[quote=markmax33][quote=swave][quote=markmax33][quote=swave]
Yes, 708 tons of gold were mined in the second quarter of this year, but 919 tons of gold were used in jewelry and electronics. The total amount of gold that has been mined is 165,000 tons. The amount available to back a currency is decreasing. [/quote]
The value of gold would go up and fewer people would use it in jewelery and the supply would increase. People would use some other precious metal. It would not be an issue.[/quote]
This would cause inflation for jewelry and electronic parts. Do you understand how exponential growth works? If the economy continues growing exponentially, demand for gold would grow exponentially. At some point in the not too distant future, we will run out. What then?[/quote]
Let’s put together a graph of population growth VS Gold supply VS money supply by the FED.
I GAURENTEE YOU THAT TWO OF THE LINES ARE FLAT AND ONE IS EXPONENTIAL. The FED’s printing will make the population growth look concave (saracasim, but it will look flat). All Ron Paul wants to do is legalize other currencies. Are you against that? He wouldn’t get rid of the FED overnight as you seem to fear. It would be clear from audits to the american people that it needs to be reformed. Do you think gold should be a legal currency? It’s not…Why not? Seems reasonable to me for competition.
Would you agree to a monetary system that only grew at the rate of population growth? That sounds rather reasonable based on your line of questioning? He has suggested that as part of a transition.[/quote]
We need to identify a system that works well with an economy that is not growing exponentially.
You would expect with increasing productivity, unemployment would increase if there is no growth in the economy. Neither the Fed nor the gold standard can deal with that problem.
The gold standard worked well for a while. The Fed also worked well for a while. But neither will work well for very long. The best solution that I have seen is described in this link:
