Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Is there enough gold in the world to go back to a gold standard?

rated by 0 users
Not Answered This post has 0 verified answers | 6 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 75 Contributor
1,149 Posts
Points 23,875
Freedom4Me73986 posted on Sat, Jul 16 2011 5:11 AM

I saw this on an anti-Ron Paul site today. Some marxist said if America goes back to the gold standard it would either have to buy up all the gold on earth or it would have to find a way to take money out of circulation in order for the amount of money to equal the amount of gold. Is this true?

All Replies

Top 500 Contributor
312 Posts
Points 4,310

As Ludwig von Mises said, it doesn't matter how much there is gold. If there would be only one ounce of gold in whole US, it is possible to tie dollar to that ounce. Gold would just be a little more valuable than now.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
4,249 Posts
Points 70,775

Flaw is in the word "equal". In what sense can the amount of money equal the amount of gold?

2 plus 2 can equal 4 because they are both numbers. Apples cannot equal oranges because they are two different things. They do however both have weight, so that the weight of a certain amount of apples can equal the weight of a certain amount of oranges. But what is being measured when we try to equalize the "amount" of money to the "amount" of gold? That they have the same weight? The same volume?

Maybe they mean the following: If we take all the dollars in existence, they add up to some number, say 50,000,000,000,000 . If we add up all the gold in possesion of the US govt, it adds up to a certain weight, say 1,000,000,000. Then for the govt to be able to exchange all the dollars in the world for gold, they can only do it if an ounce of gold will be exchanged for 50,000 dollars. But this is a mere mathematical fact, and can always be done. No need to take money out of circulation.

Maybe they mean that the price of gold will rise drastically. What of it?


My humble blog

It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
653 Posts
Points 13,185

They probably mean that if we went back to the previous gold standard of a dollar = 1/20 oz.  There are more dollars floating around now and at that rate it might add up to more gold than there is in existence.

So technically, that person is right, but they have no idea what people actually mean when they advocate a gold standard.

they said we would have an unfair fun advantage

"enough about human rights. what about whale rights?" -moondog
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
2,417 Posts
Points 41,720

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
424 Posts
Points 5,980

OP has never read a word from Rothbard on the issue.

Eating Propaganda

What do you mean i don't care how your day was?!

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS