Austrian Economics

halloween contacts link building service Restaurant Deals

thesis writing service

Gold as Money: FAQ

kramnella — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 06:45:12 GMT

Revision 18 posted to Austrian Economics by kramnella on 6/6/2011 1:45:12 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

halloween contacts link building service Restaurant Deals

thesis writing service

Gold as Money: FAQ

DavidConway — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 20:48:21 GMT

Revision 17 posted to Austrian Economics by DavidConway on 4/20/2011 3:48:21 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

thesis writing service

Gold as Money: FAQ

Melany11 — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:09:08 GMT

Revision 16 posted to Austrian Economics by Melany11 on 1/28/2011 7:09:08 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

TheSacricolist — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:04:55 GMT

Revision 15 posted to Austrian Economics by TheSacricolist on 11/12/2010 3:04:55 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Papers writing service and halloween contacts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

garydavid — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:39:41 GMT

Revision 14 posted to Austrian Economics by garydavid on 10/26/2010 4:39:41 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Papers writing service and halloween contacts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

garydavid — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:38:56 GMT

Revision 13 posted to Austrian Economics by garydavid on 10/26/2010 4:38:56 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Papers writing service and halloween contacts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

garydavid — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:37:54 GMT

Revision 12 posted to Austrian Economics by garydavid on 10/26/2010 4:37:54 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Papers writing service and halloween contactshere.

Gold as Money: FAQ

Green911 — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:20:13 GMT

Revision 11 posted to Austrian Economics by Green911 on 10/18/2010 4:20:13 AM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Papers writing service here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

dscotese — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 03:08:19 GMT

Revision 10 posted to Austrian Economics by dscotese on 9/28/2010 10:08:19 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present, ephedra, local moving company.. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, ", or "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"" Certainly the effort you'd have to put into buying a car (microscopes, nanotubes in the first case, perhaps a crane in the second) would change, and whatever means you are using to store your own money would have to adjust, but clearly, the answer is yes.

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcsby custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

The price of gold in terms of pieces of paper is irrelevant. After all, fiat currency notes can be printed with very little effort at all. For purposes of transition, the price of As gold can be adjusted (by fiat if necessary) to that all central bank money holders can convert their catches on as money into again, its usefulness and therefore its value will rise. The 4.5 trillion number is now dated, and perhaps 9 trillion is more accurate, and this is because more and more people are realizing that gold makes a better currency than fiat currency.

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

If in a deflationary economy, a nominal return investment (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 1.10, when it is repaid it compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

Frederic1 — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 18:07:01 GMT

Revision 9 posted to Austrian Economics by Frederic1 on 9/27/2010 1:07:01 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcs by custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

The price of gold in terms of pieces of paper is irrelevant. After all, fiat currency notes can be printed with very little effort at all. For purposes of transition, the price of gold can be adjusted (by fiat if necessary) to that all central bank money holders can convert their money into gold.

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present, ephedra, local moving company. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

kaith — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:29:37 GMT

Revision 8 posted to Austrian Economics by kaith on 9/22/2010 10:29:37 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Natwest Loans

Egg Loans

Alliance Leicester Bank

Name Badges

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcs by custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

kaith — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:29:24 GMT

Revision 7 posted to Austrian Economics by kaith on 9/22/2010 10:29:24 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Natwest Loans

Egg Loans

Alliance Leicester Bank

Name Badges

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcs by custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

kaith — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 03:27:48 GMT

Revision 6 posted to Austrian Economics by kaith on 9/22/2010 10:27:48 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcs by custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

davismax — Mon, 24 May 2010 23:38:43 GMT

Revision 5 posted to Austrian Economics by davismax on 5/24/2010 6:38:43 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the resume writers theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

A fundamental tenet to the Austrian analysis is an understanding of the origin of money. Gold became the most useful commodity to use as currency because of its particular characterisitcs by custom writing company. No one decided to use gold, it was just the best thing available at the time, and perhaps it still is.

