What Has Government Done to Our Money? Stabilize the Price Level?
What Has Government Done to Our Money?
Murray N. Rothbard
II.
Money in a Free Society
10. Stabilize the Price Level?
Some theorists charge that a free monetary system would be
unwise, because it would not "stabilize the price level,"
i.e., the price of the money-unit. Money, they say, is supposed
to be a fixed yardstick that never changes. Therefore, its value,
or purchasing power, should be stabilized. Since the price of
money would admittedly fluctuate on the free market, freedom must
be overruled by government management to insure
stability. [12]
Stability would provide justice, for example,
to debtors and creditors, who will be sure of paying back
dollars, or gold ounces, of the same purchasing power as they
lent out.
Yet, if creditors and debtors want to hedge against future
changes in purchasing power, they can do so easily on the free
market. When they make their contracts, they can agree that
repayment will be made in a sum of money adjusted by some
agreed-upon index number of changes in the value of money. The
stabilizers have long advocated such measures, but strangely
enough, the very lenders and borrowers who are supposed to
benefit most from stability, have rarely availed themselves of
the opportunity. Must the government then force certain
"benefits" on people who have already freely rejected
them? Apparently, businessmen would rather take their chances, in
this world of irremediable uncertainty, on their ability to
anticipate the conditions of the market. After all, the price of
money is no different from any other free prices on the market.
They can change in response to changes in demand of individuals;
why not the monetary price?
Artificial stabilization would, in fact, seriously distort and
hamper the workings of the market. As we have indicated, people
would be unavoidably frustrated in their desires to alter their
real proportion of cash balances; there would be no opportunity
to change cash balances in proportion to prices. Furthermore,
improved standards of living come to the public from the fruits
of capital investment. Increased productivity tends to lower
prices (and costs) and thereby distribute the fruits of 383 free
enterprise to all the public, raising the standard of living of
all consumers. Forcible propping up of the price level prevents
this spread of higher living standards.
Money, in short, is not a "fixed yardstick." It is a
commodity serving as a medium for exchanges. Flexibility in its
value in response to consumer demands is just as important and
just as beneficial as any other free pricing on the market.
[12]How the government would go about this is unimportant at
this point. Basically, it would involve governmentally-managed
changes in the money supply.