In Brian Glover's enthusiastically titled blog post, "I love Gooooooooooold" [sic], he talks about his concern for the future of the American dollar and your new understanding of our nation's system of currency. It's funny he mentions that he once believed our dollars served as a substitute for more "burdensome" forms of currency (like precious metals) - this is what I assumed when I was younger, too. I myself am only beginning to understand the dollar; its fluctuations and relation to currencies around the world are mostly a mystery to me.
It would seem to me that Utah's actions have already begun to serve their intended effect, at least partially; people are beginning to notice the desperate lengths to which states are reaching to increase the value of American currency, or else make available viable alternatives. And although I recognize the strength of the symbolism in turning to gold to boost our currency's worth, I can't help but notice what detractors of this movement are worried about. For instance, the implementation of gold as currency could serve oppositely of the desired effect if economically influential countries like Japan and some European nations don't also decide to make the switch. It is suggested that "the Federal Reserve [control] the distribution of dollars instead, to rein in inflation," which sounds like a safer and less drastic move on paper.
Ultimately it is hard to say if such measures will improve the state of the dollar, but at the very least it would seem that actions like these are spotlighting the concern to our politicians. As I stated before, I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to matters of currency, but I always relish the opportunity to learn.
No comments:
Post a Comment