3 ms·
If you’re splitting hairs on domestic vs international redeemability for gold you’re technically correct but the person you’re replying to is more generally cor
by SgtBastard 5y ago
If you’re splitting hairs on domestic vs international redeemability for gold you’re technically correct but the person you’re replying to is more generally correct - the discussion of the Bretton Woods agreement in that wiki article is important.
- dylan604 5y ago1933 was the infamous meeting in the backroom with not enough people to hold quorum that is what most of the conspiracy theory and illuminati types point to as evidence. plus, whether you could redeem a greenback for gold or not is much less of an issue if the powers that be have already been acting as if the gold was no longer relevant in their policy decisions. that's the reason i point to '33 vs '71. i don't care about monetary exchange formats, but how the system was running.