The American Institute for Economic Research: The Gold Standard: Retrospect and Prospect

“In general, the gold standard effectively managed the money supply to stabilize the purchasing power of money over time. This was no accident.” ~Peter C. Earle and William J. Luther

On August 15, 1971, President Richard Nixon closed the gold window, thereby preventing foreign governments from converting United States (U.S.) dollars into gold.

The Nixon shock created a clear dividing line in American monetary history. Prior to August 15, 1971, the U.S. dollar had been tied to gold in one way or another since the nation’s founding.

Fifty years after the Nixon shock, it is difficult for many to imagine a dollar connected to gold. Most Americans have never used a gold-backed dollar. They do not understand how the gold standard worked. They have not considered the merits of returning to the gold standard. The gold standard, in their minds, is a relic of a bygone era.

The contributions in this volume help to bridge the knowledge gap created by fifty years of fiat money.



Alex Castaldo writes:

what does dr burry mean by his btc mining tweet today

(20) Cassandra on Twitter: "70% of $BTC is mined in sanctioned countries, China, Iran, Russia. Crypto is in a race - add enough reputable agents of commerce to counter and overcome the inevitable coordinated actions of the ECB/BoJ/Fed/IMF/WorldBank-level powers-that-be to crush it." / Twitter

70% of $BTC is mined in sanctioned countries, China, Iran, Russia. Crypto is in a race - add enough reputable agents of commerce to counter and overcome the inevitable coordinated actions of the ECB/BoJ/Fed/IMF/WorldBank-level powers-that-be to crush it. 

Pete Earle writes:

He's saying that BTC needs to grow its network and become a more compelling medium of exchange in order to survive the likely outcome of the governments and monetary authorities in China and Russia (Iran?) putting severe criminal penalties on its mining and usage. Meh. 

Does not follow that if mining were quashed in those countries other miners elsewhere wouldn't fill the gap, but it would be a bumpy ride and the price would almost definitely suffer. (There's also the remote chance that in the tumult that would follow miners going offline there could be a 51% attack.) But it strikes me that when an illicit enterprise becomes big enough (gambling, marijuana, etc.) governments would rather become privileged providers and gatekeepers than suppressors. 

Jayson Pifer writes:

Burry seems to be missing that cheap electricity wins.  It's not a matter of simply adding reputable agents when they will not be able to scale to compete with Chinese miners.  Not to mention that those sanctioned countries are incentivized to mine heavily and therefore keep the security of the network high.  I don't really see this changing.

I'm curious what sort of coordinated actions he supposes will be taken by the power-that-be.  For the foreseeable future it appears to be concurrent debasement of currencies to the benefit of cryptos.

I forget who on the list was running a mining operation, the information shared was valuable.  Perhaps we could get some recent insight.



 Neil Peart, legendary drummer for Rush and a self described "Bleeding heart libertarian" died Tuesday from complications due to brain cancer. He was a friend of liberty and one of the best drummers in the world.

Pete Earle writes: 

This one hits home in a way that few others have. I had listened to their music since the early 1980s and seen them live 20, 25 times. Words and music that inspired and lifted me in every phase of my life. Neil was one of the good ones. Devastating.



What is the significance if any of recent money market stress and Fed actions?

Larry Williams writes: 

If it is a mini QE-4, as I suspect, bullish.

Peter Ringel writes: 

I had decreasing excess commercial bank reserves as bullish factor for equities, because it is an indicator of optimism.

People are less in cash and invest more and more in other assets.

Pete Earle writes: 

A colleague and I wrote an article about this two days back. "This is Not QE4, Yet"

Mr. Isomorphisms writes: 

If it's due to quarterly tax payments, why doesn't this happen every quarter?

Pete Earle replies:

It's not just because of taxes. Read the article.



The Prez was right with all his comments about Powell being hawkish and "not a little bit satisfied with Powell" and the markets all over the world gave everyone wealth. But now we shall have to hear about "succumbing" and "interference" and the inviolable "independence of the Fed being violated".

Pete Earle writes: 

Here is something I wrote a month or two back regarding the media assertion that the current President is conducting himself in manners vastly outside historical norms.



 From Hamon's New York Stock Exchange Manual, 1865:

"Great gains usually alternate with great losses in this kind of business. One would think that jobbers would soon die of worry and anxiety, and often enough they are seen to be very 'down in the mouth'. But nature is kind, and fits the back to the burden, or rather most of these men have been born with the peculiar temperament of the speculator.

They have an extra amount of hopefulness, and get through life with more excitement, indeed, but hardly with less equanimity on the whole than other men engaged in trade."


Resources & Links