Yesterday Barron and Bloom in “A Golden Path” (http://www.mises.org/daily/6281/A-Golden-Path) responded to my Mises Daily article “Fool’s Gold Standards”.
Their expansion was very useful. I don’t think we are as far apart as they seem to think.
Barron and Bloom’s proposal, while attractive in the short run, is (if not accompanied by Paul’s suggested reforms in the United States and elsewhere) most likely a step in the wrong direction Advocates of sound money should be heartened by the interest currently being generated for monetary reform. Discussion should be guided with a few things in mind:
- Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr.’sconcerns about abolishing central banks,
- Salerno’s gold standard: true or false, and
- Paul’s caveat that
Others are thinking about it [monetary reform], but some of them would like to internationalize something different than the dollar reserve standard. They would like to have another fiat currency and a pretend alliance with gold — and they want to move control over a new global currency into the IMF and the World Bank. I think that would be a disaster. (emphasis added)
Let’s hope Lipsky’soptimism concerning a gold commission becomes a reality where a “well-conceived and well-staffed gold commission” (preferably one dominated by Austrian-influenced economists) actually sorts out the issues in favor of competition in currency and an evolution toward a gold-coin standard à la the outline provided by Paul. [footnotes omitted]
