THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 540, October 11, 2009
"The gun is a symbol of freedom, not tyranny"
Send Letters to firstname.lastname@example.org
It's a sad, strange, twisted day when Russian TV is where to go for truth in reporting about American politics:
"Peace Prize to Obamabig mistake by Nobel committee" from Russia Today
Not your daddy's gold standrd
Re: "Secession And The Gold Standard" by Russell D. Longcore
While Russell Longcore is correct in calling for hard money to back a seceded state's new currency (Texas or any other's) his call for a 100% gold standard is incorrect. The reason for this is that there is some (since it may be cooked by soft money advocates I want wiggle waggle room here) evidence that historically the US was plagued by a cash shortage. A strict gold standard could restart this. Since the author is concerned about a "stranding" of states who might try to maintain a pretense that the nation will be reunited the following is proposed.
The first is that seceded or stranded states only issue gold or silver money. However, Platinum, iridium and rhodium and other relatively scarce metals should be used as "private" money, i.e. coinage or bullion traded and issued as money or used to back notes issued by banks and private investors. Additionally banks should be able to issue notes backed by a "shopping basket" of other commodities, i.e. redeemable in other goods that people might feel a need for down the line but right now they need folding cash to pay the rent.
Of course this will be somewhat more complicated, but runaway deflation, the reinvention of radical sociofascism, food riots, and other disruptions might be more complicated.
So, go to commodity money, but don't insist on gold only. Or if you insist, have the state limit itself to gold and silver coin and bullion, but permit the issuing of alternate private money and notes backed by both official and unofficial money.
To which Mr. Longcore replied:
My article on the gold standard encourages readers to read a 32-page white paper by economist Murray Rothbard and gives a link to the free paper. Many of Mr. Perez's concerns are dealt with by Rothbard in his paper. I will defer to greater minds.
To which Mr. Perez replied:
You are of course absolutely right. Government issue money should be limited to gold and maybe silver and not allowed to issue more paper than they can buy back at face value. This keeps them from flooding the system with worthless fiat money.
That said private money (more correctly representative money issued by private banks, though they may also issue platinum group coins) backed by other precious metals and commodities should be permitted, especially if newly independent states find themselves with a shortage of gold, an unwillingness to let the new government collect taxes to mint into money, or productive economies whose supply of other goods and services exceed their gold and silver supply.
I'll even say that a 100% percent gold standard by the big G is acceptable, as long as private citizens retain the right to issue money (either acting alone or corporately) based on whatever commodities the market will bear.
I still say boxes of fifty 9mm Parabellum (125 grain slugs loaded to 1250 fps, don't care if you use solids or hollowpoints) should be the base of all currency in an emergency as that is the ammo used in so many pistols and for which a dedicated survivalist can build a STEN for. I'd say 50 boxes for an ounce of gold, three ounces of silver for two boxes of minimum security.
Hope we never see my "ammo standard" applied.
To which Mr. Longcore replied:
Now THAT'S a standard! I just wouldn't want to take 1,000 rounds and deposit it in a bank. Gives me chills...
National Broadside Preview
This is your invitation to discover the new standard in news and pro-liberty opinion and get involved before it goes public, with a preview of National Broadside.
National Broadside is a new project to develop a leading-edge outlet for political news and pro-liberty opinion and investigative journalism. It's the central clearinghouse for original content plus the best articles from the best bloggers around the US, presenting them in a clear, appealing magazine-like format on a site which can be a platform for launching their work and their message to a broader audience.
Information on contributing and getting involved is [here]
And you can read some of our latest featured articles on the front page.
Current featured coverage includes
New content is posted to the site continually, so you never know what you'll find.
We're also stil looking for editors and contributors before the site premieres next week. Email me if you're interested in participating.
It is with great honor that I nominate Mr. Burt Gummer for the Nobel Peace Prize for the following reasons.
A He is a fictional person, in this universe, however he may actually exist in other universes. Be that as it may, he has never started a war or conflict. Quite the contrary, he is a very funny guy and by making people laugh may have helped reduce stress that prevents people from living in peace together.
B. He has protected us from graboids and other minsters.
C. He has tied up guns and ammunition in his struggle against graboids and other monsters that might otherwise have been used to make war or oppress honest people.
D. Mr. Gummer has authorized me to accept the prize money on his behalf and use it to suppress an uprising of tin cans suffering from demonic possession whose goal is to start a world war.
I just gotta know
I will limit myself to two questions regarding Mr. Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.
Was the statement "Screw 'em if they can't take a joke," made between tallying the ballots and announcing the results or after announcing the results?
Since this award is obviously based on prognostication were crystal balls, tea leaves, Tarot cards, the stars or sheep entrails used to determine Mr. Obama's triumph?
Regardless, good job Mr. President, now go earn your medal!
No real news this week, but I had to send this one out to everybody. It's available on merchandise here.
After much careful consideration I have concluded that the current colors used to determine whether a state is predominantly Democrat or Republican must be revised. The Democrats of course do not want to be the Red party due that color's association with Communism. However, I don't feel that they should be the Blue Party either. If I got it right, blue is the color of the notional good guys in military exercises, that is the guys assigned to solve the problem. The current system implies that the Republicans are a problem that needs to be solved by having the Democrats gain ascendancy. Talk about a biased system of designating sides! (And yes, it is intended that right wing fascists as well as libertarians become aware of this and throw it in the establishment media's face. Just because they're our enemies does not mean the fascisti should be denied justice anymore than the socialists when they've been wronged.)
So what colors should we use? Black and white has racial implications, so that's out. Yellow implies cowardice, there's already a Green party. What to do?
Let us use Black and Tan. those of you in the slightest familiar with the history of the various rebellions in Ireland know that the Black and Tans were British WWI veterans recruited to oppress the Irish in efforts to suppress the Independence Movement, often with the help of Irish traitors (which leads some people to think the term referred to these traitors). It is appropriate then that on election day the American people can see that the two parties are in fact two sides of the same bunch oppressing us all.
Saoirse go bragh!
Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!