1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/6497/ron-pauls-case-for-gold/

Ron Paul’s Case for Gold

April 11, 2007 by


Dennis April 11, 2007 at 11:39 am

Does anyone know what became of Lewis Lehrman? Does he still support the gold standard and Austrian economics in general?

If I remember correctly, he ran for a statewide office in New York in the early 1980s and lost a close race.

lester April 11, 2007 at 12:41 pm

I’m reading the old edition of this book and all i have to say is the blurb from jesse helms better be on the new one

Leonard Giaccone April 13, 2007 at 8:47 am

Will someone explain to me how profiteering in gold can be prevented when
there is a fixed amount of gold and we are in an era which is pre-singularity?
By singularity I mean that the advance of technology is so rapid that we stand at the knee of an exponential curve in human productivity which will usher in a a surge of productivity which is unlike any experienced by the Human race.
Now with (relatively) fixed amount of gold, which by definition cannot represent thewealth of a post-industrial society, when gold backed money exists, then gold must increase in value as the amount, complexity, and usefulness of goods increases (gold cannot keep pace). Thus persons who hoard gold under there conditions must become wealthy simply by holding that commodity. This tendancy will inhibit commerce such that the wealth produced will lag the ability to ptoduce it since little will be available for investment, while the hoarders rebury their gold. The fact that the amount of gold is fixed and the amount of wealth is not makes a gold currency a natural for manipulation by greeedy entrepreneurs? No?

gene berman April 14, 2007 at 8:22 am

Leonard Giaccone:

I don’t mean my comments to demean but you seem totally unfamiliar with Austrian (particularly Mises’) views on monetary matters (as rather thoroughly treated in HUMAN ACTION).

It is true that, whatever is considered money, whether one thing or several, attains valuation in peoples’ minds related to its quantity; but there’s never “too little” or “too much” except in the sense that money is ALWAYS “scarce”–in the same sense as are ALL OTHER economic goods. (Their scarcity is precisely what makes them “economic” goods in the first place.)

It may be an unrelated matter–or I may be too old to comprehend clearly–but I cannot begin to see that we’re on the verge of such an enormous increase in human productivity. It’s true that we’ve experienced a huge surge, especially as a result of dramatic increases in machine-aided information processing capabilities; maybe similar-scale advances will occur in the future but that’s not inevitable. But you seem to ignore that the entire rationale for production is consumption and that the overwhelming numbers of people in the world have been enabled, by such advances, to both produce and consume more–not less–even as their absolute numbers have increased vastly. (In other words, almost everything in which comparison can be made has become cheaper, in terms of the human effort required to obtain, as a direct result of such increase in production.) What is your fear for a future in which everything people need or want is even more abundant than now?

Austrians do not subscribe to a monetery view in which gold (or, indeed, anything else used as money) “represents” anything other than what it is; all are potentially exchangeable–they’re commodities–and some, because of characteristic utility in facilitating exhange, have come to be favored for that purpose. There’s neither drama nor threat in that scenario.

I don’t know whether you’re actually interested in these matters or not–they are puzzling and quite often cause people to wonder. But I’d emphasize that ther’s simply no other way to understand such matters than to read Mises.

David White April 14, 2007 at 9:21 am

Leonard Giaccone,

Here are two articles that should help you put matters in perspective. The first one presents the “Hard Truths” about what the corruption of money and the demise of the “dollar” (actually, the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Note) portends, while the second one describes how 100% gold-backed digitual money would work — and indeed is already working (third link).




David White April 14, 2007 at 9:27 am

gene berman,

Here is what Leonard is talking about in terms of the exponential growth of technology — http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0134.html?printable=1
— a mainstream topic in the scientific community that is now being discussed seriously in Congress — http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2007/03/congress_and_th.html

gene berman April 14, 2007 at 5:49 pm


It’s a matter of fact (and has been for a very long time): the one thing there’s never been a shortage of (and never will be) is bullshit–and no need for any bulls, either!

Me, I’m just waiting around (and hoping to die of global warming).

David White April 14, 2007 at 7:47 pm

gene berman,

Whatever you die from, it won’t global warming, my guess being that it will be from a mind that has lost the ability to expand.

Unfortunately, you’ve got a lot of company.

RogerM April 14, 2007 at 11:12 pm

The 19th and 20th centuries gave us a glimpse of the future with the enormous productivity gains made during those 200 years. Those productivity gains have made goods much cheaper relative to services. Productivity in services, such as doctors treating patients, financial services, entertainment, education, etc., grows much more slowly than in manufacturing, so the prices of services continue to climb. For example, in the 1960′s pro football players had to have a job in the off season to make a living; now they’re millionaires in a few years. Also, as products become cheaper, and people become richer, people will demand more services and we’ll head toward an economy like the past, only it will be the middle class, instead of the wealthy, who will hire people to tend their lawns, do their shopping, cook for them, raise their kids, entertain them, etc., so that they can have more free time.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: