From: dsteinbe@nmsu.edu (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: Views? :
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:07:43 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.134148.26485@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>In article <a0R=Lv_@engin.umich.edu> positron@engin.umich.edu (Jonathan Scott Haas) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec13.022756.3194@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>>>
>>[why gold-backed currency?]
>>>
           (stuff deleted)

>>>	Givin all this though can you think of a good commidity for the
>>>modern world?
>>>
>>
>>Look at the free market, pal, look at the free market. It doesn't really
>>matter what gold is *used* for, what matters is that there is a demand
>>for it, and that there is a supply of it. The most useless thing in the
>>world has value if people want it and people can supply it. Gold is a
>>good store of value because it's durable, doesn't rot, decay, or dissolve,
>>and is relatively rare. If you can come up with something else on which
>>to base currency, sounds good to me. As long as it's *something* concrete.
>>I want a guarantee from the government along the lines of, "We're giving
>>you these green pieces of paper to use as currency, and we assure you that
>>you can always exchange five hundred of them for an ounce of gold" or
>>something like that. Without any backing, the government can just print
>>more currency, causing inflation.
>>
>
>	I think your discription of gold is slightly off.  The demand for
>gold is relativly small.  The supply is huge, the major holders of gold
>and the major suppliers, are the people who maintain the high price by
>chocking off supply.  The natural supply of is very big.  As for golds
>physical properties that's true. What I would tend to think might be a
>good medium for exchange that does have an intrinsic value is oil.
>	Sort of like in early America where we used tabacco.
>
This reminds me of the James Blish book _Cities in Flight_.  It was a
science-fiction novel based on the premise that:
1) Longetivity drugs were discovered and
2) A device that could transport whole cities into space was invented.

After a currency collaspe, what ended up being used for the new
currency were the drugs themselves.  This caused a dilemma- should we
used the drugs to extend our lives or should we trade them for the
supplies we need?  Something similar would prob. happen with oil.
With our country needing money in order to pay off our debts (And no
Jeff, this is NOT the time to mention your master plan to eliminate
the debt...) would they enforce a draconian restriction on travel?
And what would this do to the economy...
-David "ZZYZX" Steinberg- King of the ellipses
       (dsteinbe@emmy.nmsu.edu)
**********************************************************************
*"There's a dog in the station  *"I can't believe I'm a junior and a *
* With a bad reputation         * film major, when all I really      *
* That's a sign of the nation's * wanted in this life was to marry a *
* Decay"                        * lobsterman and cook fish."         *
* -Phish                        * -a letter from Christie Searing    *
**********************************************************************



Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,osu.opinion.libertarian,osu.opinion,alt.politics.marrou,cmh.opinion,alt.politics.elections,alt.president.clinton