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

Gold as Money: FAQ

Joseph E Hammer — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:47:53 GMT

Revision 4 posted to Austrian Economics by Joseph E Hammer on 3/7/2010 7:47:53 PM

Gold as Money: FAQ

Filed under: Gold, Money, Gold Standard, FAQ, Deflation, Investment

Some responses to common objections about the use of gold as money:

1. There simply is not enough gold for it to be used as money.

Hoppe writes:

Once a money is established, any stock of money becomes compatible with any amount of employment and real income. There is never any need for more money since any amount will perform the same maximum extent of needed money work: that is, to provide a general medium of exchange and a means of economic calculation by entrepreneurs. [Source]

However, one could ask the question, "Could one ounce of gold serve as the monetary base?".

The answer to this should be consistent with the theory, as should the answer to, "If gold became as common as aluminum, would it still be useful as money?"

2. At current market prices, all the mined gold on earth is worth $4.5 trillion. This is much less that all the currency that has been printed in the whole world!

3.What’s stopping you from using gold as money now?

4. The money supply must grow at the same rate as the economy.

Falling prices are surely a good thing!

The answer to the second question is no. While it is certainly “risk-free” to keep your money under the bed, it comes with a very real opportunity cost. Investors have a peculiar trait: they prefer goods in the future to goods in the present. In other words they forego consumption today and prefer a larger return later.

So a deflationary economy a nominal return (i.e., $1) becomes $1.10 when repaid compounds the real return (i.e., the purchasing power of $1.10 is now $1.21)

The desire for future goods will increase the desire for investment.

6. When did falling prices ever coincide with economic prosperity?

Innovations in manufacturing, chemistry and railroads made the 1880s the most productive decade in the history of the United States - and one of the most prosperous.

Further Reading

Rothbard, Murray N.; The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar

Hulsmann, J. G.; Deflation and Liberty

Sources

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann; The Misesian Case Against Keynes

Measuringworth.com (charts and figures)

Hat tip to Graham of the Irish Liberty Forum for his insights here.

Cheers to David Z for his insghts here.

A World Without Intellectual Property

Peter Sidor — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:30:28 GMT

Current revision posted to Austrian Economics by Peter Sidor on 1/28/2011 7:30:28 AM

A World Without Intellectual Property

There are many good reasons to completely repeal patents and copyright laws: they are too complex to be understood or obeyed by anybody except a highly trained Intellectual Property (IP) attorney, they are often used for predatory purposes, they impede innovation since a patented invention cannot be improved by a third party.

Additionally, because one firm holds a monopoly on the patented product, competition diminishes bringing with it the high prices and low quality of all monopoly services. Intellectual property is also very expensive to enforce since it requires surveillance and enforcement on millions of consumers.

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

If we removed IP law from the fashion industry, what would be the effect on this industry, which thrives on creativity and new design. Would innovation and creativity cease? Would companies like WalMart copy fashions the second they were created and undercut the brilliant producers behind the scenes? Would the market stagnate?

The answer is "No" for a very simple reason. The fashion industry is not covered under the blanket protection that IP law provides so many other industries. The creativity and variety that are the hallmark of this industry are the results of natural market evolution, without any IP protection. WalMart already does copy the designs straight from the runway.

Advertising Revenue

The elimination of IP law would have a dramatic effect on advertising revenue. While it could be argued that many companies would continue to receive such funding, some will not. In the event that every television show, every song and every book were made public domain, then there would be two options for funding the distribution.

First, there are the traditional channels. This would use your viewing time to pay for the service of hosting and delivering the content. The authors of such content would not necessarily be paid from these funds, but it may be sufficient to run a bunch of servers producing on demand content.

Second, fee for use hosting and peer based sharing could serve as the distribution mechanism. It would be hard to deliver a service that interrupted the show every fifteen minutes to advertise when the same content could be gotten elsewhere without the annoyance. This may cripple or even destroy many firms which fund their operations from advertising revenue.

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Under this paradigm, all media would be stamped with a unique signiture that maps back to the authoring group or individual author. Tools could be cheaply created that allow you to donate directly to any producers you like. Like DRM, this stamp would be unique and tamper proof. Unlike DRM, it would not encrypt the media in any way.

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Accreditation can be used alongside copyright or as a replacement. This type of producer compensation is made possible by current technology and may provide a suitable producer targetted replacement for the business friendly copyright laws.

