Charles Kadlec

The paper dollar is now the single most important source of systemic risk to the financial system, the world economy, and the security of the American people.

That is the lesson of the past 100 years that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did not teach during his four lectures at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Business. Instead, he celebrated the importance of the extraordinary powers he and his fellow governors have to manipulate interest rates and the value of the dollar in the name of economic growth and stability.

In so doing, he ignored completely that the ever growing need for heroic interventions by the Fed is itself being created by the paper dollar system he celebrates.

This failure is all the more telling because Mr. Bernanke states up front that central banks perform two critical functions: The first is to “achieve macroeconomic stability.” By that, he generally means “stable growth in the economy, avoiding big swings, recessions and the like, and keeping inflation low and stable.” The second is to provide “financial stability” by either trying to prevent or mitigate financial panics or financial crises.

On both counts, the paper dollar system in effect since the final link between the dollar and gold was broken in 1971 has failed and failed miserably when compared to the results produced under the gold standard.

Let’s begin by stipulating that we agree with Chairman Bernanke’s point that the gold standard is not a perfect monetary system. What is?

The more important question is which system, the gold standard or the paper dollar, provides more macroeconomic stability and fewer financial crises.

To answer this question, let’s examine the historic record beginning with the most difficult example, the Great Depression, which supporters of the paper dollar invoke to discredit the gold standard and thereby avoid defending the abysmal record of the paper dollar.

As Professor Brian Domitrovic pointed out in his recent Forbes.com column, the officials running the Federal Reserve in the critical period between 1928 and 1933 chose to ignore the rules of the gold standard, which would have forced them to increase the money supply in response to inflows of gold. Instead, the Fed exercised discretion and tightened, thereby making the deflation of the early 1930s worse than it otherwise would have been. Explains Domitrovic:

“Rather, as (Richard H.) Timberlake has shown, we know what guided Fed thinking in this period, and this was the doctrine that the Fed would refrain from issuing money unless it clearly would go to financing end-point economic transactions, as opposed to things like stock-market speculation and even investment. Whatever you want to say about this doctrine, it has zip to do with the gold standard. And it was at the root of the Fed’s weird decision-making 1928-33 where it presided over a radical narrowing of the money supply.”

What about the claim that, while the gold standard maintains a stable price level over longer periods of time, in the words of Chairman Bernanke: “over shorter periods, maybe 5 or 10 years, you can actually have a lot of inflation, rising prices, or deflation, falling prices.”

After the largest gold discovery of modern times set off the 1849 California gold rush the price level in the US rose 12.4% over the next 8 years. Under the paper dollar, that 8 year cumulative increase was exceeded in 1974, 1979 and 1980 alone. Moreover, an 8 year increase of 12.4% is equivalent to an average increase of 1.5% a year. By contrast, current Fed policy calls for inflation to average 2% a year which equates to a 17% increase in the price level over the next 8 years.

Since abandoning the last vestiges of the gold standard in 1971, inflation has averaged 4.4% a year. Nevertheless, various sectors of the economy have suffered Great Depression like deflations. For example, between 1980 and 1986, the price of oil fell 60%, and the price of agricultural commodities and farm land fell by double digits. Those deflations led to the major bank failures of the mid and late 1980s. And, of course, the most recent financial crisis was triggered by a 30% decline in home prices, a disaster for American families, banks and investors alike that ranks right up there with the hardships experienced during the Great Depression.

The net result is that without the guidance of the gold standard, the Fed and the paper dollar have become the leading sources of economic and financial instability. Since 1971, when President Nixon freed the Federal Reserve from the strictures of the gold standard, recessions have become more frequent, longer and deeper. From 1971 through 2010 (under the paper standard) unemployment averaged 6.3%, much worse than the 1947-67 (gold standard) average of 4.7%. We have since experienced the three worst recessions since the end of World War II, with the unemployment rate averaging 8.5% in 1975, 9.7% in 1982, and now above 8% for three years and counting.

Under the post-World War II gold standard, there were no financial crises that presented a systemic risk to the US economy. Since 1971, we have experienced the:

  • 1973 oil shock and international monetary crisis
  • 1979 oil shock and dollar crisis
  • 1982 Latin American debt crisis
  • 1984 banking crisis and effective nationalization of Continental Illinois Bank
  • 1987 stock market crash
  • 1989-91 S&L crisis and bailout
  • 1990 Japanese bubble collapse and banking crisis
  • 1994 Mexican peso crisis
  • 1998 Asian currency crisis
  • 2001 dot com crash
  • 2007-09 Housing collapse and international financial crisis
  • 2010-2012 European sovereign debt crisis

In addition, the massive increase in the Fed’s and other major central bank balance sheets since the first quantitative easing in 2009 has coincided with the slowest recovery ever — even worse than the recoveries experienced during the 1930s — and the fear of yet another break out in inflation.

Under Chairman Bernanke’s leadership, the extraordinary steps taken to contain the financial panic in late 2008 and early 2009 by fulfilling its “lender of last resort” role to banks and, under emergency powers granted to it by the Federal Reserve Act, to non-bank institutions, may well have avoided a complete collapse of the world’s financial system.

But to use that success as justification for a discretionary monetary policy and a defense of the Fed’s ability to manipulate interest rates and the value of the dollar is to miss the greater point. The growing instability of the macro economy and the financial system is itself a product of the paper dollar system.

The most important thing the Fed could do now to fulfill its two fundamental roles of providing for a stable economy and preventing financial crises would be to begin an orderly transition back to a dollar whose value was once again defined by a unit weight of gold — that is to make the dollar once again as good as gold. To do otherwise is to leave in place the fundamental source of systemic risk that no amount of increased regulation or oversight can correct — the inherent instability of today’s monetary system based on a paper dollar whose future value is unknown and unknowable.

Regards,

Charles Kadlec,
for The Daily Reckoning

Charles Kadlec

Mr. Kadlec is a member of the Economic Advisory Board of the American Principles Project, an author and founder of the Community of Liberty.

  • Boris

    The world would have a gold standard if politicians could create gold from thin air.

  • WaffenSS

    The Federal Reserve is nothing more to me than a bunch of jews figuring out a way to squeeze the goyim for one last penny.

  • Sartorius

    Why pick on the current Fed chief? Wasn’t his predecessor, the Libertarian Super Hero Alan Greenspan, the one who laid the foundation for the current mess?

  • Ben the layabout

    In the whole western world, in the USA in particular, there is probably too much entrenched political opposition for any major corrective actions (e.g. return to the gold standard.) Even if there were no opposition, such a return would be anything but “orderly.” The disease (big banking and government) is too far gone, and only the “death” of the old regime will cure things. What will replace it? Anarchy? Dictatorship? (Those two are most likely by historical guide.) A new small government? Wouldn’t that be nice!

  • therooster of Christ

    “On both counts, the paper dollar system in effect since the final link between the dollar and gold was broken in 1971 has failed and failed miserably when compared to the results produced under the gold standard.”

    The link between gold and dollars still holds true, just not in the fixed sense but in the real-time sense, a step that was necessary in order to reintroduce gold as a fully liquid (and debt free) currency. Gold has never had great liquidity under the constraint of fixed values. Let the market rule.

  • http://GreatRedDragon.com Edward Ulysses Cate

    If one looks at any chart of the value of the dollar since 1913 to the present, they will see what an orderly, controlled default looks like. The Federal Reserve was created for one behind-the-scene reason, and it looks like they’ll reach their centennial goal by next year. They’ve known what they’ve been doing for the last 99 years, and that wasn’t for the benefit of the 99%. Same circus, different clowns.

  • rolf

    BRING BACK THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

  • Bob

    Satan’s ratz have controlled the world’s money for far too long.
    See “WIKISPOOKS.COM 9/11″
    Exterminate this curse on humanity, leeches on the body and soul of America.

  • Agent P

    “In the whole western world, in the USA in particular, there is probably too much entrenched political opposition for any major corrective actions (e.g. return to the gold standard.)”

    There it is…

    If Gold were to be (Fairly & Accurately) re-introduced, its current ‘value’ would be Multiples of its current suppressed price. And yes, I said Suppressed…

    With the amount of $Debt (both serviceable and not), that the U.S. currently holds, even based on 1980′s economic metrics, the POG would need to be re-valued at nearly $10,000/oz. – and be even more critical metrics/analysis, perhaps Double that…

Recent Articles

The Price Floor That’s Key to Gold Mining Profits

Matt Insley

Gold has had a rough go of it since the 2008 financial crisis. But according to Matt Insley, there is now a very clear price floor for the yellow metal. And what's more interesting, he comes to this conclusion by way of a glass of chocolate milk and Janet Yellen's actions from here throne at the Eccles Building. Read on...


Why You Should Tune-Out the Talk of a Tech Bubble

Paul Mampilly

The recent spate of new tech-based IPOs has a few prominent investors (Ahem... David Einhorn) touting the return of the '90s tech bubble. But there are some very good reasons why this market is nothing like the '90s, and why investors should be wary of any advice to the contrary. Paul Mampilly explains...


The Scariest Thing You Don’t Know About Generic Drugs

David Eifrig

Generic drugs are supposed to lower healthcare costs and provide you with another medical alternative. That's what it says on paper. But there's a real danger that goes along with these drugs. A danger even your doctor might not be aware of... Dr. David Eifrig has the full story. Read on...


An Unlikely Source of Dirt-Cheap Energy

Greg Guenthner

The solar panel turns 60 on Friday, but this birthday celebration will be unlike any other the industry has seen so far. In the past, solar energy's high price tag meant its wide-spread usage was nothing more than a pipe dream. But now, after six decades, solar power may finally be cheaper than oil and Asian liquefied-natural-gas. Greg Guenthner has more...


5 Min. Forecast
How to Profit On the Back of an “Activist Investor”

Dave Gonigam

Since the invention of the "shareholder rights plan" (i.e. the "poison pill"), most companies are relatively immune to hostile takeovers. But according to Dave Gonigam that could all change thanks to one activist investor. And if you're savvy enough, you may just be able to follow his lead for big gains. Read on...