> I'd say the only problem with Marx's vision on credit money and debt is
> that it's limited by his assumption that gold is the only form of
> international money (where the value of gold is determined by how much
> labor is needed to produce it). During the last 30 years, we've made a
> tradition to a dollar standard. That, in turn, is based on the power of
the
> United States. If the US hegemony collapses and nothing replaces it, then
> we'll revert to the gold standard. But in the meantime, we have a
> power-based system of money, where the hegemon can claim the privileges of
> seigneurage.
>
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
************
Why a gold standard? Why not, say, an oil standard? Or some other commodity
that's valued by "late" capital? Wasn't gold made the standard as a holdover
from some ancient metaphysics/superstition--it looks nice and has great
electrical properties but what's so great about it?
Ian