Books & Newspapers

Imagine you run a major book publisher. You publish a book, but then --whoops-- somebody clear across the country (or across the world) starts printing the same work. Because you don't have exclusive control over your content, you cannot pay your authors.

Major newspapers, on the other hand, produce new content on a daily (or weekly) basis, print millions of copies, and have them on their customers' doorsteps before anybody else has a chance to copy their work. Because of this, they don't need a government-enforced monopoly on their content.

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

In a world without copyright laws, authors would probably follow a similar protocol. Then, after the last chapter has been published, other printers could copy the author's work and distribute it far and wide.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Movie makers receive most of their revenues from motion-picture theatres, not DVD sales. Motion-picture theatres, unlike DVDs, are at low risk of piracy. Therefore, movie piracy is not nearly as harmful to the movie industry as they would have you to believe.

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Musicians could still get paid, even without copyright. They would still be able to sell concert tickets, even if they did not make a thin dime from CDs and MP3 downloads. In fact, file-sharing might actually make them more famous! They could then cash in on their new-found fame in other ways (increased ticket sales, T-shirts and promotional items, product endorsements, movie deals...)

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

When Thomas Edison (or, more accurately, Edison's company) invented the light bulb, he was three steps ahead of anybody who would try to manufacture light bulbs of their own. He had the technical know-how, he had the necessary equipment to manufacture light bulbs, and his name was known in every household. Because of these three major advantages, he did not need a legal monopoly on light bulbs to get a return on his investment. He must, however, remain three steps ahead of the competition.

Let's invent a a parallel universe, however, where Edison invents the light bulb, and then does not bother in any way to improve it or reduce the cost of manufacturing it. After several years, a rival inventor reverse-engineers the light bulb and build his own on his garage. He then discovers a way to manufacture the light bulb for cheaper than Edison's. He would quickly capture Edison's market share. In the absence of patents, Edison's laziness is punished and his rival's ingenuity is rewarded.

This happened with the invention of the steam engine. James Watt made important improvements and secured a patent for them, but then blocked many further improvements, which could be applied only when his patent expired.

"During the period of Watt's patents the United Kingdom added about 750 horsepower of steam engines per year. In the thirty years following Watt's patents, additional horsepower was added at a rate of more than 4,000 per year. Moreover, the fuel efficiency of steam engines changed little during the period of Watt's patent; while between 1810 and 1835 it is estimated to have increased by a factor of five." (*)

Software

Even without copyright laws, programmers would continue to produce software. They might engineer the software to work only with permission from the software firm, requiring the consumer to pay for it.

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

A third option, and probably most preferable from the consumer's perspective, is the open-source freeware/shareware model, or software written by volunteers/hobbyists and made freely available without difficult licensing restrictions. Users may copy, edit, modify, sell, or pretty much do anything with the software. (For-profit entrepreneurs are able to take a piece of shareware, add useful features, and sell copies with tech support.)

Brands & Trademarks

Let's take it a step further. Why do we need to have registered trademarks? The conventional answer is that it helps consumers recognize a familiar product and distinguish it from other manufacturers' products. Without corporations having legal monopolies on their respective trademarks, though, consumers would still be able to distinguish one producer's products from another's.

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

NOTE: Most authors address registered trademarks independently of copyrights and patents. While a patent has the potential to stifle innovation, no such danger exists with trademarks. Many authors treat trademarks as a unique identifier to establish a level of trust with the consumer. It would be fraudulent to impersonate a company to try to trick customers into trusting them. Immitation is okay... impersonation is not. The cereal above would be fine if it was labeled "SomeCompany Toasty-O's", but would be lying to imply that they are indeed General Mills.

There you have it. Without patents and copyright, we would still have books, music, software, and world-changing inventions. We could still watch movies, and authors would still get paid for their work. There would by less mind-numbing regulation, and more competition in the market. Plus, you wouldn't need to feel guilty for downloading audio files from your next-door neighbor.

A World Without Intellectual Property

Melany11 — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:06:30 GMT

Revision 27 posted to Austrian Economics by Melany11 on 1/28/2011 7:06:30 AM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

A World Without Intellectual Property

TheSacricolist — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:00:39 GMT

Revision 26 posted to Austrian Economics by TheSacricolist on 11/12/2010 3:00:39 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

A World Without Intellectual Property

TheSacricolist — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:00:39 GMT

Revision 25 posted to Austrian Economics by TheSacricolist on 11/12/2010 3:00:39 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing serviceswork, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Fast Cash Loans Online

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

A World Without Intellectual Property

randybosh — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 09:20:15 GMT

Revision 24 posted to Austrian Economics by randybosh on 10/28/2010 4:20:15 AM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Fast Cash Loans Online

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing services work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

A World Without Intellectual Property

randybosh — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 09:19:31 GMT

Revision 23 posted to Austrian Economics by randybosh on 10/28/2010 4:19:31 AM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Fast Cash Loans Online

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing services work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

A World Without Intellectual Property

venn99 — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:45:21 GMT

Revision 22 posted to Austrian Economics by venn99 on 10/25/2010 1:45:21 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges Fast Cash Loans Online

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing services work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

A World Without Intellectual Property

venn99 — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:44:13 GMT

Revision 21 posted to Austrian Economics by venn99 on 10/25/2010 1:44:13 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Fast Cash Loans Online

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing services work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

A World Without Intellectual Property

Frederic1 — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 18:02:35 GMT

Revision 20 posted to Austrian Economics by Frederic1 on 9/27/2010 1:02:35 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry

Advertising Revenue

The Electronic Accreditation Technique

Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

This would require very simple integration with media playing software and can be set up to donate 5/10/25 cents to anything you rate highly enough... at your choosing.

Books & Newspapers

In centuries past, authors used to have their books published one chapter at a time in major periodicals. Readers had to purchase multiple issues to read the entire book.

Authors have two main interests: to be paid for their writing services work, and to have their work widely read and enjoyed so as to make a name for themselves. Those two interests sometimes run contrary to each other. However, the system discribed above, works for everybody. Authors can get paid by the newspapers. The newspapers make a profit by selling multiple, successive issues. Printing companies can "free ride" by printing the book without paying royalties. Authors are promoted by having their works published by multiple firms. Consumers get the best deal of all: they can read a few chapters in the newspaper, then purchase the entire book at a competitive price.

Movies

Broadcasting

Broadcasters are funded by advertising revenues, not by selling content. Hence, broadcasting would continue as usual without IP laws.

Music

Of course, people would still buy CDs, even with unrestricted file sharing networks in place. If you hear a CD being played in a store, and you like it, what are you going to do:

Spend a few dollars, get a dozen good songs in your possession, or
Spend the next four hours on the Web trying to find those songs performed by some obscure local artists.

The answer is obvious.

Inventions

Software

A second profitable business model is to allow consumers to use to the software for free, courtesy of advertisers. Google follows this model.

Brands & Trademarks

Imagine that you are an entrepreneur who makes O-shaped cereal similar to General Mills' Cheerios. Without legal trademarks, it would be perfectly legitimate to call your product Cheerios.

Even though you would have the right to call your product Cheerios, grocery stores may refuse to carry your product. They might object to the name and request you to call it something else, phentermine online, pest control service. In the absence of intellectual property laws, general consensus would determine which words refer to a specific firm and which words refer to a generic product.

NOTE: Most authors address registered trademarks independently of copyrights and patents. While a patent has the potential to stifle innovation, no such danger exists with trademarks, phentermine online, pest control service. Many authors treat trademarks as a unique identifier to establish a level of trust with the consumer. It would be fraudulent to impersonate a company to try to trick customers into trusting them. Immitation is okay... impersonation is not. The cereal above would be fine if it was labeled "SomeCompany Toasty-O's", but would be lying to imply that they are indeed General Mills.

A World Without Intellectual Property

Frederic1 — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:59:45 GMT

Revision 19 posted to Austrian Economics by Frederic1 on 9/27/2010 12:59:45 PM

A World Without Intellectual Property

Filed under: Asbestos Lawsuit l Tampa Criminal Attorney l Natwest Loans l Egg Loans l Alliance Leicester Bank l Name Badges

Nevertheless, some continue to support IP rights under the following mantras:

Authors of IP should be paid for their work
IP supports investment and innovation in R&D departments
An industry with no IP would lose productivity

This article attempts to answer those and other objections.

The Fashion Industry