gilliganscorner
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 675
So who would issue the currency?
You would have to change your unit of currency.
A "dollar", "peso", "pound" etc etc are nothing more than arbitrary units of purchasing power. Those units have no weight and no measure and that is why fiat is so relative and "flexible" - usually at our loss.
Could we have our bills that have units of denomination like: milligram, gram, decagrams where the bills have the defined weight of gold in them?
If I had a few ounces of gold and was willing to invest in a printing press, could I print off bills to compete with yours? If the gold makes your bill good, it would make my bill good as well.
Could I print them and loan them out at interest? Hey, I could be a bank! If my bank failed, my bills in circulation would still be good, wouldn't they?
for barter ...yes always good as they should be since you bartered your work and value for this time.
Not sure why anyone in their right mind would try to counterfit printing gold
Very high margins to get off the ground. Making it very easy for anti counterfitting efforts to be prevented, gold is also very easy to detect in the media with sensor techologies.
But for legal and tender currency exchange it would still be counter fit if you print your own US dollars since this money would still have security tracking inks, etc. and only the US can regulate the commerce and coin money.
You wouldnt be able to keep up with the mint and they could change anything without you knowing it and catch you.
There are sealants for waterproofing inks today...
Kodak has such a sealant that they use in making their inks permanent..even when you dip them over and over again in the water, agitate, etc...
Nothing would prevent money or anything for wear and tear in a physical nature though...coins suffer the same problem, chips, breaks, etc.
That is why you dont put a large amount into any bill and disperse it and seal it so that this happens.
Logically the money circulation has to be for reliability tracked to maintain the holdings of the precious metals in the media just like color permance and water fastness we have done in the printing markets for years.
One idea a friend suggested to me the other day on this crisis was why dont we print our money with valuable inks.
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7089091/Ink-jet-printing-for-high.html
http://www.mcgpaper.com/silgolmetinp.html
He said if you only put a 400 or 500th of an ounce of gold for instance into the paper then the dollar would really be worth a dollar. And for each domination of money larger than a dollar you only need to print a larger area on the bill with gold.
Doing this would minimize cost and waste as compared to legacy processes of minting. Also as gold, or other precious metals are bought up on the market this would inherently increase the value of the money held in banks and in the persons of the people since supply would diminish. Making everything they exchanged their work for at the time always become cheaper. This to him sounded like the smart way to do money.
When you think about this that would mean all paper bank holdings for money during this crash would have a minimal market value that the FED could not effect and would safe guard the floor of the economy from going to zero.
Wouldn't all of this sealing technology make a dollar bill as unwieldy to carry as, say, a slightly thick photograph? The government is constantly circulating in new dollars (and destroying old ones) because they get so scrunched and raggy.
I'm not opposed to the idea; I just think that it would involve the unfortunate risk of losing a lot of gold in random places. Gold isn't very valuable when you find trace amounts in your back jean pocket.
Its not necessary to circulate gold itself as the currency as long as the dollar can be converted to gold anyway.