Why
Gold?
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
As
with all matters of investment, everything is clear in hindsight.
Had you bought gold mutual funds earlier this year, they might have
appreciated more than 100 percent. Gold has risen $60 since March
2001 to the latest spot price of $326.
Why
wasn’t it obvious? The Fed has been inflating the dollar as never
before, driving interest rates down to absurdly low levels, even
as the federal government has been pushing a mercantile trade policy,
and New York City, the hub of the world economy, continues to be
threatened by terrorism. The government is failing to prevent more
successful attacks by not backing down from foreign policy disasters
and by not allowing planes to arm themselves.
These
are all conditions that make gold particularly attractive.
Or
perhaps it is not so obvious why this is true. It’s been three decades
since the dollar’s tie to gold was completely severed, to the hosannas
of mainstream economists. There is no stash of gold held by the
Fed or the Treasury that backs our currency system. The government
owns gold but not as a monetary asset. It owns it the same way it
owns national parks and fighter planes. It’s just another asset
the government keeps to itself.
The
dollar, and all our money, is nothing more and nothing less than
what it looks like: a cut piece of linen paper with fancy printing
on it. You can exchange it for other currency at a fixed rate and
for any good or service at a flexible rate. But there is no established
exchange rate between the dollar and gold, either at home or internationally.
The
supply of money is not limited by the amount of gold. Gold is just
another good for which the dollar can be exchanged, and in that
sense is legally no different from a gallon of milk, a tank of gas,
or an hour of babysitting services.
Why,
then, do people turn to gold in times like these? What is gold used
for? Yes, there are industrial uses and there are consumer uses
in jewelry and the like. But recessions and inflations don’t cause
people to want to wear more jewelry or stock up on industrial metal.
The investor demand ultimately reflects consumer demand for gold.
But that still leaves us with the question of why the consumer demand
exists in the first place. Why gold and not sugar or wheat or something
else?
There
is no getting away from it: investor markets have memories of the
days when gold was money. In fact, in the whole history of civilization,
gold has served as the basic money of all people wherever it’s been
available. Other precious metals have been valued and coined, but
gold always emerged on top in the great competition for what constitutes
the most valuable commodity of all.
There
is nothing intrinsic about gold that makes it money. It has certain
properties that lend itself to monetary use, like portability, divisibility,
scarcity, durability, and uniformity. But these are just descriptors
of certain qualities of the metal, not explanations as to why it
became money. Gold became money for only one reason: because that’s
what the markets chose.
Why
isn’t gold money now? Because governments destroyed the gold standard.
Why? Because they regarded it as too inflexible. To be sure, monetary
inflexibility is the friend of free markets. Without the ability
to create money out of nothing, governments tend to run tight financial
ships. Banks are more careful about the lending when they can’t
rely on a lender of last resort with access to a money-creation
machine like the Fed.
A
fixed money stock means that overall prices are generally more stable.
The problems of inflation and business cycles disappear entirely.
Under the gold standard, in fact, increased market productivity
causes prices to generally decline over time as the purchasing power
of money increases.
In
1967, Alan Greenspan once wrote an article called Gold
and Economic Freedom. He wrote that:
An
almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one
issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to
sense perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent
defenders of laissez-faire that gold and economic freedom
are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of
laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other…
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against
gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation
of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process.
It stands as a protector of property rights.
He
was right. Gold and freedom go together. Gold money is both the
result of freedom and its leading protector. When money is as good
as gold, the government cannot manipulate the supply for its own
purposes. Just as the rule of law puts limits on the despotic use
of police power, a gold standard puts extreme limits on the government’s
ability to spend, borrow, and otherwise create crazy unworkable
programs. It is forced to raise its revenue through taxation, not
inflation, and generally keep its house in order.
Without
the gold standard, government is free to work with the Fed to inflate
the currency without limit. Even in our own times, we’ve seen governments
do that and thereby spread mass misery.
Now,
all governments are stupid but not all are so stupid as to pull
stunts like this. Most of the time, governments are pleased to inflate
their currencies so long as they don’t have to pay the price in
the form of mass bankruptcies, falling exchange rates, and inflation.
In
the real world, of course, there is a lag time between cause and
effect. The Fed has been inflating the currency at very high levels
for longer than a year. The consequences of this disastrous policy
are showing up only recently in the form of a falling dollar and
higher gold prices. And so what does the Fed do? It is pulling back
now. For the first time in nearly ten years, some measures of money
(M2 and MZM) are showing a falling money stock, which is likely
to prompt a second dip in the continuing recession.
Greenspan
now finds himself on the horns of a very serious dilemma. If he
continues to pull back on money, the economy could tip into a serious
recession. This is especially a danger given rising protectionism,
which mirrors the events of the early 1930s. On the other hand,
a continuation of the loose policy he has pursued for a year endangers
the value of the dollar overseas.
How
much easier matters were when we didn’t have to rely on the wisdom
of exalted monetary central planners like Greenspan. Under the gold
standard, the supply of money regulated itself. The government kept
within limits. Banks were more cautious. Savings were high because
credit was tight and saving was rewarded. This approach to economics
is the foundation of a sustainable prosperity.
We
don’t have that system now for the country or the world, but individuals
are showing their preferences once again. By driving up the price
of gold, prompting gold producers to become profitable again, the
people are expressing their lack of confidence in their leaders.
They have decided to protect themselves and not trust the state.
That is the hidden message behind the new luster of gold.
Is
a gold standard feasible again? Of course. The dollar could be redefined
in terms of gold. Interest rates would reflect the real supply and
demand for credit. We could shut down the Fed and we would never
need to worry again what the chairman of the Fed wanted. There was
a time when Greenspan was nostalgic for such a system. Investors
of the world have come to embrace this view even as Greenspan has
completely abandoned it.
What
keeps the gold standard from becoming a reality again is the love
of big government and war. If we ever fall in love with freedom
again, the gold standard will once more become a hot issue in public
debate.
See
also:
June
8, 2002
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send
him mail], is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2002 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|