Top Diaries

In 2000 Mundell wrote about his experiences in an an article I read as part of my Money and Banking course. In it he surveyed the history of the gold standard and noted the problem of expanding the money supply as required to keep the economy growing. This was during the Bretton Woods period, where gold was pegged at $35/oz. to the US$ and all other currencies were pegged to the US$. Mundell was a strong proponent of the gold standard as it provided an efficient means to redress trade imbalances by automatically correcting the relative valuations between currencies via gold flows or revaluation of a currency.

Mundell was an advisor to Richard Nixon and attempted to make the case for revaluing the gold fix of the US$ upward to reduce pressure for gold flow out of the USA during a long plane flight during which he was seated next to Nixon. But Nixon was too distracted to really listen and the opportunity was lost. I find this interesting as it seems it would probably work. The problem is that for most gold bugs the idea of an adjustable peg for gold makes their heads explode. The consequences of not making changes was the US going off the standard and 'closing the gold window' in 1971 - with no formal replacement for international settlements mechanism for FX.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 02:36:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See also my comment: (4.00 / 5)

Just like Napoleon said that the problem with England was that it was a nation of shopkeepers, the problem with Schäuble being the most powerful politician in the Eurozone is that you en up with a monetary union of beancounters.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 02:10:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Napoleon lost.

by IM on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 02:26:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See also my comment: (4.00 / 3)

But not before wrecking half of Europe.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 03:15:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But to Russia, not England.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 05:03:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One historical parallel after another, each more and more disconcerting! :D

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Sat Feb 28th, 2015 at 06:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Both.

by IM on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 01:49:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sure, in the fine tradition of the English getting their asses handed to them for several solid years, and then claiming victory when they get bailed out by someone who actually knows how to fight against people who shoot back.

Now, don't get me wrong, the English were great at naval warfare, and at butchering defenseless natives in the colonies. But land wars against countries with population, organization and technology base roughly on par with their own? Not so much.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 02:23:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There was a little campaign in spain.

by IM on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 02:32:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where the English took the credit for what was essentially a local insurgency. Until the Spanish guerrillas demonstrated the French could be defeated the English didn't get involved.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 02:47:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As an aside, I've been reading a book on Goya's caprichos recently and I was stunned to see how much Spain suffered not only of the war itself but of the long standing consequences on spanish politics, the reformists being associated with the Napoleonic war and therefore suffering from repression after the french defeat. Goya himself, who is not suspect of being a support of the french, had to refrain from publishing some works and has seen some of his close friends suffering from the monarchist repression.

by Xavier in Paris on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 04:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Spanish history is a wretched mess:

The Trienio Liberal (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈtɾjenjo liβeˈɾal], "Liberal Triennium") was a period of three years of liberal government in Spain. After the revolution of 1820 the movement spread quickly to the rest of Spain and the Spanish Constitution of 1812 was reinstated. The Triennium was a volatile period between liberals and conservatives in Spain, and constant political tensions between the two groups progressively weakened the government's authority. Finally in 1823, with the approval of the crown heads of Europe, a French army invaded Spain and reinstated the King's absolute power. This invasion is known in France as the "Spanish Expedition" (expédition d'Espagne), and in Spain as "The Hundred Thousand Sons of St. Louis".

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 05:19:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This was actually part of the Revolutions of 1820, the second of the six big pan-European revolutionary waves.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Sun Mar 1st, 2015 at 05:33:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But this is after the napoleonic/revolutionnary time in France.

I was more into the first round of semi-liberalisation, the one that led to 1812 constitution: a paradox that ideas brought by the french military presence were at the same time used against France and pro-monarchy, just to be crushed by the same monarchy when the french presence was no longer there to enforce them.

