[Marxism] The Republicans and the gold standard

Tom Cod tomcod3 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 29 11:25:16 MDT 2012


I think it is something more abstract than that, not necessarily a
physical object, but is increasingly something more "intangible".
Money is a "universal equivalent" as I recall Aristotle putting it, a
medium of exchange, a statement of account and a commodity in its own
right.  Increasingly it is not a physical object of any kind, but
rather accounted for in computer records.

Surely, economic value and human economy is fundamentally bottomed on
the labor that creates it, but it is an oversimplification, even a
fetish, to say that the value or the price of any item can be
determined mechanically, in the manner of cost accounting, by the
amount of labor used to produce it.  By this logic cheaply produced
paper currency, to say nothing of money and credit in computer
accounts, stocks, derivatives, futures etc. (intangibles that are also
commodities) would necessarily have less value than precious metal
currency as currency.  It is not metal that stands behind currency but
the value of goods and services in the greater economy it
represents-is a "chit" or "scrip" for-and can be exchanged for.
Therein, in my view, is where the labor value resides.

Finally, the idea that anything under capitalism can be immune from
speculation is naive.   In that regard precious metals, particularly
gold, have a long and notorious history going back to the days of Jay
Gould.  I'm not a big fan of economic writing, which like postmodern
social theory seems intentionally written to be obscure, but the link
to the article by Michael Roberts was a refreshing deconstruction of
some of these issues and not a sterile of rehash of marxist cant,
although he is a marxist.

http://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/the-republicans-and-the-gold-standard/

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldiniz at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> It doesn't need to be gold, as long as it is something that can objectively
> represent labor value. It is a labor that is transformed directly into a
> commodity that is identified with money. It could be silver, copper. I
> think, personally, that it would be possible to have an energy based
> standard, electric energy, although it is something more delicate to keep
> than metals. Can you give an example of what better ways are to peg the
> value of money that does not rely on market speculation?
>
> 2012/8/29 Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com>
>
>




More information about the Marxism mailing list