Replies to post #124545 on Zeev's Turnips Patch-No Politics (ZEEV)

[WinLoseOrDraw]

have a very hard time seeing any major currency turning into anything even remotely resembling a genuine asset-based unit of exchange. in the era of easily-convertible currencies, one major doing it is the equivalent of ALL majors doing it.

i can't even begin to imagine what could happen over the next decade to institute such a drastic change.

[lee kramer]

George: I suspect, though one can never be certain [well one can be certain that the Red Sox will break my heart yet
again]...that there will be a return to the gold standard. I think it's simply a question of when. Trust in government(s) to eventually do the wrong thing.

[schloss_1]

George Cole-

I think any talk of a gold-based currency is follishness, but for an odd reason-- war. By that I mean that a nation's ability to overextend itself during critical times would be severely restricted by a gold-backed currency. As a simple example, the financial shennanigans necessary to win WW II could never have happened if we were still on the gold standard at that time. Also the deficit spending for the alphabet relief agencies of the Great Depression would not have been possible either.

Of course it could be argued that with nuclear weapons offering the world the safe harbor of the ultimate checkmate (Ray Bradbury's concept of the most humane weapon ever created), world wars are no longer a concern, but I would disagree. Mustard gas was not used during WW II (to the best of my knowledge) although most of the major combatants had the technology. Is it not possible that there could be a global conflict in which all of the nations involved realized that they could not use their nuclear weapons? I think it is possible.

schloss