From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Wed Dec 01 2004 - 10:36:18 EST
>>>> as for gold, send me some anytime.!!!!.. well I see your point, but I was allowing for some dramatic effect in the case of imperialist states... but it is certainly true for the Indian peasant... still where personal wealth still requires the form of golden money rendered as tons of jewelry....there is also a flourishing 'second' hand gold market in the form of trinkets, coins with pawnbrokers etc in all middle/poor areas of the world... which might tell us something. <<< Paul B, What does it tell us? *If one wants to understand whether gold still serves as the money commodity, then why look to the behavior of Indian peasants?* To look at traditional societies where elements of pre-capitalist relations are still to be found is misleading: e.g. the traditional use of gold for jewelry in such societies says *nothing* of significance about the issue at hand; the fact that there is a second-hand market and pawnbrokers *only* means that these peasants when starved for cash are forced into selling family property *and* that there are pawnbrokers who receive income by 'buying low and selling high'. Indeed, the very essence of that relation is *unequal exchange* -- yet, if gold were *really* the "universal equivalent" how would such an exchange be possible? >>>> I any case you are pointing to the admin arrangements which sustain fiduciary issue and 'force its course'... so what you say is to be expected ( although since contracts for houses are cleared via solicitors (lawyers) here I'm sure they wouldn't worry.. the bank would accept the gold .. and that is the point, if banks get 'picky' let me know and I'll think about why!!!!!)) <<< If I were to walk into my bank with a bag (or bars) of gold and request that it be exchanged for Federal Reserve Notes, I think they would be very 'picky' indeed and wouldn't agree to conduct the transaction. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 02 2004 - 00:00:01 EST