5 ms·
My argument is that the same organization is the one specifying whether a particular piece of paper or commodity can or cannot be used, and under what condition
by zhdc1 5y ago
My argument is that the same organization is the one specifying whether a particular piece of paper or commodity can or cannot be used, and under what conditions. As we've seen in the United States, currency is only legal tender because the US government says that it is - there is nothing intrinsic about either fiat, representative, or commodity-based currency as a legitimate means of exchange. All of these classifications can be changed at any time (Emergency Banking Act of 1933).
Why, again, should I care about whether or not my dollar can be converted into silver if the government can, overnight, revoke redemption and outright ban ownership of the underlying commodity?
- lottin 5y agoI'm not arguing that a redeemable currency is better or worse than a non-redeemable one. I'm merely pointing out that USD is fundamentally different from an IOU, because the US dollar is non-redeemable and an IOU is redeemable. None of this has anything to do with the status of USD as legal tender, which is something you brought up for reasons that elude me (it looked like you misinterpreted the term 'redeemable' to mean 'legal tender', that's why I was trying to clear this up).