©2009 Lou Poumakis, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Monday, April 20, 2009
Last modified: Monday, April 20, 2009
The views expressed in this article are those of Lou Poumakis only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Lou Poumakis is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Lou Poumakis of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By Lou Poumakis |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-04-20 07:10:56
As much as I support the use of hard metals (gold, silver) as money, I must take issue with your article. First, the banking crisis did not happen because of God or rejection of God's law. I presume by "God's law" you mean what's written in the Bible. I reject God's law as expressed in that book because I do not believe it is really God's law. To my mind, the version of God represented there is a bastardized, twisted version of God. The real God I know bears little relationship to the God of the Bible, particularly the God of the Old Testament. Yet, I favor the use of hard metals as gold and silver. Clearly, favoring gold and silver does not require what you think of as "God's law." By your argument, my adherence to gold and silver should be impossible, as should the adherence of atheists and agnostics to gold and silver. Given the fact that most of the world is not Christian, yet most of the world preferred the use of gold and silver until the governments of the world (both Christian and otherwise) abandoned them shows quite clearly that "God's law" as you call it had little to do with what happened.
Further, the history of big bankers both prior to the creation of the Fed and after its creation clearly shows that they were generally highly religious and considered themselves Godly and followers of "God's law." While a few were Jewish, the vast majority were Christians who attended church "religiously" (if you'll pardon the play on words). You conveniently ignore this fact. JP Morgan (both Sr. and Jr.) were fervent Episcopalians. Henry P. Davison, a senior partner at the Morgan bank and founder of Banker's Trust as well as one of the authors of the Aldrich Bill, which later became the basis for the Federal Reserve Act, was a life-long Presbyterian known for his generous philanthropic work. His biographer describes how his Uncle Merrick had the most influence on his life and read the scriptures to him daily. John D. Rockefeller was a devout Baptist and heavily involved in his church, as was his brother William Rockefeller. The list of heavily religious, Christian bankers goes on and on.
Second, the gold standard did not provide a limit on the banker's ability to print "phony money." To the contrary, this is not the role of gold. I know that many people have claimed that gold does have that effect, but history shows us the invalidity of the claim.
The gold standard still existed when the Federal Reserve System was created in 1913. It didn't go away until twenty years later when FDR pulled us off the gold standard. Yet, during that time, the Fed and the banks managed to inflate the money supply grossly, leading to the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression. The Great Depression, by the way, occurred when the Fed countered its earlier massive inflationary policies by contracting the fiat money supply. In combination with what FDR did to gold, the result was what fiat monetary contraction always produces: recession, leading to depression.
Also, the gold standard did not prevent banks from issuing excess paper currency prior to 1913 any more than it did after 1913. In fact, the main justification given by the advocates of the Fed for its creation was their contention that the money supply must be even more "elastic" as a means for combatting the various panics and crises that seemed to occur on Wall Street every few years under gold's watch, panics which themselves were heavily influenced by excessive issuance of paper currency in relation to gold and silver reserves. By "elastic" they meant that the money supply should be increased by issuance of money well beyond gold and silver reserves. Ultimately, gold could not deter the ravages of the pre-Fed banking predators, just as it could not deter the ravages of the post-Fed calamities.
The only thing that can limit the issuance of counterfeit currency (by which I mean currency in excess of gold or silver reserves) is force of law. Lacking such law strictly enforced, nothing gold or silver can do can possibly cancel the fraudulent activity of bankers or governments.
Posted By: Lou Poumakis
Date: 2009-04-20 08:41:10
Dear Mr. Thiessen,
I must agree with much of what you say but I'm sorry to hear that you have such a low opinion of the Bible. It is the basis of Christianity and the foundation of the Western World, the most free and prosperous civilization the world has ever known. I'm not sure which god it is that you know that is so superior to the God of the Bible but history has demonstrated that cultures that followed the Bible's precepts have prospered far more than those that did not.
It's true that one can support gold and silver as money without believing the Bible and that others that affirm the Bible can become fractional reserve bankers. Inconsistency is ever present and none of us are immune from it. God's law though, is much more than just gold and silver money. The panics you referred to came about because the bankers and money manipulators of that day were in violation of other aspects of the law, summarized by "love your neighbor as yourself." Nevertheless, the damage done in those panics was contained and did not compare with what has been done since 1914.
Your final statement about counterfeit currency is surprising, especially coming from a Libertarian. Isn't the US dollar the most widely distributed counterfeit currency ever? And it's the very "force of law" you call for that is supporting it!
Posted By: Jake, the Champion of the Constitution
Date: 2009-04-20 12:20:32
Dear Lou,
I thought you might be interested in this article I wrote on the 4 types of "gold standards" in use in the beginning half of the 20th century. The 4 types are certainly not equivalent to each other.
Bernanke's Great Lie - The "Gold Standard" and the Great Depression (PART 2/2)
Jake
Posted By: Lou Poumakis
Date: 2009-04-21 08:42:35
Jake,
Good article, well written and very thorough! I see we need to be careful to define what we mean when using the term "gold standard."
I read Human Action back in the 70's but didn't appreciate all Von Mises had to say. It is surely coming home to roost today.