English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I'm posting this again, to ensure answers. Thanks.

2006-08-14 06:15:20 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance Other - Business & Finance

2 answers

Forced citizens to either use the phony printed money or barter. Getting off the gold standard allowed the government to play fast and loose with spending, they'd just print more money.

If people had the option they would have used gold for transactions instead of printed money. Even now gold is a hedge against money printing induced inflation.

2006-08-14 06:39:06 · answer #1 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 0 0

Roadkill is partially right, but the money isn't 'phony' nor was barter a significant factor at that time. Simple fact is that the world doesn't have enough gold to monetize all of the currency being created; the increased demand for gold (to back currency) would have, by itself, created deflation as the price of gold increased. Further, gold is not a very good currency; it's heavy, and hard to transport; moving it from one place to another is expensive and takes too much time. It needs to be insured, if you hold very much of it. It is easily debased by 'clipping' or by diluting the gold content and remaking the coins or bars. It has to be assayed at every transaction to be sure it is pure. But it is a good hedge against run-away inflation.

2006-08-14 14:59:33 · answer #2 · answered by Michael K 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers