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: 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)

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.

The Deepening Gold Markets of Asia: Hong Kong Opens New Gold Storage

Gold markets in Asia will get a huge boost from the opening of Hong Kong’s largest gold storage

From Bloomberg,

Hong Kong’s largest gold-storage facility, which can hold about 22 percent of the bullion now in Fort Knox, will open in September to meet rising demand from banks and the wealthy, according to owner Malca-Amit Global Ltd.

The facility, located on the ground floor of a building within the international airport compound, has capacity for 1,000 metric tons, said Joshua Rotbart, general manager for the Hong Kong-based company’s Malca-Amit Precious Metals unit. Two of the vaults may hold assets, including gold, for banks and financial institutions, and others will be used for diamonds, jewelry, fine art and precious metals, said Rotbart.

The move in Hong Kong reflects increased demand for gold in Asia even as the commodity struggles to sustain its rally into a 12th year. Gold-demand growth in China, the world’s second- largest user after India last year, is slowing, according to the World Gold Council. Vault charges will depend on each customer’s operations, according to Rotbart, who declined to give a figure for the venture’s cost beyond millions of dollars.

Reports attribute this to the growing wealth in Asia, from the same article…

Asia-Pacific millionaires outnumbered those in North America for the first time last year, according to Capgemini SA and Royal Bank of Canada’s wealth-management unit. The number of individuals in the region with at least $1 million in investable assets rose 1.6 percent to 3.37 million, helped by increases in China and Indonesia, according to the firms’ World Wealth Report, released last month. So-called high-net-worth individuals in North America dropped 1.1 percent to 3.35 million.

Gold markets in Asia will likely become more competitive, from the same article…

The new storage facility will compete with services offered by the Airport Authority Hong Kong, which began storage operations at a 340 square meter site in 2009 for government institutions, commodity exchanges, bullion banks, refiners, wealthy individuals and exchange-traded funds. Capacity is reviewed on a regular basis to ensure there is adequate storage over the medium term, the authority said in a statement.

Singapore’s Push

Singapore is also among economies in Asia vying for a greater share of the bullion trade. In February, the government announced a plan to exempt investment-grade gold, silver and platinum from a goods and services tax, starting from October. The aim is to raise the city-state’s share of the global gold trade to as much as 15 percent in five to 10 years from about 2 percent, according to IE Singapore, the external trade agency.

Competitive gold markets are signs of the burgeoning free markets in Asia.

Besides, gold has been embedded in the culture for many Asian nations (e.g. India, Vietnam, Malaysia, China, etc…), which I think is why the “gold as money” theme will be more receptive to Asians.

Yet this seems to exclude the Philippines, where much of the public still cling to the romanticized notion that the US dollar represents as THE ultimate currency—this seems tied to the popular social democratic mindset which gives mandate to the political economy of state (crony) capitalism.

I believe that the Asia’s blossoming gold market has been more than just about the showcase of wealth, but about gold as insurance…which essentially may pave way for gold to reclaim its role as money.

Perhaps this may signal that Asia may lead the world towards the restitution of sound money.

Do We Need Central Banks?

Tim Price at the Sovereign Man asks why the need for a central bank? (bold emphasis original)

A typical if feeble answer is that we need a lender of last resort. To which the answer is… Why? Why do we need a government-appointed entity to support banks that get in over their heads?

A typical answer is that if our banks start failing, our society starts going down the toilet. (It already has, but never mind.)

So now we have the worst of all possible worlds. Our banks are already failing, in the sense of no longer functioning according to the principles of offering an economic rate to depositors and offering economic funding to borrowers.

Plus, now we have ended up with a handful of quasi-nationalised banking group zombies that appear to be being run for the sole purpose of being granted dollops of money that they are free to hoard whenever the central bank deems it appropriate to depreciate our currencies some more.

If our banks were free to fail, a) we would have no need of a central bank, and b) we would have no need for banking guarantees.

Banking deposit agreements would simply come with a giant ‘Caveat Emptor’ on them, and depositors might be able to start earning a positive real interest rate on their savings again.

Abolishing central banks and their core functions would have the happy and non-trivial side effect of reintroducing something akin to sound money into the world economy, rather than live with permanent inflation and have the entire economy held hostage by banking interests.

In reality central banks exists as backstop financiers to the welfare-warfare state. For instance, wars has been facilitated and enabled by the existence of central banks.

Professor Gary North explains

The sinews of war are strengthened by central banking. This is why textbooks praise the Bank of England. It let the British fight longer wars and more destructive wars. The message: get a central bank for your nation, so that your politicians can declare war more readily and stay in that war far longer.

Central banks signify as central planning and the politicization of money. They are part of the 10 planks of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto.

Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Yes it's a delusion to equate capitalism with 'communist' central banking.

Central banks also promote the interests of the banking and political class at the expense of society through inflationism which not only causes boom bust cycles, but importantly has been diminishing the purchasing power of our currencies. This why a huge amount of the public’s resources have been funneled to insolvent “zombie” banks and bankrupt states.

And this is why once zombie institutions become desperate they resort to other measures of financial repression and take the political route towards despotism. And this is also why the private sector will always become the scapegoat for policy errors. That's until people don't understand the essence of central banking.

Yes, I agree Mr. Price, we need the de-politicization of money or the return to sound money through the free markets.

End the Fed. End all central banking.

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.

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.

Video: Ron Paul's Plan for Monetary Freedom

In the following interview with Judge Andrew Napolitano, Ron Paul discusses the possible transition process towards 'sound money' or monetary freedom from the current fiat standard.

Gold as Money: China’s Gold ATMs and Donald Trump’s Gold Security Deposit

We are witnessing more signs of gold’s reassuming its place as money.

From Forbes, (bold emphasis mine)

China’s got the gold bug. Recently, the government allowed citizens to actually own gold bullion. And now, starting on Sept 23, Chinese people can buy gold bars directly from vending machines.

Gold has caught on like a wrong and oversold political narrative. Is this WMD, or is gold for real?

The China machines, made by German firm TG Gold Super Market, is the first of its kind there, but are already up and running in Las Vegas and Boca Rotan in the U.S., as well as Abu Dhabi, Germany, Spain and Italy. The ATMs dispense gold bars weighing up to 2.5 kilograms and work just like the normal ATMs. The machines can accept both cash and credit cards.

The cash-for-gold machines will be on trial at Beijing’s upscale night clubs and private banks during the initial period for security reasons.

I posted Germany’s first gold vending machine or ATMs in 2009 here.

With gold more accessible to the public, it won’t be long when the function of payment and settlement in the marketplace will include gold bars or coins. (That’s if governments won’t engage in gold confiscation)

In fact, Donald Trump may be setting a precedent on this.

Mr Trump recently accepted gold bars as payment for Security Deposit for property rentals.

From the Wall Street Journal,

On Thursday, the newest tenant in Donald Trump's 40 Wall Street, a 70-story skyscraper in Manhattan's Financial District, will hand Mr. Trump a security deposit worth about $176,000. No money will change hands—just three 32-ounce bars of gold, each about the size of a television remote control.

The occasion will mark the first time the Trump Organization has accepted 99.9% pure gold bullion, rather than cash, as a deposit on a commercial lease. The tenant, precious-metals dealer Apmex, will sign a 10-year lease for 40 Wall's 50th floor at a leasing rate of about $50 a square foot, according to Apmex Chief Executive Michael R. Haynes. The company is promoting the use of gold as a replacement for cash in some situations.

As the great Ludwig von Mises wrote, (bold emphasis mine)

Under the gold standard gold is money and money is gold. It is immaterial whether or not the laws assign legal tender quality only to gold coins minted by the government. What counts is that these coins really contain a fixed weight of gold and that every quantity of bullion can be transformed into coins. Under the gold standard the dollar and the pound sterling were merely names for a definite weight of gold, within very narrow margins precisely determined by the laws. We may call such a sort of money commodity money.

Sound money could be in the future as the current paper money based system self-destructs.

Hot: Wikileaks Exposes Gold Price Suppression

Writes Chris Powell, Secretary/Treasurer of Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc. (GATA), published at the goldseek.com (bold emphasis mine)

China knows that the U.S. government and its allies in Western Europe strive to suppress the price of gold, and the U.S. government knows that China knows, according to a 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing to the State Department in Washington.

The cable, published in the latest batch of U.S. State Department cables obtained by Wikileaks, summarizes several commentaries in Chinese news media on April 28, 2009. One of those commentaries is attributed to the Chinese newspaper Shijie Xinwenbao (World News Journal), published by the Chinese government's foreign radio service, China Radio International. The cable's summary reads:

"According to China's National Foreign Exchanges Administration, China's gold reserves have recently increased. Currently, the majority of its gold reserves have been located in the United States and European countries. The U.S. and Europe have always suppressed the rising price of gold. They intend to weaken gold's function as an international reserve currency. They don't want to see other countries turning to gold reserves instead of the U.S. dollar or euro. Therefore, suppressing the price of gold is very beneficial for the U.S. in maintaining the U.S. dollar's role as the international reserve currency. China's increased gold reserves will thus act as a model and lead other countries toward reserving more gold. Large gold reserves are also beneficial in promoting the internationalization of the renminbi."

It's hard to believe that, two years later, China is still leaving so much of its gold with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Bank of England when even little Venezuela has publicly figured out the gold price suppression component of the Western fractional reserve banking system and is attempting to repatriate its gold from the Bank of England and various Western bullion banks:

http://www.gata.org/node/10281

http://www.gata.org/node/10286

It is already a matter of record that China dissembled about its gold reserves for the six years prior to the public recalculation of its gold reserves in April 2009 that prompted the commentary in Shijie Xinwenbao. At that time China announced that its gold reserves were not the 600 tonnes it had been reporting each year for the previous six years but rather 76 percent more, 1,054 tonnes:

http://www.gata.org/node/9545

ZeroHedge, which seems to have broken the story of the Beijing embassy cable this evening, comments:

"Wondering why gold at $1,850 is cheap, or why gold at double that price will also be cheap, or, frankly, at any price? Because, as the following leaked cable explains, gold is, to China at least, nothing but the opportunity cost of destroying the dollar's reserve status. Putting that into dollar terms is, therefore, impractical at best and illogical at worst. We have a suspicion that the following cable from the U.S. embassy in China is about to go not viral but very much global, and prompt all those mutual fund managers who are on the golden sidelines to dip a toe in the 24-karat pool."

The ZeroHedge commentary can be found here:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/wikileaks-discloses-reasons-behind-chinas-...

In addition to fund managers throughout the world, this cable may be of special interest to the gold bears CPM Group Managing Director Jeff Christian, who says he consults with most central banks and that they hardly ever think about gold, and Kitco senior analyst Jon Nadler, who insists that central banks have no interest whatsover in manipulating the gold price.

In fact, of course, gold remains the secret knowledge of the financial universe, and its price is actually the determinant of every other price and value in the world.

The Beijing embassy cable can be found here:

http://cables.mrkva.eu/cable.php?id=204405

And, just in case, at GATA's Internet site here:

http://www.gata.org/files/USEmbassyBeijingCable-04-28-2011.txt

This only exhibits how the welfare-warfare state-central banking-banking cartel have been deeply averse to reinstate a sound money regime which extrapolates to a dilution of their political power, and thus the continuing saga of the war on gold (sound money) and on free markets.

Do Central Banks Uphold Or Undermine Free Market Principles?

When I read Professor Art Carden’s statement from this article,

Far too often, people use terms like "capitalism" and "socialism" sloppily, either because they don't understand them or because the words make for cheap but effective (albeit inaccurate) political rhetoric. The Great Conversation suffers because of it.

It struck me that many arguments supposedly for the so-called advancement of the political philosophy of libertarianism, free markets and or classical liberalism have precisely been anchored on this—rhetoric misrepresented as principles.

And this is exactly the essence of my last article, The Middle Of The Road Policy Of A Local Free Market Group. Where I was earlier disappointed about the issue of principles, I was even more dismayed by the responses.

Given the benefit of the doubt that perhaps my article or my “spin” could have lacked clarity, or that specialization may have lead to the misunderstanding of my message, my argument against the positive relationship between central banking and the free market was certainly not about utility nor was it about market failure.

By utility, I mean it would seem misguided to compare what is essentially is a monopoly—operating on the power of coercion, funded by taxpayer resources and whose decision making process by the authorities are (externality) risk borne by the taxpayers—with private and semi-private enterprises operating mostly on a competitive environment.

By market failure, the standard statist ‘Paul Krugman’ tactic—throw up a strawman, assail or shoot it down with econometric gibberish or economic models, and declare “market failure”, thus justifying government intervention—eludes the question about this relationship between free markets and the central bank.

The fact that the local central bank began only in the Philippines in 1949, goes to show that even in our colonial past the nation has survived without it, thereby, disproving the presumed sine qua non nature of central banking to the local economy.

As my colleague Paul How writes in his 'as-yet unpublished manuscript', the “Philippine Banking And The Business Cycle” about how the domestic monetary system operated, (bold emphasis mine)

During the 19^th century, the monetary system had a gold standard in place, where each monetary note was presumed to redeem a fixed amount of gold...

Clearly, people, in their private capacity, preferred the use of a medium of exchange whose value was based not on government decree but on the amount of rare metals contained in the item. Even after the Spanish handed the Philippines over to the United States in December 1898, Filipinos continued using the Mexican coin, much to the chagrin of US officials keen on imposing their culture on the new colony’s inhabitants.

Where half of our transactions are settled for by money which is issued by an institution owned and controlled by the government, this extrapolates to half of our trading activities under the indirect purview of the government. Thus it is very important to put in question the role of such institution under the Free Market precept.

Ultimately, what for stands as the most important issue is through this question:

Do central banks promote or undermine the Free Market Principles?

This brings us back to definition. A free market, according to Wikipedia, is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to enforce private contracts and the ownership of property.

If freedom to contract and private property rights are the key pillars of free market principles as stated by such definition, do central bank activities promote these?

As a side note, under classical liberalism I would not say that free market is the absence of intervention or regulation, but instead a free market is self regulated by (mostly non-state) institutions operating under the rule of law.

Nevertheless the entire concept of freedom to contract and private property or even the rule of law are put into a test under the central bank’s operations: (bold highlights under below quotes are my emphasis)

1. Inflation of the monetary system

Thus, credit expansion unavoidably results in the economic crisis. In either of the two alternatives, the artificial boom is doomed. In the long run, it must collapse. The short-run effect, the period of prosperity, may last sometimes several years. While it lasts, the authorities, the expanding banks and their public relations agencies arrogantly defy the warnings of the economists and pride themselves on the manifest success of their policies. But when the bitter end comes, they wash their hands of it.

The artificial prosperity cannot last because the lowering of the rate of interest, purely technical as it was and not corresponding to the real state of the market data, has misled entrepreneurial calculations. It has created the illusion that certain projects offer the chances of profitability when, in fact, the available supply of factors of production was not sufficient for their execution. Deluded by false reckoning, businessmen have expanded their activities beyond the limits drawn by the state of society’s wealth. They have underrated the degree of the scarcity of factors of production and overtaxed their capacity to produce. In short: they have squandered scarce capital goods by malinvestment.

Ludwig von Mises, The Causes of Economic Crisis,

Does price signalling distortion, reduction of purchasing power of money and capital consumption from these forces represent as free market principle? The same question should all be applied on the following aspects shown below.

2. The nature of central bank’s fractional reserve system

As Huerta de Soto points out, the problem of the tragedy of the commons always appears when property rights are defined improperly. In the case of fractional reserve banking, bankers can infringe on property rights because it is not clearly defined who owns the deposit.

When customers make their deposits, the promise is that the deposit is always available for withdrawal. However, the deposits, by the very definition of fractional reserve banking, are never completely available to all customers at one time. This is because banks will take a part of these deposits and loan them out to other customers. In other words, they issue fiduciary media. By issuing more property titles than property entrusted to them, the banks violate the traditional property rights of their customers. (One of the most important contributions of Huerta de Soto's exhaustive book is to demonstrate how banking developed historically and that fractional reserve banking evolved as a perversion of deposit banking.)

Philipp Bagus, The Commons and the Tragedy of Banking

3. Externality costs from the knowledge problem

The odds that 19 men and women (a.k.a. the Federal Open Market Committee) will be able to select the overnight interest rate that keeps the U.S. economy growing at its potential in perpetuity are next to nil.

There would be a huge outcry if the Fed set the price of oil or copper or soybeans. Yet we accept the central bank as a price setter, a monopolist, when it comes to the interbank lending rate.

Caroline Baum Capitalism Still Has Legs That Are Long and Sexy

3. Operates from an environment of arbitrary rules

The concept of the rule of law in jurisprudence and political philosophy has several dimensions. At its core is the classical liberal principle of nondiscretionary governance that stands in contrast to the arbitrary or discretionary rule of those people currently in authority. In shorthand, either we have the rule of law or we have the rule of authorities. Under the rule of law, government agencies do nothing but faithfully enforce statutes already on the books. Under the rule of authorities, those in positions of executive authority have the discretion to make up substantive new decrees as they go along, and to forego enforcing the statutes on the books.

Dr. Lawrence H. White Rule of Law or the Rule of Central Bankers?

Think currency interventions in behalf of exporters and OFWs at the expense of importers and consumers via elevated prices of goods and services.

4. Operate on persistent political pressures

To put it into the hands of an institution which is protected against competition, which can force us to accept the money, which is subject to incessant political pressure, such an authority will not ever again give us good money

Friedrich August von Hayek A Free-Market Monetary System

5. Choosing winners and losers

The real reason for the adoption of the Federal Reserve, and its promotion by the large banks, was the exact opposite of their loudly trumpeted motivations.

Rather than create an institution to curb their own profits on behalf of the public interest, the banks sought a Central Bank to enhance their profits by permitting them to inflate far beyond the bounds set by free-market competition.

Murray N. Rothbard, The Case Against the Fed

6. Crony Capitalism

The answer was the same in both cases: the big businessmen and financiers had to form an alliance with the opinion molding classes in society, in order to engineer the consent of the public by means of crafty and persuasive propaganda.

Murray N. Rothbard, The Case Against the Fed

7. Promote Government Expansion

While, as we shall see presently, government's exclusive right to issue and regulate money has certainly not helped to give us a better money than we would otherwise have had, and probably a very much worse one, it has of course become a chief instrument for prevailing governmental policies and profoundly assisted the general growth of governmental power. Much of contemporary politics is based on the assumption that government has the power to create and make people accept any amount of additional money it wishes. Governments will for this reason strongly defend their traditional rights. But for the same reason it is also most important that they should be taken from them.

A government ought not, any more than a private person, to be able (at least in peace-time) to take whatever it wants, but be limited strictly to the use of the means placed at its disposal by the representatives of the people, and to be unable to extend its resources beyond what the people have agreed to let it have. The modern expansion of government was largely assisted by the possibility of covering deficits by issuing money-usually on the pretence that it was thereby creating employment. It is perhaps significant, however, that Adam Smith [54, p. 687] does not mention the control of the issue of money among the 'only three duties [which] according to the system of natural liberty, the sovereign has to attend to'.

Friedrich August von Hayek Denationalization of money

In my view, the fundamental case for free market capitalism begins with sound money and sound banking institutions (whether it is a 100% gold reserve or a free banking standard).

Gold And Sound Money

Sometimes I am predisposed to think that gold may be in a bubble, even if I know it isn’t.

This happens when I get feedback of gold’s alleged immutable role as a wealth preservation asset especially in the supposed prospects of an ‘Armageddon’ of either the US dollar or the US economy.

Chart from Casey Research

I don’t know whether gold’s successive rise maybe instilling a false sense of security or may be leading some people to become proselytes or cult followers of the ‘gold bug’ dogma.

However, given that the reactions I get seemingly emanate from false premises, or from the idea that gold functions as an anti-US dollar trade, where in fact gold has been rising against ALL currencies, I think it is more about the former.

In addition, when one becomes an idealist who aspires to share of gold’s ‘wealth preservation’ status as a social mission, it would seem as wrong source of advocacy.

For one, it represents a false belief to think that gold prices as only moving in one direction enough for it to function as an enduring ‘wealth preservation’ asset.

While it is true that gold has functioned as money over many generations, gold has likewise shown periods of volatility as shown by the 650 year chart courtesy of chartrus.com or sharelynx.

In other words, gold like all other commodities is subject to the forces of demand and supply.

The main difference with gold from other commodities is that gold and the precious metal family has demonstrated special qualities (marketability, divisibility, durability, scarcity, high value per unit weight, homogeneity and a stable supply) that have made people reconsider them to discharge of an additional role-money.

Second, the rejuvenated price of gold has mostly occurred after the Nixon Shock or the closing of the gold window in August 15, 1975 that has transitioned the monetary framework from that Bretton Woods gold-US dollar convertibility to the US dollar standard.

Chart courtesy of Wiltontech

The implication is that with the current monetary platform unanchored to commodities, global central bankers and their respective political authorities have been free to inflate on their currencies to meet many unsustainable political agenda. And the repercussions of these actions appear to be coming home to roost.

Thus, the rising prices of gold, not exclusively to the US dollar, could most likely be symptomatic of the escalation of these ongoing inflationist maladies around the world.

And a continuity of gold’s rise would only suggest of further stress in the current US dollar centric fiat standard.

Put differently, rising gold prices may be pointing to a prospective inclusion of gold in the reconfiguration or reform of the incumbent currency architecture. World Bank’s Robert Zoellig recent overtures may be interpreted as a gradual warming of authorities on such a possibility.

The fact that current conditions have been prompting changes to peoples perception of gold, which includes political entities, implies that the gold’s current price trend could reverse once inflationism would be recognized as the source of economic and financial ailments and subsequently addressed.

While the odds of this may be slim for the moment, worsening inflation conditions or the public’s sudden recognition of the inflation tax, may radically alter this mentality.

The point is, it would be wrong to view gold prices as perpetually headed skywards because people act and react based on the unfolding conditions. And the same applies with government policies, policymakers respond to changes in political conditions or sentiment especially when their privileges are under threat.

In short, past performance may not be indicative of future results.

As caveat, this is NOT to say that I have changed my stance on gold as I remain steeply bullish.

The lesson I want to impart is that no asset can be seen as static or even permanently risk free.

Lastly, it would be wrong to worship gold as if contains some mythical powers or deified like the Biblical idol, the golden calf.

The value of gold represents what society perceives it to be.

And if there is anything that gold has symbolized in the past, it is no less than sound money on the framework of economic freedom.

As Ludwig von Mises explained,

It is impossible to grasp the meaning of the idea of sound money if one does not realize that it was devised as an instrument for the protection of civil liberties against despotic inroads on the part of governments. Ideologically it belongs in the same class with political constitutions and bills of rights. The demand for constitutional guarantees and for bills of rights was a reaction against arbitrary rule and the nonobservance of old customs by kings. The postulate of sound money was first brought up as a response to the princely practice of debasing the coinage. It was later carefully elaborated and perfected in the age which — through the experience of the American continental currency, the paper money of the French Revolution and the British restriction period — had learned what a government can do to a nation's currency system...

Thus the sound-money principle has two aspects. It is affirmative in approving the market's choice of a commonly used medium of exchange. It is negative in obstructing the government's propensity to meddle with the currency system.

So any advocacy should center not on the metal itself but on the essence of what gold truly stands for-Liberty and Economic Freedom.

End The Fed: The Apostasy of Ambrose Evans Pritchard

Ben Bernanke and the US Federal Reserve just lost a popular mainstream media supporter.

Telegraph’s Ambrose Evans Pritchard does a turnabout…

I apologise to readers around the world for having defended the emergency stimulus policies of the US Federal Reserve, and for arguing like an imbecile naif that the Fed would not succumb to drug addiction, political abuse, and mad intoxicated debauchery, once it began taking its first shots of quantitative easing.

My pathetic assumption was that Ben Bernanke would deploy further QE only to stave off DEFLATION, not to create INFLATION. If the Federal Open Market Committee cannot see the difference, God help America.

We now learn from last week’s minutes that the Fed is willing “to provide additional accommodation if needed to … return inflation, over time, to levels consistent with its mandate.”

NO, NO, NO, this cannot possibly be true.

Ben Bernanke has not only refused to abandon his idee fixe of an “inflation target”, a key cause of the global central banking catastrophe of the last twenty years (because it can and did allow asset booms to run amok, and let credit levels reach dangerous extremes).

Worse still, he seems determined to print trillions of emergency stimulus without commensurate emergency justification to test his Princeton theories, which by the way are as old as the hills. Keynes ridiculed the “tyranny of the general price level” in the early 1930s, and quite rightly so. Bernanke is reviving a doctrine that was already shown to be bunk eighty years ago.

Read the rest here

Nothing is fixed, people’s minds can and has always changed. Parlayed into politics, this only means politics always evolve.

Could Mr. Pritchard’s volte-face presage on the emergence of mainstream’s clamor to end the fiat money central banking regime or a return to sound money?

Is Sound Money Incompatible With Democracy?

One of the recent feedbacks I received is the attribution that sound money can’t be compatible with democracy. The implication is that inflationism is an indispensable instrument for democratic survival.

Of course, this assertion accounts no less than an arrant bunk (nonsense) for the following reasons:

One, this serves as an example of argumentum ad populum (appeal to popularity), where the belief of the many holds that the argument is true.

Just because many seek to live off at the expense of the others this doesn’t mean that their demands are necessarily justifiable or valid and should be provided for.

This is similar to the unwisdom of the crowds which we have recently critiqued. Moreover, these proponents seem oblivious to the fact that populist policies tend to self-destruct overtime. What is unsustainable won’t last.

Second, the alleged incompatibility is also misleading because this operates on the premises of the 'tyranny of the majority' or the rule of the mob.

Say for example, 10 persons get stuck in a remote island where only one of them is a woman. Yet 6 of the male elected to force themselves on her. Is the majority’s action justified? The answer is obviously NO. The means to an end isn’t justified by mere numbers.

What is needed is the rule of law, of which inflationism chafes at.

As Friedrich A. von Hayek wrote in the Decline of the Rule of Law, Part 1

The main point is that, in the use of its coercive powers, the discretion of the authorities should be so strictly bound by laws laid down beforehand that the individual can foresee with fair certainty how these powers will be used in particular instances; and that the laws themselves are truly general and create no privileges for class or person because they are made in view of their long-run effects and therefore in necessary ignorance of who will be the particular individuals who will be benefited or harmed by them. That the law should be an instrument to be used by the individuals for their ends and not an instrument used upon the people by the legislators is the ultimate meaning of the Rule of Law.

Three, the collectivist charade is to sell popular wisdom to the economic ignoramus. The collectivists forget to tell everyone that inflationism is a redistribution scheme which benefits the minority at the expense of society.

As Jörg Guido Hülsmann wrote in Deflation and Liberty (emphasis added)

``Inflation is an unjustifiable redistribution of income in favor of those who receive the new money and money titles first, and to the detriment of those who receive them last. In practice the redistribution always works out in favor of the fiat-money producers themselves (whom we misleadingly call central banks) and of their partners in the banking sector and at the stock exchange. And of course inflation works out to the advantage of governments and their closest allies in the business world. Inflation is the vehicle through which these individuals and groups enrich themselves, unjustifiably, at the expense of the citizenry at large. If there is any truth to the socialist caricature of capitalism—an economic system that exploits the poor to the benefit of the rich—then this caricature holds true for a capitalist system strangulated by inflation. The relentless influx of paper money makes the wealthy and powerful richer and more powerful than they would be if they depended exclusively on the voluntary support of their fellow citizens. And because it shields the political and economic establishment of the country from the competition emanating from the rest of society, inflation puts a brake on social mobility. The rich stay rich (longer) and the poor stay poor (longer) than they would in a free society.”

Fourth, what collectivists see as essential is actually the opposite. History reveals that democracy and sound money has had and can have a symbiotic relationship.

In The Gold Standard, Indirect Exchange section of the epic Human Action, Ludwig von Mises wrote, (bold emphasis mine)

``The gold standard was the world standard of the age of capitalism, increasing welfare, liberty, and democracy, both political and economic. In the eyes of the free traders its main eminence was precisely the fact that it was an international standard as required by international trade and the transactions of the international money and capital market. It was the medium of exchange by means of which Western industrialism and Western capital had borne Western civilization into the remotest parts of the earth's surface, everywhere destroying the fetters of age-old prejudices and superstitions, sowing the seeds of new life and new well-being, freeing minds and souls, and creating riches unheard of before. It accompanied the triumphal unprecedented progress of Western liberalism ready to unite all nations into a community of free nations peacefully cooperating with one another.”

Finally, the hucksters of false promises of inflationism are no less than blinded by economic dogma whose foundations seem to operate outside the realm of the law of scarcity—yes fantasyland.

As Ron Paul wrote on Why Governments Hate Gold, (bold emphasis mine)

``Time and again it has been proven that the Keynesian system of big government and fiat paper money are abject failures in the long run. However, the nature of government is to ignore reality when there is an avenue that allows growth in power and control. Thus, most politicians and economists will ignore the long-term damage of Keynesianism in the early stage of a bubble when there is the illusion of prosperity, suggesting that the basic laws of economics had been repealed.”

Hardly does any of these fanatics have ever explained why throughout the centuries, experiments with paper money has ALWAYS failed.

Of course if one believes redistribution is a way or a path to prosperity, then apparently they are merely deluding themselves.

As Henry Hazlitt once wrote,

Any attempt to equalize wealth or income by forced redistribution must only tend to destroy wealth and income. Historically the best the would-be equalizers have ever succeeded in doing is to equalize downward. This has even been caustically described as their intention.

The collectivists amuse us with their logical fallacies, incoherent theories, misleading definitions, short term nostrums, and misinterpretation and deliberate twisting of facts.

For them it’s not about being right, but about blind faith.

Beware of false prophets.

Bring Back The Gold Standard?

A splendid article in the Wall Street Journal, from Ms. Judy Shelton, opines of the return to the gold standard to compete with modern Central Banking.

Why? Because of the insidious and nasty impacts of policy prompted inflation….

Excerpts from Ms Shelton’s articles (all bold highlights mine)

``Under a gold standard, if people think the paper money printed by government is losing value, they have the right to switch to gold. Fiat money -- i.e., currency with no intrinsic worth that government has decreed legal tender -- loses its value when government creates more than can be absorbed by the productive real economy. Too much fiat money results in inflation -- which pools in certain sectors at first, such as housing or financial assets, but ultimately raises prices in general.

