The choice of the word “unadulterated” is not accidental. There
were many different kinds of gold standard, including what we now call the
Classical Gold Standard, the Gold Bullion Standard, and the Gold Exchange
Standard. Each contained flaws; each was adulterated.
For example, in
the Coinage Act of 1792, the government forced the price of one thing
to be fixed in terms of another thing. The mechanism was in
Section 11:
“And be it further enacted, That
”the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which shall by law be
current as money within the United States, shall be as fifteen to one…”
Of course, people
respond to such distortions. When the government fixes the price of
something too low, then people will hoard or export it. If the price is
fixed too high, then they will flood the market with it.
According to Craig
K. Elwell, in his 2011 Congressional Research Service Report:
“Because world markets valued
them [gold and silver] at a 15½ to 1 ratio, much of the gold left the country and
silver was the de facto standard.”
Subsequently, the government
changed direction. Elwell notes:
“In 1834, the gold content of
the dollar was reduced to make the ratio 16 to 1. As a result, silver
left the country and gold became the de facto standard.”
If the law
dictates the ratio between gold and silver, then only one metal—the one that is
undervalued—will be used. It would be extremely difficult for the government to get the ratio
exactly right. And even if so, as soon as the market value changed the
ratio would be wrong and only one metal would circulate.
The government
should not attempt to force a price onto the market. In the
unadulterated gold standard, the market is allowed to set the price of silver,
copper, oil, wheat, a fine wool suit, and everything else. It allows
people to use gold, or silver, or seashells as money if they wish (the market
has not chosen seashells in modern history).
Throughout the 19th century,
there were various state laws to impose new kinds of restrictions on the
banks. One popular restriction was that in order to obtain a charter
(permission to operate as a bank), the bank had to buy state government
bonds. This theme—forcing banks to buy government bonds—was to
recur later.
This is a
pernicious idea. Banks must have an earning asset to match the liability of the
deposit accounts. Why not make them buy some government bonds as a
condition for permission to operate? Because this is obviously
blackmail. In a free country, one should not need to ask
permission to be in business and one should not be forced to do something in
exchange for that permission.
This policy has
two economic effects.
- First, it pushes
the price of the government bond higher than it would otherwise be,
which means it pushes down the rate of interest. This distortion ripples throughout the entire
economy.
- Second, it
exposes the state-chartered bank to the fiscal irresponsibility in the
state capitol. And of course the state capitol is encouraged to
borrow and spend by this very perverse policy, because they know that
there is always a market for their bonds. This lasts until they
default, of course. And when they do, the state-chartered banks
become insolvent. This is not a failure of the gold standard, or of
the free market. It is a failure of a deficit spending policy and
central planning.
There is another
problem with this scheme. The bank takes in deposits, especially demand
deposits, and it buys bonds, especially longer-dated bonds. This is
called “borrowing short to lend long”, and it is dangerous because
if the depositors want to redeem their gold or silver, the bank may be in a
position where it has only an illiquid bond. Obviously, the depositor
does not want a government bond, and so the bank can be forced to default in a
“run on the bank”.
All borrowing
short to lend long schemes, also called “duration mismatch”, collapse sooner or
later. This is because the depositor, who is the ultimate issuer of the
credit, is signaling that he only wishes to extend credit for short
duration. But the bank has expanded long-term credit. This is not
the bank’s decision to make, and by disrespecting its depositors’ intentions,
it makes itself vulnerable to a run.
In 1864, the
National Banking Act imposed a tax of 10% on notes issued by state banks.
Needless to say, state-chartered banks responded to this threat of mass
robbery. There were 1466 state-chartered in 1863. Five
years later, 83% of them had either gone out of business or become
nationally chartered.
One of the
provisions of this Act was to require nationally chartered banks to hold US
government bonds in order to issue nationally standardized bank notes and other
liabilities. One key reason for this was that the federal government was
eager to finance the civil war (1861 - 1865). In later years,
when the federal government wanted to pay down its debt, this squeezed the
banks and the result was deflation and panics.
The problem was
exacerbated when the federal government resumed the minting of coins. The
“Crime of 1873" was the name many gave to the Coinage Act of 1873, which
demonetized silver. This was an enormous wealth transfer from the
small saver such as the farmer who had silver stored at home into the hands of
the wealthy who kept gold in the banks.
These problems
occurred under the Classical Gold Standard. Even before the Federal
Reserve Act of 1913, we saw the following adulterations:
1.
A fixed gold:silver price ratio in a bimetallic monetary standard. The unintended
consequence was that first gold, and later silver, fled the country.
2.
Laws forcing banks to seek permission to operate. Big-spending
governments, needing a market for their bonds, forced banks to buy their bonds
in various schemes in exchange for permission to operate. This exposed
banks to bank runs and bankruptcy when the bonds defaulted, and created a new
problem when the size of the banking system was restricted by the value of
government bonds outstanding.
3.
Demonetizing one metal shifts wealth from one class of saver to another.
4.
Duration mismatch causes the business cycle. The boom occurs due to
credit expansion beyond the intent of the savers. The bust begins when
there are significant redemptions by depositors who need their money. A
full panic occurs when other depositors realize that the bank is not holding
either money or short-duration assets such as Bills. The bank holds
illiquid long-term bonds and cannot pay depositor redemptions. The run
turns into bankruptcy. The panic turns into a wide scale depression.
No comments:
Post a Comment