WEBVTT

NOTE Fiat Money Cannot Last. Or Can It?

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.440
Ladies and gentlemen, it's a great pleasure to be here.

2
00:00:02.440 --> 00:00:04.440
I'm really excited.

3
00:00:04.440 --> 00:00:06.560
Mises Institute is a fantastic place,

4
00:00:06.560 --> 00:00:11.640
and I really feel honoured to have the opportunity this afternoon

5
00:00:11.640 --> 00:00:14.600
to share some thoughts about my work.

6
00:00:14.600 --> 00:00:18.320
It's titled, Fiat Money Cannot Last, Or Can It?

7
00:00:18.320 --> 00:00:21.480
What Mises and Rothbard Had to Say About It.

8
00:00:21.480 --> 00:00:24.400
To most of you, I think I'm stating the obvious,

9
00:00:24.400 --> 00:00:28.080
if I say fiat money has got a bad name.

10
00:00:28.080 --> 00:00:33.000
But if we look at economic literature, this impression is basically confirmed.

11
00:00:33.000 --> 00:00:39.040
Frank Fetter, for instance, in his 1926 book, Modern Economic Problems,

12
00:00:39.040 --> 00:00:43.640
wrote on fiat money, which he called political money,

13
00:00:43.640 --> 00:00:48.520
quote, political money resorted to in desperate extremities

14
00:00:48.520 --> 00:00:52.520
has usually proved to be a costly experiment.

15
00:00:52.520 --> 00:00:57.840
It is peculiarly liable to the subject of political intrigue

16
00:00:57.840 --> 00:01:02.840
and of popular misunderstanding. It is this danger more than anything else

17
00:01:02.840 --> 00:01:06.840
that makes political money in general a poor kind of money.

18
00:01:06.840 --> 00:01:11.840
And also Irving Fischer, for instance, in his The Purchasing Power of Money

19
00:01:11.840 --> 00:01:17.840
wrote about fiat money, quote, irredeemable paper money has almost invariably proved

20
00:01:17.840 --> 00:01:24.840
a curse to the country employing it. And lastly, the French philosopher Voltaire

21
00:01:24.840 --> 00:01:31.840
noted once, quote, paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value, zero.

22
00:01:31.840 --> 00:01:42.840
Against this backdrop of this kind of skepticism, the question which I found quite interesting is the following.

23
00:01:42.840 --> 00:01:52.840
Is there a priori theory which must lead to the conclusion that fiat money cannot last, that it will necessarily break down?

24
00:01:52.840 --> 00:02:05.840
And with a priori theory, I mean propositions which tell us something about reality and which can be validated without taking recourse to experience.

25
00:02:05.840 --> 00:02:12.840
When we look at the Austrians, let me start with Ludwig von Mises. He concluded that fiat money cannot last.

26
00:02:12.840 --> 00:02:18.840
He made it pretty clear in his magnum opus, Human Action, that fiat money cannot last.

27
00:02:18.840 --> 00:02:28.840
In contrast, Murray Rothbard, in the case for a 100% gold dollar, expressed concern that fiat money may continue indefinitely.

28
00:02:28.840 --> 00:02:36.840
The fact that Mises and Rothbard's conclusions diverge may come as a surprise to you,

29
00:02:36.840 --> 00:02:45.840
especially so as both thinkers rest their analyses in praxeology, the science of human action, the logic of human action.

30
00:02:45.840 --> 00:03:00.840
And in the article, hopefully you could secure a copy, I try to address the issue where Mises and Rothbard's reasoning converges and where it diverges.

31
00:03:00.840 --> 00:03:05.840
And the article has been structured as follows.

32
00:03:05.840 --> 00:03:11.840
The second part, I will briefly outline some important aspects of fiat money.

33
00:03:11.840 --> 00:03:19.840
Then I address Mises and Rothbard's view on whether or not fiat money is a lasting monetary system.

34
00:03:19.840 --> 00:03:26.840
And then I move on to the issue, and I think this is the focus of my presentation,

35
00:03:26.840 --> 00:03:35.840
that fiat money basically leads to an exportational rise of debt and money relative to income

36
00:03:35.840 --> 00:03:42.840
and therefore proves from a praxeological point of view unsustainable.

37
00:03:42.840 --> 00:03:54.840
And finally I outlined the role of public government, public ownership of government and fiat money and its destructive economic effects.

38
00:03:54.840 --> 00:03:58.840
Let me briefly say something about fiat money just to clarify.

39
00:03:58.840 --> 00:04:10.840
fiat money, the world is full of fiat moneys. These fiat moneys have not originated through free market forces, but through an act of violating money holders property rights.

40
00:04:10.840 --> 00:04:18.840
I think in the Philippe Bargus address this morning made it pretty clear what the real nature of fiat money is.

41
00:04:18.840 --> 00:04:25.040
is, and Guido Hülsmann wrote, quote, paper money has never been introduced through voluntary

42
00:04:25.040 --> 00:04:31.360
cooperation. In all known cases, it has been introduced through coercion and compulsion,

43
00:04:31.360 --> 00:04:38.400
sometimes with the threat of the death penalty. And fiat money is typically created through

44
00:04:38.400 --> 00:04:46.200
a bank circulation credit, as Mises termed it, so banks extending loans to let's say

45
00:04:46.200 --> 00:04:51.140
Businesses and Private Households, thereby increasing the money supply.

46
00:04:51.140 --> 00:04:56.040
And fiat money is of course at the heart of the Austrian theory of the trade cycle.

47
00:04:56.040 --> 00:05:02.080
It is fiat money which sets into motion the boom and bust cycle.

48
00:05:02.080 --> 00:05:09.880
Now moving on, Mises and Rothbard on whether or not fiat money can last.

49
00:05:09.880 --> 00:05:14.320
Ludwig von Mises wrote, quote, there is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a

50
00:05:14.320 --> 00:05:19.240
The boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis

51
00:05:19.240 --> 00:05:24.640
should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment or further credit expansion or

52
00:05:24.640 --> 00:05:31.200
later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.

53
00:05:31.200 --> 00:05:37.880
To me the fate of fiat money would be sealed once people become aware of its inflationary

54
00:05:37.880 --> 00:05:43.880
People would then try to get out of fiat money, investing in real assets.

55
00:05:43.880 --> 00:05:51.880
This is the so-called crack-up boom and would then lead to a total destruction of the purchasing power of money.

56
00:05:51.880 --> 00:06:03.880
In contrast, as I mentioned earlier, Rothbard, in his case for a 100% gold dollar, argued that there would actually be no such necessity.

57
00:06:03.880 --> 00:06:15.880
I want to make clear what I'm not saying. I'm not saying that fiat money, once established on the ruins of gold, cannot then continue indefinitely on its own.

58
00:06:15.880 --> 00:06:23.880
If fiat money could not continue indefinitely, I would not have to come here to plead for its abolition.

59
00:06:23.880 --> 00:06:31.880
So Rothbard basically maintained the idea that fiat money could possibly continue indefinitely.

60
00:06:31.880 --> 00:06:37.240
Now I think this is important contrast between these two great thinkers and requires some

61
00:06:37.240 --> 00:06:43.880
analysis of why they come to these different conclusions.

62
00:06:43.880 --> 00:06:53.880
I would like to make my explanation on the basis of this little illustration.

63
00:06:53.880 --> 00:07:01.520
To outline the differences between Rothbard and Mises, I made use of this rather simple

64
00:07:01.520 --> 00:07:03.240
illustration.

65
00:07:03.240 --> 00:07:09.720
It shows you on the upper right-hand side the credit market where credit supply meets

66
00:07:09.720 --> 00:07:12.600
credit demand.

67
00:07:12.600 --> 00:07:19.920
The lower quadrant shows you the production function as a function of credit.

68
00:07:19.920 --> 00:07:25.920
The upper left-hand quadrant shows you the money market, where money demand meets money supply.

69
00:07:25.920 --> 00:07:39.920
And the left-hand quadrant on the lower left shows you the relation between money and output.

70
00:07:39.920 --> 00:07:54.920
And let's assume we are in a fiat money system and the credit supplies increase without the societal time preference experiencing any change.

71
00:07:54.920 --> 00:08:08.920
So the credit supply moves to the right, lowers the interest rate and an increase in credit, as I included it in the explanation of the product, of the output function, increases output.

