Deals become unworkably complex. You cannot find someone to make a deal with, because that requires resources, which would require more deals. Literally modern society would be impossible. We would have to return to a more pre-iron age society.
Certainly one way to put it! Money is old. It has been around for a very long time. Whether it's gold, silver, diamonds, cigarettes, candy bars, some kind of certificate (paper money), or bits in a computer; it all performs the same task. It provides a medium of exchange the is more convenient and practical than direct barter (money is indirect barter), and it provides a way to set a price (or more accurately, to agree on a price) using a uniform unit.
But no one is stopping you. You can turn to solely barter, and see if you can survive.
Very true. There ARE various communes out there that try to live this way, but they are small for a reason.
Money is so much better than barter, even when given a forced situation to solely barter, people quickly invent some sort of money (cigarettes, candy bars, foreign currency).
Very true. Indeed, that's how money got started in the first place! People have used money for some 5000 years at least. No one dictated it. They simply chose to use it.
The gold standard is susceptible to rampant abuse by random uncontrolled forces.
This is actually not quite true.
Using gold as money has certain advantages:
* You can't just print gold. You have to mine and refine it.
* Gold is gold. It doesn't matter what mine it comes from or how many miners there are.
* It's purity is easily tested. It is easily weighed. It is malleable. It is easily coined. It has uses in industry.
Gold, like any money, can be stolen. In the United States, it was stolen by FDR. That's when fiat money was declared the legal tender in the United States (unconstitutionally). That's also when Fort Knox was built, to house all that stolen gold.
A gold standard does not prevent modern banking practices, including loans, interest, accounting, or even the use of cash machines.
Gold has some disadvantages as money as well:
* It is heavy. This is compensated by the fact that gold is very valuable. You don't have to carry much of it with you.
* It is valuable...too valuable, for day to day transactions. This is why silver is also typically used along with a gold standard. It is more practical for day to day transactions. The current price of an ounce of gold in dollars is around $1800. The current price of an ounce of silver in dollars is $22.50. As the value of the dollar falls, due to just printing more and more of them with no corresponding increase in wealth, that same ounce of gold or silver is worth more dollars. This value is so high that it's practical for large transactions such as buying a car or a house, but not for day to day use.
* Anyone hoarding gold or silver is no different from someone that hoards dollars, except that what he is hoarding is losing value if it happens to be dollars. This happens to be why saving money is so ill advised. It is better to invest with it. Convert it to fine art, diamonds, real estate, business activity, precious metals, anything that holds value, even if someone is hoarding it.
Gold is not 'outdated'. Neither is silver. If people turn to using it as a currency (some already have, even some nations), it can be a practical currency.
The elites do best from stability.
The 'elites' never do well, in the end. Elitism is the result of bigotry. No one is 'elite', though some people think they are 'elite'.
Inflation is very destructive to them. Inflation often helps the young and agile.
Inflation is a relative term.
A dollar is a dollar is a dollar. It's only value AS a dollar is the ability to convert it to something else (to buy something with it). As faith in the dollar wanes, it takes more dollars to buy the same thing.
The key thing here is that money is NOT wealth. It is just a medium of exchange. It is used to TRADE wealth.
If money is being created faster than a corresponding increase in wealth (only capitalism can create wealth out of nothing), then you have inflation.
If money is being created slower than a corresponding increase in wealth, then you have deflation.
No government can predict how much money to create. This is the basic problem with communism. The Fed, for example, can only act to close the barn door long after the horse is gone. It is reactive. It cannot predict the future of wealth. That's not the only problem with the Fed.
The government can 'print' money (by telling the Fed to raise M1) any time it wants to. It does this by telling the Fed to write a check to the government. That check will be honored by the Fed. As the government spends that money, it circulates into society, and there are more dollars than before. If wealth has not increased as much for that extra money, inflation occurs.
The government puts itself in a trap this way. It too must buy stuff just to operate. Paper, guns, tanks, computers, pay for the electricity, etc. Therefore it too sees higher prices. It must print MORE money to cover it. This sets off a spiral that is destructive. It's called a Cash Crash.
There are only two other ways a government can raise money: borrow it, or tax for it (steal it).
Borrowing money sets off a similar destructive spiral. That way causes a Debt Crash.
Taxing money sets off a revolt, sooner or later. That revolt may become violent. This sets off a Tax Crash.
The federal government is broke. It has been for a long time. It is trying to print it's way out of its difficulties. It won't work. It will result eventually in a Cash Crash. People will simply no longer accept the dollar as a useful currency. They will use something else. People are already investigating possible alternatives. When they settle on one or two currencies, there is NOTHING the government can do about it.