 2011).

Arguably, Austria and Hungary did not recover from their hyperinflations in the early 1920s until the mid-1950s. Thus the historical record is that half the countries in a currency zone that breaks up experience hyperinflation and do not reach their prior GDP per capita as measured in purchasing power parities until about a quarter of a century later, which is far more than the lost decade in Latin America in the 1980s.

The causes of these large output falls were multiple: systemic change, competitive monetary emission leading to hyperinflation, collapse of the payments system, defaults, exclusion from international finance, trade disruption, and wars. Such a combination of disasters is characteristic of the collapse of monetary unions.

Why hyperinflation poses as the greatest risk for the disintegration of the fiat money based currency unions?

A common reflex to these cases is to say that it was a long time ago, that things are very diferent now, and that other factors matter. First of all, it was not all that long ago. Two of these economic disasters occurred only two decades ago. Second, hyperinflation was probably the most harmful economic factor, and it is part and parcel of the collapse of a currency zone, regardless of the time period. About half of the hyperinflations in world history occurred in connection with the breakup of these three currency zones. The cause was competitive credit emission by competing central banks before the breakup. Third, monetary indiscipline and war are closely connected. The best illustration is Slovenia versus Yugoslavia. In the first half of 1991, the National Bank of Yugoslavia started excessive monetary emission to the benefit of Serbia. On June 25, 1991, Slovenia declared full sovereignty not least to defend its finances. Two days later, the Yugoslav armed forces attacked Slovenia (Pleskovic and Sachs 1994, 198). Fortunately, that war did not last long and Slovenia could exit Yugoslavia and proved successful both politically and economically

Again since inflationism essentially represents monetary means to attain political ends, previous accounts of hyperinflation in post currency union dissolution may have been a result of policy miscalculations from political leaders trying to attain the illusory positive effects from devaluation.

Or most importantly or which I think is the more relevant is that in absence of access to local and foreign savings through banking or financial markets, political authorities in pursuit of their survival have resorted to massive money printing operations.

Also since hyperinflation means the destruction of division of labor or free trade, one major consequences have been to seek political survival through plunder, thus the attendant war. Inflationism, according to great Ludwig von Mises has been “the most important economic element in this war ideology”.

Looking at history has always been deterministic. We look at the past in the account of how narrators describes the connections of the facts in them. But we must not forget of the importance of theory in examining these facts.

As Austrian economist Hans Hermann Hoppe explains,

There must also be a realm of theory — theory that is empirically meaningful — which is categorically different from the only idea of theory empiricism admits to having existence. There must also be a priori theories, and the relationship between theory and history then must be different and more complicated than empiricism would have us believe.

I concur that hyperinflation could likely be the outcome for many European countries once a breakup of the Eurozone becomes a reality. This will not happen because history will merely repeat itself, but because the preferred recourse by politicians has been to resort to inflationism. Theory and history have only meshed to exhibit the likelihood of such path dependent political actions.

Steve Forbes on How to Bring Back America

Media mogul Steve Forbes of the Forbes magazine recently interviewed by the Hera Research Newsletter gives his prescription for the restoration of America: Gold Backed Dollar, Simplified Tax Code and the return to a free market

From Hera Research Newsletter (Hat tip Zero Hedge)

The Hera Research Newsletter is pleased to present an incredibly powerful interview with Steve Forbes, Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Media. The company’s flagship publication, FORBES, is the leading business magazine. Combined with international and licensee editions,FORBES reaches more than 6 million readers worldwide. The Forbes.com website is a leading destination for senior business decision-makers and investors with more than 30 million unique visitors per month.

Hera Research Newsletter (HRN): Thank you for joining us today. With the U.S. economy struggling to recover from recession and financial crisis, what policies would you recommend?

Steve Forbes: The only way to recover is to stabilize our money, have a gold backed dollar, simplified tax code and return to a free market.

HRN: You advocate the gold standard?

Steve Forbes: If there’s any better system to ensure a stable value for money, it’s yet to be found. For nearly all of America’s first 200 years, the dollar was linked to gold. Since we went off the gold standard, we’ve had more and more financial, economic and banking crises. For example,if the Federal Reserve hadn’t started to print so much money ten years ago, we wouldn’t have experienced the housing bust or the commodities boom or the sovereign debt crisis in Europe. Eventually, events become a persuasive teacher.

HRN: Don’t we need a flexible money supply?

Steve Forbes: That’s like saying that changing the number of minutes in an hour would be a great tool to increase productivity in the economy. Manipulating weights and measures, whether it’s the number of ounces in a pound or minutes in an hour, is a false way to think that you can achieve prosperity. All gold does is serve as a yardstick to measure the value of your currency.

HRN: Doesn’t increasing the money supply help to stimulate the economy?

Steve Forbes: The only way to increase prosperity is through innovation and productivity. Attempts to manipulate the value of money invariably fail. We’ve had numerous devaluations, and not once has it created lasting prosperity.

HRN: Under the gold standard, would there still be a lender of last resort to backstop the banking system?

Steve Forbes: The gold standard doesn’t prevent lending during a panic. The Bank of England pioneered acting as a lender of last resort in the 1860s under the gold standard.

HRN: Wouldn’t the gold standard prevent financial innovation?

Steve Forbes: No. Financial innovation has been with us for hundreds of years in terms of new financial instruments to meet expanding needs as the global economy becomes more complex. Many of the innovations of recent years, however, have come about in response to the instability of the dollar and other currencies, which has increased volatility in currency and commodity markets. New instruments have been designed either as insurance against volatility or to take advantage of it. If you had stable money, there would be much less hedging and financial speculation.

HRN: Can governments function under the gold standard?

Steve Forbes: Certain countries feel free to spend money whether they have it or not. Fiat money, which can just be printed up, has disguised the real cost. We would never have experienced the kind of government borrowing we’ve had in recent years if we’d had stable money. The gold standard would keep the government honest.

HRN: Doesn’t government deficit spending smooth over recessions?

Steve Forbes: The bottom line for the U.S. is that a weak dollar means a weak recovery. Stability is good for the economy. The simplest thing to do is to re-link the U.S. dollar to gold.

HRN: Wouldn’t that tie the hands of the Federal Reserve?

Steve Forbes: Tie their hands to do what, further harm to the economy? I don’t think that’s such a bad thing.

HRN: Isn’t the price of gold volatile like other commodities?

Steve Forbes: The reason to return to the gold standard is that gold maintains a stable, intrinsic value over time. Stable money meets all conditions. Gold doesn’t change in value. Currencies change in value. Gold is Polaris.

HRN: How would re-linking the U.S. dollar to gold work?

Steve Forbes: You simply peg the value of the dollar to gold. Let’s say, for argument’s sake, you peg the dollar to gold at $1,600 per ounce. If gold goes above $1,600, you tighten up on money creation. If it goes below $1,600, you ease up. You keep it around $1,600 by tightening or easing up on money creation. The gold standard doesn’t preclude a booming economy having more money or a stagnant economy having less money.

HRN: Isn’t the gold standard deflationary?

Steve Forbes: No. The gold standard is neither inflationary nor deflationary. It’s like the mile: There are 5,280 feet in a mile; it’s a fixed length. That doesn’t restrict the number of miles of highway you can build. Between 1776 and 1900 the U.S. grew from a small, agricultural nation of 2.5 million people to a nation of 76.2 million people, and it became the greatest industrial power on earth. The money supply went up about 160-fold while the dollar was pegged to gold.

HRN: Wouldn’t the gold standard severely limit leverage in the financial system?

Steve Forbes: If you’re a worthy borrower, you can borrow at the market interest rate; if you’re an unworthy borrower, you have to pay a higher interest rate or you can’t get money. The gold standard would have prevented the wild lending and money creation we’ve experienced in the last few years, which has led to disaster. You can see it in the housing bubble and in the European government debt bubble. None of these things could have happened had we had stable money.

HRN: Is the Utah Legal Tender Act, which makes gold and silver legal in Utah, helpful?

Steve Forbes: I’m in favor of the states trying to get away from the Federal Reserve’s play-money approach. The key is for the next President to institute a gold-linked dollar policy.

HRN: Do competing currencies make sense?

Steve Forbes: The idea of a parallel currency is a perfectly good one. People would come to prefer a dollar based on gold rather than a dollar based on politicians.

HRN: Do you also suggest using silver as money?

Steve Forbes: The Chinese and other cultures have used silver as money, but silver doesn’t maintain its value the way gold does. Over time it takes more silver to buy an ounce of gold. About 120 years ago it took 15 ounces of silver to buy 1 ounce of gold. Today it takes more than 50 ounces. That’s why the U.S. moved away from a bi-metallic standard to the gold standard. One metal becomes more valuable than the other at different times. Silver is better than fiat money, but there’s only one gold standard.

HRN: Would the gold standard help the U.S. economy to recover?

Steve Forbes: In the 1980s, when we had very high unemployment and a stagnant economy, the way out was through a strong dollar, lower income taxes, entrepreneurship and new wealth creation. Remember, the values of assets go up when people see a future. They don’t today.

HRN: We didn’t have the gold standard in the 1980s.

Steve Forbes: Ronald Reagan killed the terrible inflation of the 1970s and sharply reduced income tax rates. Reagan wanted a return to the gold standard, but none of his advisors believed in it. Inflation was effectively killed by high interest rates. Deregulation was pushed forward, and America roared. In 1982, the Dow bottomed at 776; over the next 18 years it went up 18-fold.

HRN: You advocate cutting taxes?

Steve Forbes: Yes, and we should put in a flat tax. The advantage of the flat tax is that it enables people to focus on real things. Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, which defines the character of the American nation, is all of 272 words. The Declaration of Independence is a little more than 1,300 words. The Constitution of the United States and all of its amendments are a little more than 7,000 words. The Bible, which took centuries to put together, is a mere 773,000 words. The U.S. federal income tax code—with all of its cross-references, descriptions of amendments and effective dates—is probably now in excess of 4,000,000 words. Nobody knows what’s in it. Last year the IRS announced that Americans spent 6.1 billion hours filling out tax forms and $300 billion on tax preparation. This is a huge waste of resources and brain power. Not to mention that it’s a corrupting influence. It’s a huge source of government power, and it brings out the worst in us. The sooner we get simplicity—and a flat tax would give us that—the more energy we can devote to productive pursuits.

HRN: How could the U.S. transition to a flat-tax system?

Steve Forbes: Since people get hung up on their deductions, we would institute a flat tax and give people the option of filing either under the new, simple system or the old, horrific system. If you’re a masochist and want to punish yourself, you can file under the old income tax system. If you want the simplified one, you can go with that. I think 99% of Americans, out of sheer convenience, would quickly switch to the new system.

HRN: You mentioned deregulation. How would that help the U.S. economy?

Steve Forbes: Take health care, for example. We don’t have a free market in health care. There’s a disconnect between patients and health care providers. If you go to a hospital and ask how much something costs they’ll look at you strangely because they think you’re either uninsured or a lunatic. How many hospitals put the prices of procedures on their websites? It’s like going into a restaurant and having no idea how much anything on the menu costs. It’s a crazy system.

HRN: How would you go about deregulating health care?

Steve Forbes: First, we should repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—Obamacare—which is an abomination. Patients should have more choice. The insurance companies don’t compete freely for business. We should allow people to shop nationwide for health insurance. I live in New Jersey, which has a lot of senseless regulations. Why can’t I buy a health insurance policy in Pennsylvania that costs less? We should equalize the tax treatment of health care expenses. If you’re a business or are self-employed, you should be able to deduct the expense. And individuals should be free to go into the market and pay with after-tax dollars. We should make it easier for small businesses to form a collective to buy health insurance. There are a lot of simple things that could be done.

HRN: Do free markets really work?

Steve Forbes: Free markets, with sensible rules of the road, can do all the things that big government advocates say the government does but that it really can’t do. Free markets enable people to move out of poverty and break down barriers between ethnic groups and between nations. Free markets increase cooperation and foster a sense of humanity. Everything that big government says it will do, you get more from free markets than from government bureaucracies. Which one has a better future, FedEx or the U.S. Post Office? Do you want food stamps or paychecks? Big government makes a lot of promises, but it’s short sighted. Government is about meeting its own needs at the expense of the nation, and it’s immoral. Free markets have gotten a bad rap, which happens to be the subject of my new book.

HRN: The Federal Reserve recently announced that it will extend its “Operation Twist” program by $267 billion through the end of 2012. Will that help the U.S. economy?

Steve Forbes: No. The more Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke messes up, the more he’s hailed as a savior. The Federal Reserve’s programs—quantitative easing 1 and 2 and Operation Twist—are just fancy words for printing up more money. It’s a bunch of smoke and mirrors. They’ve done a lot of damage already, and they’re continuing to. What they’re doing is dangerous. Not only has the Federal Reserve created a lot of money and vastly expanded its balance sheet but, along with the U.S. Department of Treasury, it has dramatically shortened the maturity of U.S. government debt.

HRN: What do you mean when you say that the Federal Reserve has done a lot of damage?

Steve Forbes: By keeping interest rates artificially low, Chairman Ben Bernanke is cheapening the dollar, which punishes savers and harms future investment. It distorts financial markets and misdirects investments into things like creating the housing bubble. It subsidizes government borrowing at the expense of the rest of us. It’s the equivalent of a cut in pay for workers. Let’s say you’re earning $20 per hour and the government cheapens the dollar; then, in effect, you’re making $15 per hour. It violates contracts and undermines social trust.

HRN: What should Chairman Bernanke do instead?

Steve Forbes: Other than resign, Chairman Bernanke should realize that the gold standard works and that when you deviate from it, you create more and more uncertainty. He should re-link the dollar to gold. Doctors used to treat patients by bleeding them. Bernanke just keeps bleeding the economy.

HRN: Thank you for being so generous with your time.

Steve Forbes: Thank you.

Hera Research, LLC, provides deeply researched analysis to help investors profit from changing economic and market conditions. Hera Research focuses on relationships between macroeconomics, government, banking, and financial markets in order to identify and analyze investment opportunities with extraordinary upside potential. Hera Research is currently researching mining and metals including precious metals, oil and energy including green energy, agriculture, and other natural resources. The Hera Research Newsletter covers key economic data, trends and analysis including reviews of companies with extraordinary value and upside potential.

Turkish Banks offer Gold Deposit Accounts

Speaking of a reset in the global order monetary, one possible step towards the reintroduction of gold as money is for the banking system not only to accept gold as loan collateral but for people to be able to have gold deposit accounts which could pave way for payments and settlements services in gold.

Banks in Turkey seems to have lunged into this path.

From Mineweb.com

For centuries, Turks have flocked to the jewellery shops of Istanbul's labyrinthine Grand Bazaar to trade their gold - ornaments handed down through their families over generations, or bars stashed under mattresses as savings. But in recent months the shops have a new and unexpected competitor: banks.

The country's commercial banks are pouring their technical expertise and marketing resources into offering their customers gold deposit accounts. Customers hand their gold to a bank and can make withdrawals from their accounts in gold bars or the lira currency; the accounts offer interest rates that are substantially lower than those on normal time deposits.

Gold deposit accounts have been growing around the world, but Turkey's boom has made it a leader in the trend. This appears to have cut the amount of gold flowing to jewellers in the Grand Bazaar and elsewhere in the country, a trend which dismays the shop owners. In the long run, it could threaten their business model, which relies partly on turning scrap gold they buy into jewellery and selling it back to retail customers…

Gold is big business in Turkey, for cultural reasons and also because of the country's experience with bouts of high inflation over the past century. The metal is traditionally given as a gift at weddings and circumcision ceremonies, and demand for imports tends to surge during the summer months.

Turks are believed to have accumulated about 5,000 tonnes of gold in their homes, worth around $250 billion at current international prices, according to the World Gold Council, an industry lobby. It ranks Turkey's gold demand as fifth in the world for jewellery and eighth for retail investment, mostly behind countries with much bigger populations such as India, China and the United States.

I hope that Philippine banking system does the same.

Quote of the Day: Global Monetary Order is on the Verge of a Reset

The return to gold is unmistakably the product of a strategic, not merely a tactical, shift in global central banking policy. Central banks in the developed world have now altogether stopped selling bullion. This was foreshadowed by their behavior over the past decade, when they sold even less gold than they were permitted to under the anti-dumping Central Bank Gold Agreements. Clearly the concern about dumping gold was out of step with the trend. But more importantly, central banks in the emerging markets have been buying gold by the truckload.

Since the financial crisis of '08, nations as diverse as Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand, Kazakhstan, Turkey, Ukraine, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and India have led the way back to gold as a primary reserve asset. Russia alone has added an impressive 400 tonnes of bullion to its reserves, most of it coming from domestic purchases. Mexico has added over 120 tonnes, including 78 tonnes from one mega-purchase in March 2011. The Philippines have bought over 60 tonnes, with 32 tonnes coming in as recently as March 2012. Thailand has added approximately 60 tonnes, and Kazakhstan just shy of 30 tonnes. Turkey amended its regulatory policy late last year to allow commercial banks to count gold towards their reserve requirements, adding over 120 tonnes to its official reserves. And bullion imports into mainland China through Hong Kong have been reaching all-time highs.

Finally, loyal US allies Saudi Arabia and India, in what is sure to leave particularly bitter taste in Washington's mouth, have been adding gold to their reserves by the hundreds of tonnes.

In short, the governments of emerging markets recognize that the global monetary order is on the verge of a reset. These emerging markets are the economic engines of the 21st century, and they're determined not to be undermined by Western fiat paper.

This is from Peter Schiff at the lewrockwell.com talking about the return to the gold standard

China’s Middle Class Support Demand for Gold

From Mineweb.com

The rise of China's middle-class is helping support demand for gold in the country. China, the largest producer of gold, is set to become the biggest consumer of the metal in 2012, with a significant proportion of luxury purchases in China veering towards gold accessories, bought by middle-class aspirational consumers.

By 2020, 25% of China's population is expected to be middle-class, creating great consumption demand. Diamond studded luxury items and gold watches are seeing `blow-out like demand' from wealthy shoppers in China, who are snapping up these expensive accessories to make a fashion statement, give as business gifts or just collect.

What also augurs well this year is that middle-class wealth is expected to spread to 600 million people in third-tier Chinese cities, with a sizeable percentage investing in gold or buying gold jewellery.

For a country whose gold production in the first four months of 2012 reached 109.6 tonnes, up 6.13% from the same period last year, passion for the yellow metal has scaled new heights.

Total retail sales of gold, silver and jewellery in China amounted to $2.82 billion in May, up 18.2% compared to the same period last year, according to the National Bureau of Statistics of China. Accumulative retail sales of the segment in the first five months of 2012 reached $14.6 billion, up 16.1% compared to the same period last year.

In May, the country's overall retail sales of consumer goods including gold, silver and jewellery totalled $262 billion, up 13.8% year-on-year at nominal growth rates. The real growth rate was 11%, data showed.

The jewellery sector in China has become a hot spot fuelled by surging investment demand for gold and precious stones. Jewellery retailers registered a 42% increase in sales last year, driven by consumers' taste for gold and gemstone-encrusted jewellery. Reports indicate that these jewellers are looking beyond traditional markets, eager to dig into the pockets of the newly rich middle-class in smaller cities.

For some time now, the country's growing middle-class has been pursuing a quality of lifestyle that includes appreciation for exquisite fine jewellery. And, retail jewellery chains are expanding to smaller cities and districts to keep up with demand.

Statists have always made the point that paper money has been the popular choice. But appeal to popularity premised on free lunch or Santa Claus politics cannot and will not supplant economic reality.

Today’s crisis have been manifestations of the unraveling of such unsustainable institutional arrangements.

Statists also say that people will have difficulty over adjusting or accepting to the return of gold as money. Maybe for the people of the West this may hold some substance. The intellectual elite may have successfully indoctrinated upon the public to accept the ideology that gold is a “barbaric metal” and where free lunch politics have promoted and embedded to their lifestyles the creed that “debt based spending is the path to prosperity” through government’s cartelized banking system.

But this certainly is far from reality for most of Asia such as China, India, Malaysia or Vietnam. The rate of growth of gold’s demand by China’s middle class looks like a testament to these.

In other words, should a global currency crisis emerge, then Asians are likely to reform their respective monetary system faster than that of the West. But that would be just a guess.

Yet it is unclear if prospective monetary reforms will include gold. But chances are increasing that gold may be part of it.

Global central banks have been accumulating gold at a faster rate led by Asia.

From Reuters.com

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) noted in its June 2012 Quarterly Review that "central bank balance sheets in emerging Asia expanded rapidly over the past decade because of the unprecedented rise in foreign reserve assets" Reserves rose from $1.1 trillion to $6.4 trillion in 2011.

This quote, which I earlier posted, attributed to Janos Feteke (who I think was the deputy governor of the National Bank of Hungary) looks apropos to the surging demand of gold from China’s middle class and to the micro versus macro debate on the return of the gold standard,

There are about three hundred economists in the world who are against gold, and they think that gold is a barbarous relic - and they might be right. Unfortunately, there are three billion inhabitants of the world who believe in gold.

What truly matters is to get monetary system out of government's hands or to depoliticize or denationalize (Hayek) money and allow for competition in banking (free banking), where gold standard may or may not be the accepted standard. Nevertheless sound money based on free markets.

Will Gold be a Part of Basel Capital Standard Regulations?

At the Mineweb.com, Ross Norman CEO of Sharps Pixley thinks that chances are getting better for gold to take a role in the banking system’s capital standard regulations.

Mr. Norman writes,

Banking capital adequacy ratios, once the domain of banking specialists are set to become centre stage for the gold market as well as the wider economy. In response to the global banking crisis the rules are to be tightened in terms of the assets that banks must hold and this is potentially going to very much favour gold. The Basel Committee for Bank Supervision (or BCBS) as part of the BIS are arguably the highest authority in banking supervision and it is their role to define capital requirements through the forthcoming Basel III rules.

In short, they are meeting to consider making gold a Tier 1 asset for commercial banks with 100% weighting rather than a Tier 3 asset with just a 50% risk weighting as it does today. At the same time they are set to increase the amount of capital banks must set aside as well. A double win potentially.

Hitherto banks have been much dis-incentivised to hold gold while being encouraged to hold arguably riskier assets such as equity capital, currencies and debt instruments, none of which have fared too well in the crisis. With this potential change in capital adequacy requirements. bank purchases of gold would drive up its value relative to other high quality qualifying assets, increasing its desirability for regulatory purposes further. This should result in gold being re-priced to bring it on a par with all other high quality assets.

While this should be good news, gold isn’t structurally compatible with the current form of political institutions (welfare-warfare state-central banking and privileged bankers) highly dependent on inflationism.

Since the Basel standards have in itself been fundamentally flawed, like in the past, governments and their adherents will only use gold as scapegoat for any future crisis. But who knows.

Nevertheless, the above serves as added indications where gold will likely play a greater role in the global economy, perhaps as money.

Essays on Proposed Monetary Reforms

I am supposed to take my day off today.

But I stumbled upon a gem of collection of wonderful essays on proposed monetary reforms from my favorites: Ron Paul, James Grant, Gerald O’ Driscoll, George Selgin, Lawrence White, Judy Shelton, Roger Garrison, Kevin Dowd, Kurt Schuler and more.

Read them at Cato Institute Journal called Monetary Reform in the Wake of Crisis (Volume 32 Number 2), a forum which was held in November of last year.

Read some of the statements by Ron Paul, Ben Steill (CFR), Allan Meltzer (Carnegie Mellon University), Lawrence White (George Mason University), Gerald O’Driscoll (Cato Institute) and Robert Zoellick, Jr. (World Bank) at the forum here

Gold is Money: Will a Swiss Gold Franc Emerge?

Gold may not be money today but parts of the world seem to be exploring the incorporation of gold to their respective monetary system (e.g. Malaysia’s Islamic gold dinar).

From the IBTimes.com

The Swiss parliament was scheduled to debate Tuesday the wisdom of creating a new gold-backed national coin that would float in parallel with the Swiss franc, becoming the first national legislature in decades to consider issuing a currency based on a commodity.

The proposal was first introduced in March 2011 by three right-wing legislators as part of what they termed a "healthy currency" initiative. It seeks to modify the Swiss constitution, instructing the nation's central bank to issue a new national coin with a fixed gold content that would complement, though not replace, the Swiss franc.

A press release described the legislative action as seeking "an attractive alternative to the Swiss franc as a safe haven, given how franc appreciation has continued as a result of currency turmoil outside Swiss international borders." The move would reduce some policy-making power from the Swiss National Bank, the nation's issuer of legal tender, by forcing it to issue a currency at a fixed rate to gold.

The mainstream may not like it, but forces of decentralization appear to ushering in the gold standard. Once a major economy, like Switzerland, successfully brings the gold standard partly back in operation, then gradually more nations (most likely emerging markets) can be expected more to hop in.

Ron Paul: Federal Reserve System is the Epitome of Crony Capitalism

Here is the gist of US congressman Ron Paul’s courageous talk before the Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy & Technology, United States House of Representatives, May 8, 2012 (From Lew Rockwell)

Much confusion exists over what the Federal Reserve System actually is. Some people claim that is a secret cabal of elite bankers, while others claim that it is part of the federal government. In reality it is a bit of both. The Federal Reserve Board is a government agency, while the Federal Reserve Banks are privately-run government-chartered institutions, and monetary policy decisions are made by the Federal Open Market Committee, which has members from both the Board and the Reserve Banks.

The Federal Reserve System is the epitome of crony capitalism. It exemplifies the collusion between big government and big business to profit at the expense of the taxpayers. The Fed's bailout of large banks during the financial crisis propped up poorly-run corporations that should have gone under, giving them an advantage that no other business in the United States would have received. The bailouts continue today, as banks maintain $1.5 trillion worth of excess reserves at the Fed, reserves which were created through the Fed's purchase of worthless securities from banks. The trillions of dollars that the Fed has injected into the system have the goal of forcing down interest rates. But the Fed fails to realize that interest rates are a price, the price of money and credit, and that forcing interest rates down will only create an even bigger bubble and an enormous economic depression when this entire house of cards comes falling down.

The Federal Reserve is statutorily required to focus on three aims when engaged in monetary policy: full employment, stables prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. In practice, only the first two have received any attention, the so-called "dual mandate." Some reformers have called for the full employment mandate to be repealed, in order to allow the Fed to focus solely on stable prices. But these critics ignore the fact that stable prices are not a desirable goal. After all, with increasing productivity and technological innovation, the natural trend for most goods is for prices to decrease. By calling for the prices of goods to remain stable, the Fed would have to inflate the money supply in order to counteract this trend towards price declines, pumping new money into the system and creating economic distortions. This is exactly what happened during the 1920s, as the Fed's monetary pumping was masked by rising productivity. The result was stable prices, but the malinvestment caused by the Fed's loose monetary policy became evident by 1929. There is no reason to expect that focusing on stable prices today would have a dissimilar outcome.

