From: Gerald A. Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Sat Jun 12 2004 - 03:36:31 EDT
Hi Claus. For personal reasons, this will have to be a short reply. > However, > what seems to me that you want to say in your conclusion and in the > shopping story is that the thing that is money must circulate as means > of circulation, otherwise it cannot be money. Thus, gold would have to > perform this function today in order to be considered money. The point of "Shopping With Claus" was not only to suggest that gold no longer serves as a practical means of payment, but that it indeed has significantly less *liquidity* than currency in circulation, credit cards, travelers checks, and even personal checks. It's one thing to suggest that in a money commodity system, the money commodity gradually is withdrawn from circulation. It's quite another when those who are engaged in an exchange will accept just about any other symbol that passes as money as a means of payment _rather than_ the 'money commodity'. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 15 2004 - 00:00:02 EDT