Money and Freedom, by Hans Sennholz
This book is a brief (less than 100 page) overview by Dr.
Sennholz of the intersection of money and freedom. As money is central to a division-of-labor
society, it is central to man’s improved condition on this world. Dr. Sennholz argues that to the extent money
is free (that is, allowed to function and develop in a free-market
environment), man is free.
He begins the volume covering the history of money and the
various interferences by the state in this otherwise normally market-derived
commodity. He discusses various
alternate philosophies regarding money and economics. He continues with a clear statement about
gold – free gold coinage as opposed to a government managed gold standard. He concludes with a concise argument of why
money should be developed solely by the free market.
There are a few subjects in this short volume that I will
cover in the coming days. However it is
with this conclusion, the issue of free-market-derived money, where I would
like to begin.
Currencies are sound, not as they
are managed, but as they are free. This essay
urges reconstruction of the monetary order on the foundation of freedom. It differs from all other reform proposals in
both the simplicity and audacity of its objective: only freedom.
We seek no reform law, no
restoration law, no conversion or parity, no government cooperation: merely
freedom….The legal underbrush that has grown up over the years – legal tender
laws, tax discrimination against gold and silver coins, banking regulations
preventing the opening of accounts denominated in ounces of gold, and so forth –
must be cleared away so that Americans are once again free to use sound money.
Sennholz does not advocate to petition for the gold
standard. He does not advocate for any
preconceived sanctions to a new monetary order.
In this statement he seems clear – leave the market alone and the market
will figure out money.
I have long held such a position. It also seems consistent with the work of
Mises in Human Action. It also stands in
the face of many advocates of free market Austrian economics who add qualifiers
such as 100% reserves or gold backing only.
Let’s see if Sennholz maintains his position of truly free (market/contract
derived) money, or if he adds a qualifier.
The primary objective must always
be the abolition of the money monopoly and legal tender coercion.
Political money with legal-tender
power, which is currency issued by politicians or bureaucrats and forced on
people at face value, is an ominous restraint of human rights.
Sennholz sees this as a moral issue. The current money system impoverishes most
people, forcing them to take and use at face value a constantly depreciating
currency. He suggests that religious,
ethical, and moral leaders should rightly speak out against this money
monopoly.
He also suggests that in a free-money system, one need not
fear inflation:
If no one can force bad money on
anyone, it cannot do any harm. If individuals
have the choice to refuse bad money or accept it at its market value stated in
gold weight units, bad money will only harm the issuer.
I am not even sure why Sennholz need add the qualifier “stated
in gold weight units….” The freedom to
accept or reject any form of money will ensure that the market prices will
adjust to reflect the perceived quality of the money. The buyer of the money will pay market price,
while the issuer of the money is required to redeem at face value. This will ensure that issuers of bad money
must either greatly limit the practice or face the risk of insolvency.
In a monetary order without legal
tender and a money monopoly, there could be no inflation. Printing and issuing new money would not
raise the prices of goods and services, but would merely lower the exchange
rate of the issue in terms of other competing moneys. Good money would drive out bad money.
Here Sennholz rightly captures Gresham’s law, as the bad
money drives out good money only if the bad money is afforded legal protection
in its exchange. Left free, good money
will drive out bad, or more properly, the exchange rate between the
alternatives will reflect the value perceived by the market.
Sennholz states that while he would not require gold and
silver to be the basis of a monetary system, he believes these would ultimately
be chosen in the market as they have been for thousands of years. With this in mind, following is his list of objectives
to restore sound money:
1)
Mint gold and silver coins denominated only by
weight and purity.
2)
Repeal legal tender laws and permit specific
performance of payments.
3)
Permit financial institutions to issue private
notes, and permit banks to accept deposits denominated in foreign currencies
and weights of gold and silver.
4)
Permit free entry into banking.
5)
Permit interstate banking.
6)
End mandatory membership in the Federal Reserve,
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and any other agency or
cartel.
7)
Prevent tax discrimination against all forms of
money.
I note (with joy) that he does not include on the list the
requirement that any idea of 100% reserve backing – neither does Mises, under
whom Sennholz received his doctorate. The
list prepared by Sennholz (when one adjusts for the view that he has inserted
gold and silver not by direction but by his belief that these would prevail in
a free market) is a good one for clarity and detail, however I believe it can
be much simplified:
1)
Allow for contract to determine money.
2)
Disallow any and all government actions favoring
one form of money over another.
Sennholz allows for the continuance of government money, as
long as it doesn’t come with any forms of protection or allowances that differ
from those allowed for market derived money.
He believes that competition will properly determine the winners and
losers.
Markets have solved problems that are much more complex than
the problem of money. In any case, this
problem of money was solved thousands of years ago in many societies, none of
which had the technical capabilities we are blessed with today. Money does not require government
intervention to bring it forth. The government
intervention exists solely because money is the single most important aspect of
a division-of-labor economy, which makes it the most useful aspect to control.
Sound money and free banking are
not impossible; they are merely illegal.
This is why money must be deregulated….freedom of money and freedom of
banking, these are the principles that must guide our steps.
I can offer no better conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment