Yesterday Barron and Bloom in "A Golden Path" (http://mises.org/daily/6281/A-Golden-Path) responded to my Mises Daily article "Fool's Gold Standards". Their expansion was very useful. I don't think we are as far apart as they seem to think.
They just have more confidence that the dots will fall in place more spontaneously than I do. Joe Salerno and Ron Paul are a good guide to needed caveats and reforms that would have to accompany Barron-Bloom for the proposal to be successful. I still think my conclusions holds up:Barron and Bloom's proposal, while attractive in the short run, is (if not accompanied by Paul's suggested reforms in the United States and elsewhere) most likely a step in the wrong direction Advocates of sound money should be heartened by the interest currently being generated for monetary reform. Discussion should be guided with a few things in mind:Others are thinking about it [monetary reform], but some of them would like to internationalize something different than the dollar reserve standard. They would like to have another fiat currency and a pretend alliance with gold — and they want to move control over a new global currency into the IMF and the World Bank. I think that would be a disaster. (emphasis added) Let's hope Lipsky'soptimism concerning a gold commission becomes a reality where a "well-conceived and well-staffed gold commission" (preferably one dominated by Austrian-influenced economists) actually sorts out the issues in favor of competition in currency and an evolution toward a gold-coin standard à la the outline provided by Paul. [footnotes omitted]
- Gerald P. O'Driscoll Jr.'sconcerns about abolishing central banks,
- Salerno's gold standard: true or false, and
- Paul's caveat that
