I am proudly on the side of gold and private money, totally opposed to the fiat currency system. And gold is in the news today: Our central banksters have just bought 200 tonnes of gold from the IMF.
Now, the editors of the Economic Times declaim that this is “no big deal.” The language used by ET is also revealing. They actually use the word “barbaric” to describe gold – â la their evil mentor, John Maynard Keynes. These eminent editors write that in the past:
“…the barbaric metal commanded a respect quite out of proportion to either its intrinsic value or the return it yielded as an asset class….”
Frankly, I sincerely doubt whether anyone who invested in gold over the last 30 years of a global pure fiat money system has lost money. Gold was some $30 an ounce when Nixon de-linked the dollar from gold, in the early 70s, thereby putting the entire world on a purely fiat money system. Gold has shot over $1000 an ounce now. This is why ordinary common people “respect” gold. These editors worship State-issued papers with Gandhi’s photu on them.
They doubt whether gold possesses “intrinsic value.” Actually, nothing has “intrinsic value,” not even gold. All “value” lies in the minds of valuers. Value is “subjective.” The common people who are buying gold “respect” the value of gold. What, indeed, is respect? The first article of mine ET ever published was titled “Respect Must Be Earned.”
The editors of ET then go on to say that, since the dollar is in terminal decline, and the bulk of RBI’s “reserves” are held in US dollars:
“…gold is a poor alternative. The RBI should, instead, be buying other currencies like, say, the euro or maybe even the Chinese yuan.”
They use the word “currencies.” I would prefer to use the term “fiat papers” – all this funny munny.
Yet, it is their concluding remarks that really take the cake, and the cake-shop as well:
"Total central bank holdings of gold is around 30,000 tonnes, the same level as 60 years ago, over which period world output has grown some 13 times. The relative decline of gold in the affairs of the world, we hope, will have some influence on Indians’ collective craving for gold.”
The editors have just unwittingly disclosed figures that reveal, to me at least, how much funny money has been pumped into each and every national economy by central "banksters," with no link to gold, which was the money people freely chose to use throughout the then world, right upto the time when central banks arose in every nation. Indeed, humanity has chosen gold as money throughout the history of civilization. The classical liberal / libertarian / Austrian conception of The Market is individualistic in its methodology – so people like me merely attempt to predict what these individuals would choose as money. We do not say, “Impose gold as money.” Fiat money is IMPOSED upon us. These editors worship central banks - who wield vast coercive powers.
Further, they are lying baldly when they say that there has been “a relative decline of gold in the affairs of the world.” Their very own newspaper reports almost every day how much gold our common people are buying. Just the other day I read in an ET report that rural post offices in Karnataka have taken to selling gold coins, and business is booming. Indeed, right as we speak, gold prices have surged to over $1000 per ounce. People, and more and more people, are choosing gold. Gold ETFs are doing brisk business. In the “natural order” of a free market society, it is obvious gold would become the chosen money. Our worthy editors have their minds set upon an “artificial order,” where coercion replaces co-operation – and wee, the sheeple are "fleeced" as well.
Why do so many people fall prey to such erroneous thinking? In my view, the critical error in ET’s thinking lies in the false concept of “national economy.” It is this dangerously false idea that is the guiding philosophy of central state control over an economy. In short, it is the guiding philosophy of those who support tyrannies. Never fall prey to this error, my dear reader.
In the world of free markets, there is no “national economy.” Rather, there are millions and millions of “individual economies,” of which each and every individual is the Sole Proprietor. Just as I am the Sole Proprietor of The Antidote Blog. All these individual economies are "private economies."
We are all sailing our little boats on a mighty wide and placid lake, and each is the Captain of his own boat. We are all “minding our own business.” We are “trying to keep the customer satisfied.” And all we do is “row, row, row our boats, gently down the stream.” Merrily, of course.
No comments:
Post a Comment