Other reformers have called for changes to the composition of the Federal Open Market Committee, the body which sets the Fed's monetary policy objectives. On Constitutional grounds, the FOMC is undoubtedly problematic, as government appointees and the heads of the private Federal Reserve Banks work together to set monetary policy objectives that directly impact the strength of the dollar. While all of the members of the FOMC ought to be confirmed by the Senate, debates about the size of the FOMC or whether Reserve Bank Presidents should make up a majority of the members or whether they should even serve at all are largely a sideshow. While the only dissent to monetary policy decisions in recent years has come from Reserve Bank Presidents, there is no reason to think that expanding the FOMC to include more Reserve Bank Presidents would lead to any greater dissent or to any substantive changes to the conduct of monetary policy.

Another proposal for reform is for outright nationalization of the Fed or its functions. No longer would the Fed create money; that function would be taken up by the Treasury, issuing as much money as it sees fit. No longer would the Treasury issue debt to cover fiscal deficits, it would just issue new money to cover budget shortfalls. If what the Fed does now is bad, allowing the Treasury to print and issue money at will would be even worse. These types of proposals hearken back to the days of the first greenbacks, which the U.S. government began issuing in 1863. A pure fiat paper currency, unbacked by silver or gold, the greenbacks were widely reviled. Only once the greenbacks were made redeemable in gold were they accepted by the American people. The current system of Federal Reserve Notes is even worse than the greenback era in that there is no hope that they will ever be redeemable for gold or silver. The only limiting factor is that the Federal Reserve System only creates new money when purchasing assets, normally debt securities. Allowing the federal government to print money without at least a nominal check on the amount issued would inevitably lead to a Weimar-like hyperinflation.

So what then is the solution? The Fed maintains that a paper standard can be adequately managed without causing malinvestment, inflation, or other economic distortions. If the Fed were omniscient and knew the wishes, desires, and future actions of all Americans, this might be possible. But the Fed cannot possibly aggregate or act on the information necessary to engage in monetary policy. The actions of hundreds of millions of individuals, all seeking to better their position in life, acting purposefully towards that aim, cannot possibly be compiled into aggregates or calculated through mathematical equations or econometric models. Neither a single person, nor the members and staff of the FOMC, nor millions of people with millions of computers working in a new Goskomtsen will ever be able to accumulate, analyze, and act upon the information required to create a centrally planned monetary system. Centrally planned fiat paper standards such as the one currently in place in this country are doomed to failure.

This brings us to the question of the gold standard. The era of the classical gold standard was undoubtedly one of the greatest eras in human history. For a period of several decades in the late 19^th century, largely uninterrupted by war, the West made enormous advances. Economic productivity increased, art and culture flourished, and living standards rose so that even the poorest citizens lived a life their forebears could have only dreamed of.

But the problem with the gold standard is that it was run by the government, which exercised a monopoly over monetary affairs. The temptation to suspend gold redemption, so often resorted to by governments throughout history, reared its head again with the outbreak of World War I. Once the tie to gold was severed and fiscal restraint thrown to the wind, undoing the damage would have required great fiscal austerity on the part of governments. Emancipated from the shackles of the gold standard, the Western world proceeded to set up a gold-exchange standard which lasted not even a decade before the easy money policies it enabled led to the Great Depression. While returning to the gold standard would certainly be far better than maintaining the current fiat paper system, as long as the government retains the power to go off gold we may end up repeating the same mistakes that occurred from 1934 to 1971 as the government went first off the gold coin standard and finally off the gold bullion exchange standard.

The only viable solution for monetary stability is to get government out of the money business permanently. The way to bring this about is through currency competition: allowing parallel currencies to circulate without any one currency receiving any special recognition or favor from the government. Fiat paper monetary standards throughout history have always collapsed due to their inflationary nature, and our current fiat paper standard will be no different. The Federal Reserve is currently sowing the seeds of its own destruction through its loose and reckless monetary policy. The day of reckoning may still be many years in the future, but given the lack of understanding on the part of the Federal Reserve's decision makers, it is quickly coming upon us.

Incidentally and ironically archrivals Ron Paul and Fed Chair Ben Bernanke had a face to face breakfast meeting the following day.

Here’s the Wall Street Journal Blog reporting on what transpired.

Still, Wednesday’s breakfast brought together two figures who publicly agree on very little. A longtime critic of paper currency and fan of the gold standard, Mr. Paul’s fiery Fed-bashing has enthused his campaign trail supporters, who often start rallies with loud chants of “end the Fed!”

Mr. Bernanke, meanwhile, dedicated a significant chunk of his first lecture at George Washington University in March to enumerating the flaws associated with a system in which the dollar is valued at a fixed price per unit of gold.

So did Wednesday’s meeting overturn any deep-set beliefs?

“He’s for the gold standard now,” joked Mr. Paul.

End the Fed. End Central Banking. End the politicization of money.

Gold Standard Years: Era of Relative Stability

Author and Bloomberg columnist Amity Shlaes defends the performance of the gold standard from mainstream critics.

The record of gold’s performance in all economies over the past century is not all “terrible.” Especially not in relation to areas that concern us today: growth, inflation or the frequency of bank crises. The problem here may lie not with the gold bugs but with those who work so hard to isolate them.

Gold’s Real Record

Conveniently enough, the gold record happens to have been assembled recently by a highly credentialed team at the Bank of England. In a December 2011 bank report, the authors Oliver Bush, Katie Farrant and Michelle Wright review three eras: the period of a traditional gold standard (1870-1913); the period of a gold-standard variant, the Bretton Woods gold-exchange standard (1948 to 1972); and a period of flexible exchange rates (1972-2008).

The report then looks at annual real growth per capita worldwide, over many nations. Such growth, they find, was stronger in the recent non-gold-standard modern period, averaging an annual increase of 1.8 percent per capita, than in the classical gold-standard period before 1913, when real per- capita gross domestic product increased 1.3 percent annually. Give a point to the gold disdainers.

But the authors also find that in the gold exchange standard years of 1948 to 1972 the world averaged annual per- capita growth of 2.8 percent, higher than the recent gold-free era. The gold exchange standard is a variant of the gold standard. That outcome doesn’t tell you we must go back to the gold exchange standard yesterday. But it does suggest that figuring out how the standard worked might prove a worthy, or at least not a ridiculous, endeavor.

Gold shone in other ways. In a gold-standard regime, money is backed by gold, so it’s impossible, or at least more difficult, for governments to inflate. Naturally the gold standard and Bretton Woods years therefore enjoyed lower rates of inflation compared with the most recent era. The gold standard endures a reputation for causing more banking crises than other monetary regimes. The Bank of England paper suggests gold stabilizes banks: The incidence of banking crises in the non-gold-standard period is higher than the incidence in the two gold periods.

“Overall the gold standard appeared to perform reasonably well against its financial stability and allocative efficiency objectives,” wrote Bush, Farrant and Wright.

Stable Markets

Markets and countries enjoyed relative stability in gold- standard years, and capital in those years flowed to worthy growth-generating projects. The main sacrifice in gold regimes that the authors identify is that governments lose authority to micromanage domestic economies. But given governments’ records, that may not be such a bad thing, either.

The gold standard essentially distilled or detached money from politics, by placing tethers on the spending abilities of politicians.

And this has been the key reason why politicians, their allies and captured institutions everywhere have worked fervently and in complicity to mangle or contort gold’s relatively better track record and or even discreetly attempted to expunge gold’s role from the pages of history books.

As the champion of sound money Professor Ludwig von Mises once wrote,

The excellence of the gold standard is to be seen in the fact that it renders the determination of the monetary unit's purchasing power independent of the policies of governments and political parties. Furthermore, it prevents rulers from eluding the financial and budgetary prerogatives of the representative assemblies. Parliamentary control of finances works only if the government is not in a position to provide for unauthorized expenditures by increasing the circulating amount of fiat money. Viewed in this light, the gold standard appears as an indispensable implement of the body of constitutional guarantees that make the system of representative government function.

The mainstream may deny it, but the way governments, through central banks, have been rapidly and intensely emaciating (or put bluntly destroying) their currencies, we shouldn’t discount that prospective reforms to the current US dollar standard system could partly include the return of gold, or that gold may play a bigger role in the monetary system.

Former World Bank President Robert Zoellick suggested this in 2010, but he may have been pressured by some quarters that prompted for a swift abdication of his earlier position.

Nevertheless the only way to bring back stability is to depoliticize money. This could be attained by first removing the monopoly privileges of government over money and by allowing for currency competition. So markets will determine whether gold will reassume its role or whether other forms of currency systems will emerge.