``Inflation is the enemy of capitalism, chiseling away at the foundation of free markets and the laws of supply and demand. It distorts price signals, making retailers look like profiteers and deceiving workers into thinking their wages have gone up. It pushes families into higher income tax brackets without increasing their real consumption opportunities.

``In short, inflation undermines capitalism by destroying the rationale for dedicating a portion of today's earnings to savings. Accumulated savings provide the capital that finances projects that generate higher future returns; it's how an economy grows, how a society reaches higher levels of prosperity. But inflation makes suckers out of savers.

``If capitalism is to be preserved, it can't be through the con game of diluting the value of money. People see through such tactics; they recognize the signs of impending inflation. When we see Congress getting ready to pay for 40% of 2009 federal budget expenditures with money created from thin air, there's no getting around it. Our money will lose its capacity to serve as an honest measure, a meaningful unit of account. Our paper currency cannot provide a reliable store of value.

Thus, the importance to bring about governance based on the principles of sound money…

``So we must first establish a sound foundation for capitalism by permitting people to use a form of money they trust. Gold and silver have traditionally served as currencies -- and for good reason. A study by two economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Arthur Rolnick and Warren Weber, concluded that gold and silver standards consistently outperform fiat standards. Analyzing data over many decades for a large sample of countries, they found that "every country in our sample experienced a higher rate of inflation in the period during which it was operating under a fiat standard than in the period during which it was operating under a commodity standard."

``Given that the driving force of free-market capitalism is competition, it stands to reason that the best way to improve money is through currency competition. Individuals should be able to choose whether they wish to carry out their personal economic transactions using the paper currency offered by the government, or to conduct their affairs using voluntary private contracts linked to payment in gold or silver.

``Legal tender laws currently favor government-issued money, putting private contracts in gold or silver at a distinct disadvantage. Contracts denominated in Federal Reserve notes are enforced by the courts, whereas contracts denominated in gold are not. Gold purchases are subject to taxes, both sales and capital gains. And while the Constitution specifies that only commodity standards are lawful -- "No state shall coin money, emit bills of credit, or make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts" (Art. I, Sec. 10) -- it is fiat money that enjoys legal tender status and its protections…

Nevertheless, we should learn how the gold standard has contributed immensely to human development, which helped buttress the ethical values in the marketplace.

``Private gold currencies have served as the medium of exchange throughout history -- long before kings and governments took over the franchise. The initial justification for government involvement in money was to certify the weight and fineness of private gold coins. That rulers found it all too tempting to debase the money and defraud its users testifies more to the corruptive aspects of sovereign authority than to the viability of gold-based money.

``Which is why government officials should not now have the last word in determining the monetary measure, especially when they have abused the privilege.

``The same values that will help America regain its economic footing and get back on the path to productive growth -- honesty, reliability, accountability -- should be reflected in our money.

However, economics based on false premises have dominated mainstream thinking which has only misled people…

``Economists who promote the government-knows-best approach of Keynesian economics fail to comprehend the damaging consequences of spurring economic activity through a money illusion. Fiscal "stimulus" at the expense of monetary stability may accommodate the principles of the childless British economist who famously quipped, "In the long run, we're all dead." But it shortchanges future generations by saddling them with undeserved debt obligations.

``There is also the argument that gold-linked money deprives the government of needed "flexibility" and could lead to falling prices. But contrary to fears of harmful deflation, the big problem is not that nominal prices might go down as production declines, but rather that dollar prices artificially pumped up by government deficit spending merely paper over the real economic situation. When the output of goods grows faster than the stock of money, benign deflation can occur -- it happened from 1880 to 1900 while the U.S. was on a gold standard. But the total price-level decline was 10% stretched over 20 years. Meanwhile, the gross domestic product more than doubled.

``At a moment when the world is questioning the virtues of democratic capitalism, our nation should provide global leadership by focusing on the need for monetary integrity. One of the most serious threats to global economic recovery -- aside from inadequate savings -- is protectionism. An important benefit of developing a parallel currency linked to gold is that other countries could likewise permit their own citizens to utilize it. To the extent they did so, a common currency area would be created not subject to the insidious protectionism of sliding exchange rates.”

Yes, while it may seem like a lost cause…bringing back the gold standard would be very ideal as governments hate competition.