The True Gold Standard (Second Edition)
"...a money supply based on nothing other than faith in government is a productivity killer."
John Aziz is a young British blogger on matters economic, publishing at azizonomics: economics for the jilted generation. In a recent entry he addresses the predicament that during the post-war gold-exchange standard "average family income increased at a greater rate than that of the top 1%. From 1979-2007 (years without a gold standard) the top 1% did much, much better than the average family." The stagnation of family income, and the growing disparity between the middle class and the wealthy is, of course, one of the fundamental complaints underlying the former Occupy Wall Street movement and its more structured successor, the 99% Spring. Of course, economic growth rates are a combination of labor force growth plus productivity growth. Without productivity growth wages stagnate. So ... consider the correlation between monetary policy and productivity growth (and the absence thereof).
Aziz writes, with exceptional lucidity:
I have long suspected that a money supply based on nothing other than faith in government is a productivity killer.
Last November I wrote:
As we have seen with the quantitative easing program, the newly-printed money is directed to the rich. The Keynesian response to that might be that income growth inequality can be solved (or at least remedied) by making sure that helicopter drops of new money are done over the entire economy rather than directed solely to Wall Street megabanks.
And now I have empirical evidence that my hypothesis has been true — total factor productivity.
In 2009 the Economist explained TFP as follows:
Here’s US total factor productivity:
Only a wilful and ideological Keynesian could ignore the salient detail: as soon as the USA left the gold exchange standard, total factor productivity began to dramatically stagnate.
Coincidence? I don’t think so — a fundamental change in the nature of the money supply coincided almost exactly with a fundamental change to the shape of the nation’s economy. Is the simultaneous outgrowth in income inequality a coincidence too?
And it’s not just total factor productivity that has been lower than in the years when America was on the gold exchange standard — as a Bank of England report recently found, GDP growth has averaged lower in the pure fiat money era (2.8% vs 1.8%), and financial crises have been more frequent in the non-gold-standard years.
The authors of the report noted:
Still think it’s a barbarous relic?
Full marks, Mr. Aziz
Hostility toward gold has a long pedigree. 19th century depiction of Pliny the Elder courtesy of the Library of Congress Gaius Plinius Secundus, commonly known as Pliny the Elder, in his The Natural History, Book 33, section 3, writes: Would that gold could have been banished for ever from the earth, accursed by...
Apr 16, 2014
The New York Times’ Jonathan Gilbert reported: “Argentines endured price rises of nearly 30 percent last year, according to an unofficial index published by opposition politicians; the government, which has been accused of manipulating economic data in the past, claims inflation reached only 10.9 percent in 2013. In 2014, inflation...
Apr 14, 2014
Jacques Rueff, a key figure in European economic circles from the 1930s until the 1970s, was, first and foremost, an...
Nov 14, 2012
Key Monetary Writings
Presentation to the Tenth Annual UNICEF-Georgetown International Development Conference (IDC). I'm honored to address the 10th UNICEF-Georgetown International Development...
Kathleen M. Packard, Publisher
The Gold Standard Now
Board of Advisors:
Sean Fieler, James Grant,
Senior European Advisor