Why can't we abandon religion the same way we abandoned the gold standard?

[GAROVORKIN]

13 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Is this the "Not having a crux IS a crux" defense?

Sounds like an extraordinary position you've carved out for yourself there.

In this case , it works for me. 

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

This thread reeks of Eurocentrism.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 hours ago, mcbigski said:

I'm not a gold bug myself, but less flexible and more restrictive does have certain benefits wrt to inflation control.  Consider the Bolivar or the Papier Mark.  "Intrinsic value" might actually cut to the heart of the question though.  I'm not sure anything has intrinsic value in the strictest sense.  Absent metaphysics, isn't what we value subjective?

Yes.  But continued existence on this mortal coil does require, food, shelter, and fuel.  Those things allow people to continue staying alive.

Gold, unto itself provides none of these things.  It is a rare, shiny, soft metal.  That’s it.

[Jace, Extat]

You Iconoclastic, Scott?

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

9 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

You Iconoclastic, Scott?

Considering that he's Greek Orthodox, probably not.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

17 minutes ago, Matrim Fox Cauthon said:

Considering that he's Greek Orthodox, probably not.

I’m certainly not a religious Iconoclast.  I venerate Icons every time I enter my parish.  

As to the gold-standard.  Sure.  It’s as abstract as fiat currency.

[OldGimletEye]

10 hours ago, mcbigski said:

I'm not a gold bug myself, but less flexible and more restrictive does have certain benefits wrt to inflation control.  Consider the Bolivar or the Papier Mark.  "Intrinsic value" might actually cut to the heart of the question though.  I'm not sure anything has intrinsic value in the strictest sense.  Absent metaphysics, isn't what we value subjective?

Yeah, because the United States has had real inflation problem as of late. When the  last round of all this nonsensical gold buggism started, back around 2010 or so, it was pushed by people that were concerned by a non existent problem ie inflation.

But, you know, some people just can’t let the 1970s go. The true conservatism made some real bad calls.

And there is nothing magical about the gold standard. It can be badly botched like any other monetary system, to wit, the international gold standard that likely played a key role in bringing about the Great Depression.

Anyway, what gives fiat money value? Likely it can be used to pay taxes. What about gold? Probably the same thing. I get the argument that gold can be used to make necklaces or whatever so it may have "intrinsic value", but there is a decent argument to be made that the reason that state's issued money in the form of gold or silver was because it was hard to forge. And that it could be used to pay taxes, in lieu of real commodities, gave it value.

 

[Jace, Extat]

15 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I’m certainly not a religious Iconoclast.  I venerate Icons every time I enter my parish.  

As to the gold-standard.  Sure.  It’s as abstract as fiat currency.

I really dig that kind of religious jargon. It makes me think of The Arbiter talkin' shop at work or something.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

3 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Yeah, because the United States has had real inflation problem as of late. When the  last round of all this nonsensical gold buggism started, back around 2010 or so, it was pushed by people that were concerned by a non existent problem ie inflation.

But, you know, some people just can’t let the 1970s go. The true conservatism made some real bad calls.

And there is nothing magical about the gold standard. It can be badly botched like any other monetary system, to wit, the international gold standard that likely played a key role in bringing about the Great Depression.

Anyway, what gives fiat money value? Likely it can be used to pay taxes. What about gold? Probably the same thing. I get the argument that gold can be used to make necklaces or whatever so it may have "intrinsic value", but there is a decent argument to be made that the reason that state's issued money in the form of gold or silver was because it was hard to forge. And that it could be used to pay taxes, in lieu of real commodities, gave it value.

 

I would say that specie currency had the following virtues:

1.  Relatively rare material that was relatively difficult to extract.

2.  Relatively easy material to forge if you have the required expertise into a portable means of exchange.

3.  Relatively easy to create a multi-jurisdictional monetary system because value could translate by weight.

4.  Relatively easy to debase by alloy (though see above re international exchange).

 

[Darth Richard II]

9 hours ago, GAROVORKIN said:

Snark is not considered a virtue.

It is in my religion.

[Yukle]

11 hours ago, Matrim Fox Cauthon said:

This thread reeks of Eurocentrism.

 I was thinking something similar.

A lot of assumptions about religion, including the fact that they contain deities, is taken for granted. For instance, some devout Hindus are atheists. That sounds peculiar, but belief in gods is not a central tenet of Hinduism as a religion.

That's a very brief scratch of the surface, but I think it would take a much better knowledge than what I have to go much further; suffice it to say that the broad strokes being made are only really relevant to Christianity or religions similar to it.

I'm not really sure that the gold standard is being discussed well, either, since it's assumed that 1) all nations used to use it, which they didn't, and 2) gold has no use when it actually does. It's very useful and highly sought after in electronics.

[OldGimletEye]

4 hours ago, Yukle said:

I'm not really sure that the gold standard is being discussed well, either, since it's assumed that 1) all nations used to use it, which they didn't, and 2) gold has no use when it actually does. It's very useful and highly sought after in electronics.

Well your right. The United States allowed both gold and silver during it's history. Europe during the Middle Ages used primarily silver, gold being mainly used for large transactions, particular international transactions. So we probably should speak of commodity backed money.

But, when I think of their being "a gold standard" its mainly the period between 1870 - 1914 when many nations adopted an actual gold standard and the subsequent attempt to create a gold standard (or really a gold exchange standard) after WW1 in the 1920s ,the system of which malfunctioned badly and played a part in causing the Great Depression, and ultimately led to commodity backed money becoming disfavored and the creation of fiat money.

[OldGimletEye]

21 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I would say that specie currency had the following virtues:

1.  Relatively rare material that was relatively difficult to extract.

3.  Relatively easy to create a multi-jurisdictional monetary system because value could translate by weight.

If countries use gold as a means of payment, then all commodities become priced in terms of the international price of gold. If the gold price of corn is higher in New York than it is London, then corn should get shipped to New York, leaving the price difference between New York and London that of transportation cost. If the corn price in New York falls, then you'd expect some substitution away from goods that might not be international commodities to an international commodity like corn. So internal commodities end up being linked to an international gold price as well.

If the worldwide demand for gold suddenly increases, maybe because people get nervous, because somebody forgot to sacrifice a goat, the price of commodities will fall. And this can be quite a problem, where it may take a long while for prices to adjust back into equilibrium. Firms are likely to adjust quantities first before trying to reduce prices. Labor markets are likely to adjust by quantities first before the nominal wage falls. And it may be a long while before goods and labor markets clear.

And because it is difficult to dig gold out of the ground or even to find it, private producers probably are not likely to satisfy the demand for gold to keep the price level stable.

ETA:

But, during a low tech era, where making money that is not easy to being counterfeited is hard, then the advantages you describe do have a lot of merit and its probably why most states began with commodity money.

[Yukle]

1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

And because it is difficult to dig gold out of the ground or even to find it, private producers probably are not likely to satisfy the demand for gold to keep the price level stable.

I read somewhere that all of the gold ever mined to date would fit into a cube small enough to fit beneath the Eiffel Tower.

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

 

And because it is difficult to dig gold out of the ground or even to find it, private producers probably are not likely to satisfy the demand for gold to keep the price level stable.

That's why half of the record business is you have to get a producer who shits gold records.

[Yukle]

2 minutes ago, Triskele said:

I was about to ask why can't we abandon post-modernism the way that we abandoned modernism, but was there ever even a movement referred to as "modernism?"

Yes. The time period from roughly 1500 to 1800 is considered modernism. Post-modernism as a term describes a period a fair bit later, because the in-between moments get lots of war names: Colonialism, Pre-war, Wars, Post-wars, Cold War... Post-modern.  

[Altherion]

44 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I read somewhere that all of the gold ever mined to date would fit into a cube small enough to fit beneath the Eiffel Tower.

At its base, the Eiffel Tower is a square with each side being 100 meters. The French love of the metric system works to our favor here as one doesn't even need a calculator to figure out that the volume of the cube that matches this base is 1 million cubic meters. The density of gold (according to the first Google result) is 19.32 grams per cubic centimeter which works out to 19.32 tons per cubic meter. Thus, the mass of the total amount of gold that would fit in our hypothetical cube is 19.32 million tons. How much gold have we mined so far? According to the BBC,

Quote

Estimates range from 155,244 tonnes, marginally less than the GFMS figure, to about 16 times that amount - 2.5 million tonnes.

Even at the upper range of that scale (which is probably an overestimate), we are roughly an order of magnitude short of the Eiffel Tower cube so yes, it will fit under the base and in fact it will even fit under the second platform (which is a square with a side of 37.5 meters) for the lower estimate or under the first platform for the higher estimate.

[Jo498]

8 hours ago, Yukle said:

 I was thinking something similar.

A lot of assumptions about religion, including the fact that they contain deities, is taken for granted. For instance, some devout Hindus are atheists. That sounds peculiar, but belief in gods is not a central tenet of Hinduism as a religion.

That's a very brief scratch of the surface, but I think it would take a much better knowledge than what I have to go much further; suffice it to say that the broad strokes being made are only really relevant to Christianity or religions similar to it.

The Eurocentrism is to some extent justified because Europe (or its cultural derivatives, lke the US etc.) is the only region of the world where there is a vocal minority that thinks one should get rid of religions. I am not aware of any prominent figure like Nietzsche, Dawkins or Hitchens from Africa, India, East Asia but maybe I am too eurocentric. More importantly, the idea that religion (attendance, practice, beliefs) would somehow automatically decline and vanish for demographical or similar reasons seems wrong in most of the world, except for a few regions in the so-called "Western World", so the main "data points" that favor a waning of religions are also from Europe/US/Australia etc.

[Yukle]

2 hours ago, Jo498 said:

The Eurocentrism is to some extent justified because Europe (or its cultural derivatives, lke the US etc.) is the only region of the world where there is a vocal minority that thinks one should get rid of religions. I am not aware of any prominent figure like Nietzsche, Dawkins or Hitchens from Africa, India, East Asia but maybe I am too eurocentric. More importantly, the idea that religion (attendance, practice, beliefs) would somehow automatically decline and vanish for demographical or similar reasons seems wrong in most of the world, except for a few regions in the so-called "Western World", so the main "data points" that favor a waning of religions are also from Europe/US/Australia etc.

I hadn’t really thought of it like that. I can’t think of a similar movement elsewhere in the world - like you it could be I just don’t know of an existing culture, rather than it not existing as such.

My guess is India and China must have similar such sentiments somewhere in their cultures just due to the sheer size and variety of their populace. India, certainly, is a cultural melting pot, but, yeah, now you mention it, I don’t know if this discussion would really relate to a typical Indian’s life.

Food for thought. I will do some reading around, if and when I have time.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

12 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

If countries use gold as a means of payment, then all commodities become priced in terms of the international price of gold. If the gold price of corn is higher in New York than it is London, then corn should get shipped to New York, leaving the price difference between New York and London that of transportation cost. If the corn price in New York falls, then you'd expect some substitution away from goods that might not be international commodities to an international commodity like corn. So internal commodities end up being linked to an international gold price as well.

If the worldwide demand for gold suddenly increases, maybe because people get nervous, because somebody forgot to sacrifice a goat, the price of commodities will fall. And this can be quite a problem, where it may take a long while for prices to adjust back into equilibrium. Firms are likely to adjust quantities first before trying to reduce prices. Labor markets are likely to adjust by quantities first before the nominal wage falls. And it may be a long while before goods and labor markets clear.

And because it is difficult to dig gold out of the ground or even to find it, private producers probably are not likely to satisfy the demand for gold to keep the price level stable.

ETA:

But, during a low tech era, where making money that is not easy to being counterfeited is hard, then the advantages you describe do have a lot of merit and its probably why most states began with commodity money.

Yes - your ETA was my point.  I don't think commodity money continues to make sense on any level, anywhere.