Texas Star
US Veteran
I have two brothers. One is pretty normal, if not much into guns. The other wants to change the social order.
He has some language problems that'd require a full-time editor, but has written a long manifesto about why he thinks the major nations should abandon gold, etc. and base the value of their money on people's faith that the government will stand behind the paper money they issue. In other words, the money is worth its face value because a government says that it is.
He's probably right that many countries really don't have the gold or whatever to back up their paper. But can you economists explain why we can't just print paper money, without regard to what standard it's based on?
He thinks that if just paper was involved, the govt. could print enough they could distribute it to out-of-work people and the poor, etc. and everyone would have nicer lives.
Aside from the liklihood that Cuba, Guinea, or Haiti, or Nigeria, etc. could then print all the money they wanted and be as well off as we are, what flaws do you see with his plan?
I'm trying to convince him not to make a fool of himself by starting a blog to promote this scheme or selling printouts of his plan by mail.
What are the flaws in doing this? In just relying on paper being worth what the govt. says that it is and using it to eliminate poverty through government monetary handouts to those in need?
P.S .: Please, no ridicule. This is a serious question.
He has some language problems that'd require a full-time editor, but has written a long manifesto about why he thinks the major nations should abandon gold, etc. and base the value of their money on people's faith that the government will stand behind the paper money they issue. In other words, the money is worth its face value because a government says that it is.
He's probably right that many countries really don't have the gold or whatever to back up their paper. But can you economists explain why we can't just print paper money, without regard to what standard it's based on?
He thinks that if just paper was involved, the govt. could print enough they could distribute it to out-of-work people and the poor, etc. and everyone would have nicer lives.
Aside from the liklihood that Cuba, Guinea, or Haiti, or Nigeria, etc. could then print all the money they wanted and be as well off as we are, what flaws do you see with his plan?
I'm trying to convince him not to make a fool of himself by starting a blog to promote this scheme or selling printouts of his plan by mail.
What are the flaws in doing this? In just relying on paper being worth what the govt. says that it is and using it to eliminate poverty through government monetary handouts to those in need?
P.S .: Please, no ridicule. This is a serious question.
Last edited: