WWII Germany printed curency out of it's value. Which is what the U.S. is doing now. Coming up with money that doesn't even exist yet.
There're rumors that if things fail Washington will create a multi-national monetary sytem yielding a new dollar that will based on that economy that certain qualifying coutries can and will use..Some thing like the E.U.
Will the NWO be after...? I forsee the future union of the E.U. and this new "Western" dollar.
Stay tuned, folks!
__________________ "The darkside, Sidious, is an illness no true Sith wishes to be cured of, my young apprentice .."
The positives and negatives of not having backing seem to be the same thing. Namely flexibility. Gold standard has trouble responding to economic problems but it's also less vulnerable to them for the same reason.
The biggest drawback to back tender that I know is, is that it would make gold prohibitively expensive.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
All this making money from no where raises the question "is it really worth anything" and what' s the point of companys making goods if they are worth imaginary money
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Well, the companies can really demand whatever they want for their products. They have "faith" in the money, so they accept it in exchange for their goods and services.
But isn't that good? Wouldn't A diverse backing also protect against market flucuations? Wouldn't it also curb out of control inflation?
Take the Pound problem experienced recently because of silver dropping. If they had a diverse backing, the hit wouldn't have been so severe.
There are theories out that that no backing is a conspiracy perpetuated by that administration's politicians to make it easier to control things from behind the scenes. We would need Deano for further clarification, but I think there has got to be some sort of truth behind that. (Corruption, at some level, some where.)
Raising the price of gold dramatically is a bad thing if you like computers.
It should, I see no reason that it would not. But then again I'm not an economist, there's almost certainly some line of logic that says backed currency is a bad idea. I believe the problem lies in the use of mining futures to back the economy. There's something called "pure strain gold" that's supposed to avoid that, but I have no idea how.
Which is one of the more "realistic" conspiracy theories. An unbacked currency actually is much easier to control than one that is backed by a gold standard. In fact that's is acknowledged as the point of not having backing: when economies turn bad an unbacked currency can alter the market to stabilize things more quickly (in theory).
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 11th, 2009 03:52 AM
