A LIBERTARIAN CRITIQUE OF GOVERNMENTAL MONETARY SYSTEMS
Economist Murray Rothbard wrote in the Introduction to this 1964 essay, “Of all the economic problems, money is possibly the most tangled, and perhaps where we most need perspective. Money, moreover, is the economic area most encrusted and entangled with centuries of government meddling. Many people… usually devoted to the free market, stop short at money. Money, they insist, is different---it must be supplied by government and regulated by government. They never think of state control of money as interference in the free market; a free market in money is to them unthinkable. Governments must mint coins, issue paper, define ‘legal tender,’ create central banks… ‘stabilize the price level,’ etc. Historically, money was one of the first things controlled by government, and the free market ‘revolution’ of the 18th and 19th centuries made very little dent in the monetary sphere… Let us first ask ourselves the question: CAN money be organized under the freedom principle? Can we have a free market in money as well as in other goods and services?... we have no more important task than exploring the ways and means of a free market in money.”
He observes, “Through the centuries, two commodities: gold and silver, have emerged as money in the free competition of the market, and have displaced the other commodities. Both are uniquely marketable… and excel in other necessary qualities. In recent times, silver … has been found more useful for smaller exchanges, while gold is more useful for larger transactions… the important thing is that … the free market has found gold and silver to be the most efficient moneys… Thus government is powerless to create money for the economy; it can only be developed by the processes of the free market.” (Pg. 3-4)
He argues, “Opponents of private coinage charge that fraud would run rampant… But if government cannot apprehend the criminal when private coinage is relied upon, what hope is there for a reliable coinage when the integrity of private market place operators is discarded in favor of a government monopoly of coinage? If government cannot be trusted to ferret out the occasional villain in a free market in coin, why can government be trusted when it finds itself in a position of total control over money and may abase coin, counterfeit coin, or otherwise will full legal sanction perform as the sole villains in the market place? It is surely folly to say that government must socialize all property in order to prevent anyone from stealing property” (Pg. 8-9)
He asserts, “the monetary planner might object: ‘All right, granting that it is pointless to increase the money supply, isn’t gold mining a waste of resources? Shouldn’t the government keep the money supply constant, and prohibit new mining?’ This argument might be plausible to those who hold no principled objections to government meddling, though it would not convince the determined advocate of liberty. But the objection overlooks an important point: that gold is not only money, but is also, inevitably, a COMMODITY. An increased supply of gold may not confer any MONETARY benefit, but it does confer a NON-MONETARY benefit---i.e., it does increase the supply of gold used in consumption (ornaments, dental work, and the like) and in … industrial work. Gold mining, therefore, is not a social waste at all.” (Pg. 13)
He explains, “when a businessman borrows or lends money… The loaned funds are SAVED funds… being transferred from saver to borrower. Bank issues, on the other hand, artificially increase the money supply since pseudo-receipts are injected into the market. A bank, then, is not taking the usual business risk… The bank creates new money out of thin air, and does not… have go acquire money by producing and selling its services. In short, the bank is ALREADY and at all times bankrupt; but its bankruptcy is only REVEALED when customers get suspicious, and precipitate ‘bank runs’… Here we conclude that, morally, such banking would have no more right to exist in a truly free market than any other form of implicit theft.” (Pg. 23)
He states, “if government can find ways to engage in COUNTERFEITING---the creation of new money out of thin air---it can quickly produce its own money without taking the trouble to sell services or mine gold. It can then appropriate resources slyly and almost unnoticed, without rousing the hostility touched off by taxation. In fact, counterfeiting can create in its very victims the blissful illusion of unparalleled prosperity. Counterfeiting is… but another name for inflation.” (Pg. 27)
When government injects ‘new’ money into the economy, “Local spending, indeed... DOES get a shot in the arm. The new money works its way … throughout the economic system. As the new money spreads, it bids prices up… new money can only dilute the effectiveness of each dollar. But this dilution… is therefore uneven… some people gain and others lose… people in remote areas of the economy, who have not yet received the new money, finding their buying prices rising before their incomes… The first receivers of the new money gain most, and at the expense of the latest receivers. Inflation, then, confers no general social benefit; instead, it redistributes the wealth in favor of the first-comers and at the expense of the laggards in the race.” (Pg. 28)
He continues, “Inflation also penalizes thrift and encourages debt; for any sum of money loaned will be repaid in dollars of lower purchasing-power than when originally received. The incentive, then, is to borrow and repay later rather than save and lend. Inflation, therefore, lowers the general standard of living in the very course of creating a tinsel atmosphere of ‘prosperity.’” (Pg. 29)
He contends, “Government imposes price controls largely in order to divert public attention from governmental inflation to the alleged evils of the free market.” (Pg. 33)
He asserts, “In addition to removing the checks on inflation, the act of establishing a Central Bank began, banks kept their reserves in gold; now gold flow into the Central Bank in exchange for deposits with the Bank, which are now reserves for the commercial banks. But the Bank itself keeps only a fractional reserve of gold to its own liabilities! Therefore, the act of establishing a Central Bank greatly multiplies the inflationary potential of the country.” (Pg. 41)
He concludes, ‘the prognosis for the dollar and for the international monetary system is grim indeed. Until and unless we return to the classical gold standard at a realistic gold price… the international money system is fated to shift back and forth between fixed and fluctuating exchange rates, with each system posing unsolved problems, working badly, and finally disintegrating… The prospect for the future is accelerating and eventually runaway inflation at home, accompanied by monetary breakdown and economic warfare abroad. This progress can only be changed by a drastic alteration of the American and world monetary system: by the return to a free-market commodity money such as gold, and by removing totally from the monetary scene.” (Pg. 62)
This essay will appeal to libertarians, many conservatives, and similar persons.