The naughty boy who blurts out unpleasant truths
“In the first place, the ‘classic’ writers, without neglecting other cases, reasoned primarily in terms of an unfettered international gold standard. There were several reasons for this but one of them merits our attention in particular. An unfettered international gold standard will keep (normally) foreign-exchange rates within specie points and impose an ‘automatic’ link between national price levels and interest rates. The modern mind dislikes this automatism, as much for political as for economic reasons: it dislikes the fetters this automatism clasps on government management of the economic process – dislikes gold, the naughty boy who blurts out unpleasant truths. But most of the economists of the period under survey liked it for precisely the same reasons. Though they compromised in practice as in theory and though they admitted central-bank management, the automatism – a phrase beloved by Lord Overstone [Samuel Jones Loyd, 1st Baron Overstone] – was for them, who are neither nationalists nor etatistes, a moral as well as an economic ideal.” –– Joseph Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis (1954) Published posthumously
Dr. MoneyWise says. . . .And to Dr. Schumpeter’s well-considered discourse on the practical merits of the gold standard, I will add a simple thought of my own: Absent the gold standard, the prudent investor who stores gold benefits in concert with the blurting of those unpleasant truths.