72
00:08:08.920 --> 00:08:16.720
output, but due to the law of diminishing marginal return, which is an axiomatic truth,

73
00:08:16.720 --> 00:08:25.920
as you all know, the increase in the bank circulation credit supply will remain lower

74
00:08:25.920 --> 00:08:29.040
than the output gains.

75
00:08:29.040 --> 00:08:36.740
And that results over time, if we would try to continue to hold up an inflationary boom

76
00:08:36.740 --> 00:08:39.600
through further expansion of money and credit

77
00:08:39.600 --> 00:08:44.140
would lead to a rise of the credit and money supply

78
00:08:44.140 --> 00:08:46.460
in excess of output gains,

79
00:08:46.460 --> 00:08:50.320
thereby raising the economy's indebtedness.

80
00:08:51.500 --> 00:08:55.340
And I think it's worthwhile to contrast this result

81
00:08:55.340 --> 00:09:00.340
with a situation in a commodity money regime,

82
00:09:03.820 --> 00:09:05.900
which is illustrated on this chart.

83
00:09:06.740 --> 00:09:11.620
Again, we have a rise in the credit supply because of a lowering of the time preference

84
00:09:11.620 --> 00:09:18.020
rate and that moves the credit supply schedule to the right.

85
00:09:18.020 --> 00:09:26.540
But in this example, the lowering of the time preference leads to more savings, more investments

86
00:09:26.540 --> 00:09:30.660
and therefore an increase in the economist capital stock.

87
00:09:30.660 --> 00:09:34.640
And that moves the production schedule outwards.

88
00:09:34.640 --> 00:09:40.000
As you can see, the production schedule over here moves outwards.

89
00:09:40.000 --> 00:09:44.680
So one can argue that in this environment, the increase in credit is basically matched

90
00:09:44.680 --> 00:09:55.680
by a rise in output, so you wouldn't end up in a situation where the credit supply exceeds

91
00:09:55.680 --> 00:09:57.120
the gains in output.

92
00:09:57.120 --> 00:10:02.840
At the same time, the money supply remains constant because in a commodity money regime

93
00:10:02.840 --> 00:10:10.840
A bank landing activity just means a transfer of existing balances from the saver to the investor.

94
00:10:10.840 --> 00:10:21.840
So the case is basically made on the basis of praxeology using the refutably true law of diminishing marginal returns,

95
00:10:21.840 --> 00:10:27.840
which allows us to say that in a fiat money system, in order to keep going a boom,

96
00:10:27.840 --> 00:10:34.840
in whom you would end up with debt and money spinning out of control relative to income.

97
00:10:34.840 --> 00:10:41.840
And I think just from this point of view, ignoring the issue of compound interest,

98
00:10:41.840 --> 00:10:45.840
you can come up with the conclusion that economically speaking,

99
00:10:45.840 --> 00:10:51.840
fiat money is really unsustainable from a praxeology viewpoint.

100
00:10:51.840 --> 00:11:01.840
and I must say I come to the conclusion at this stage to side with Mises conclusion rather than with Rothbard's conclusion.

101
00:11:01.840 --> 00:11:09.840
Now another argument advanced in this paper is the role of a government in the fiat money regime

102
00:11:09.840 --> 00:11:20.840
and I try to outline taking recourse to the work of Hans-Hermann Hoppe that fiat money of course is a creature of public ownership of government

103
00:11:20.840 --> 00:11:31.840
which is associated with further economic incentives and I would say logically argues for capital consumption,

104
00:11:31.840 --> 00:11:46.840
for an eroding of the productive capacity of the economy which also would argue that this is going to make it increasingly difficult for an economy to service the accumulation of debt in a fiat money system.

105
00:11:46.840 --> 00:12:07.840
So I conclude, I would like to conclude, the article has tried to show that first, fiat money is economically unsustainable as it makes debt and fiat money growing exponentially relative to income and that two, the use of fiat money will destroy the free market order,

106
00:12:07.840 --> 00:12:13.200
It will destroy the free market order and both findings are actually in support of Mises,

107
00:12:13.200 --> 00:12:20.040
I said it earlier, rather than Rothbard's conclusion, namely that from a praxeological

108
00:12:20.040 --> 00:12:27.040
viewpoint fiat money cannot last but must collapse. Thank you very much for your attention.