Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ArkyBeagle t1_iv744wi wrote

> It’s clearly been a 100-year failure.

I'm less sure of that than you are. I made the mistake of reading ( most of ) "A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960" and the various panics and crashes of the 19th century were a big problem. Some of that is having money denominated in metals, some of it was stubborn attachment to other ideology.

Also - I suspect that the "Bernanke Put" worked great. That's more or less what the Fed was designed for - it was inspired by JP Morgan's ending of the Panic of 1907. Morgan died in 1913 so that avenue was lost. I think it shows well just how important an historical figure he was, regardless of any negative perception of him.

> Like a Sears home built in 1920 - the purchase price when adjusted with “silver math” comes out to almost exactly its current market value. CPI calculator had it at half.

Interesting. I'm just hoping that is not a coincidence.

I did find this:

I'm not 100% sure there's always been signal there. But the 10 and 5 year '"breakeven" rates seem pretty stable ( which is literally half of the dual mandate ). Does that mean it's an overly managed figure ( if I read you right ) ? Possibly. They could work out to the silver figures run thru a "low pass filter", something econometricians do.

> the hunt brothers saga is a bit of a boone

If our currency was silver-backed I don't think speculation would be legal so it's a wee bit specious on my part to bring that up. It does however show that commodity money earns the seemingly-counterintuitive property of feeding instability. You'd think otherwise, right? Well...