We could also speak of the tragedy of logistics, the lack of being a main reason for military depredation in Spain by the french army and the subsequent revolt by the spanish people starved to death by military requisitions.

by Xavier in Paris on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 11:52:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The Enlightenment idea(l)s were not brought to Spain by the French military presence. Spain as a French client was part of the same cultural milieu in the 18th century and the first thing the Spanish did after kicking out Napoleon was to enact a liberal constitution in 1812. But the French-inspired intelligentsia got associated with Napoleon's occupation in the people's mind, and the rest is 170 (reactionnary) histoty, 160 years of it.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 12:01:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See also my comment: (4.00 / 3)

I did not say that liberal ideas had been brought into a desert Spain by french troops, but that the liberal in Spain had been bolstered by the presence of the french army (at the time, there were also a feeling of hope in some places at the advance of the french army, before the effects of war were felt, because of the aura of the french revolution. A lot of people accross Europe sincerely bought into the Empire=Révolution=Liberty, whereas from the french point of view, Napoleon is a kind of counter-revolutionnary: his politics were of stopping the reform mouvement and give it a conservative tinge that would render it acceptable for a bigger part of the elite.

And actually I'm not saying anything myself: that's just from a book read in spanish two weeks ago about Goya and the people around him.

by Xavier in Paris on Wed Mar 4th, 2015 at 04:36:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, I was reading up a bit and what happened was that after the French Revolution the Spanish monarchy became reactionary and for about 15 years until Napoleon's invasion in 1807-8 the liberals' political influence was on the wane.

But the fact is that the Spanish patriots fighting the occupation were liberal, too, as evidenced by the constitution of 1812.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Mar 4th, 2015 at 04:41:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It is also what I said above. And they got screwed because they were associated to a foreign invasion even though some of them fought against it.

At least, that's the message from the book I read, which describes close friend from Goya hoping to use the french presence to get rid of some spanish bad habits (mainly religious influence that they criticized), and being deceived as the war -curiously quite secondary from a french perspective- takes its toll.

Anyway, as I haven't got enough background to argue here, and as I don't want to get involved into a new flaming debate here, after the one with IM, so count me as convinced. You may delete my messages if you find them too off base.

by Xavier in Paris on Wed Mar 4th, 2015 at 04:59:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Anyway, as I haven't got enough background to argue here, and as I don't want to get involved into a new flaming debate here, after the one with IM, so count me as convinced. You may delete my messages if you find them too off base.

Where did that come from?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Mar 4th, 2015 at 05:27:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Until the Spanish guerrillas demonstrated the French could be defeated the English didn't get involved."

clever, these shopkeepers.

by IM on Mon Mar 2nd, 2015 at 06:53:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sure, that absolutely is the way to use a local insurgency, as Putin is also demonstrating in Ukraine right now.

But bragging about your martial prowess when everyone else did all the real fighting that won the war for your side is just pathetic. It would be like Iran crowing about how great the Revolutionary Guard is for winning the Iraq war.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Mar 2nd, 2015 at 07:41:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I haven't said anything about martial prowess. I just pointed out the the shopkeepers defeated Napoleon.

by IM on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 07:09:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

And JakeS pointed out that shopkeepers only bragged about defeating Napoleon...

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 09:54:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

To revisionist for my taste. I stand for now by the traditional interpretation that bear and whale defeated the egale.

by IM on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 10:17:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See also my comment: (4.00 / 3)

Actually, it's really a government influenced by shopkeepers. Wealth of Nations (courtesy of Marxists.org)

To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers; but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced by shopkeepers.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 01:01:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Since the late 17th century has been a government of elites of wealth and power, divided between landed and commercial/manufacturing interests. It wasn't until the second half of the 19th century that the opinions of actual shopkeepers even really mattered. They were too far down the hierarchy and the elites were too good at getting what they wanted from the electorate, such as it was with the very limited voting franschise. As the franchise broadened the elites simply stepped up their game to stay ahead.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Tue Mar 3rd, 2015 at 01:58:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is why England relied so heavily on Continental mercenaries since the Renaissance. I am certainly no military historian, but, on two occasions, they did rise above the typical behavior and field at least competent armies, under Marlborough and under Wellington. The English never took to 'the Prussian Drill' with any zeal and were less susceptible to the nationalistic and revolutionary fervor that made France so strong after 1789. And that is not a bad thing, IMO.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Mar 2nd, 2015 at 09:19:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]