HAVENSTEIN'S CHOICE
The Philosopher's Stone of Monetary Science
By Franklin Sanders
Editor, The Moneychanger
"The whole extraordinary depreciation of the mark has naturally created a rapidly increasing demand for additional currency, which the Reichsbank has not always been fully able to satisfy. But these enormous sums [printed] are barely adequate to cover the vastly increased demand for the means of payment, which has just recently attained an absolutely fantastic [nominal] level *** "
-- Dr. Rudolf Havenstein, Reichsbank President, August, 1923, quoted in When Money Dies by Adam Ferguson, p. 173; London: Wm. Kimber & Co., Ltd, 1975.
AXIOMS:
·
“Inflation” is an increase in the money supply that
eventually causes prices to rise because it cheapens the purchasing power of
each and every monetary unit. Inflation
is the cause, rising prices the effect.
·
“Deflation” is a decrease in the money supply that
eventually causes prices to fall because it enhances the purchasing power of
each and every monetary unit. In a
deflation money becomes more, not less, valuable. Deflation is the cause, falling
prices the effect.
·
Every monetary inflation causes and masks a real
deflation and economic contraction.
While nominal prices rise, real prices fall as paper (fiat)
money loses value relative to all other assets.
·
Inflation makes money appear cheap because it
suppresses the interest rate. The lower
price of money fools businessmen into making investments that look profitable
at the inflation-lowered interest rate.
Consumers are not really forcing down interest rates by saving more now
to spend more later, so the lower rate sends a false signal about future
demand. When the future arrives, those
who were fooled go bust. Inflation
induces malinvestment that at some point will be liquidated (written off).
·
Inflation always brings on lower commodity
prices eventually because it initially induces overproduction. Overproduction will always call out lower
prices.
·
When will inflation not be able to raise prices? When the fiat money is debt-based
(borrowed into circulation) and the debt is being revalued (written down and
off) around the world, i.e., a deflation of debt is underway. New money is not borrowed into
circulation because no matter how much money is offered (by increasing
reserves), or how low its price (interest rate), borrowers are afraid to
borrower and lenders to lend, so the monetary authorities are “pushing on a
string.”
·
Government cannot cure economic deflation by outright
printing and spending money into circulation because the recipients will save
and not spend it (the velocity of money drops because demand for cash and
safety increases).
·
Hence when the snapping turtle of deflation locks on to
the economy’s leg, he won’t let go until he hears the thunder of (1) the
last bankrupt’s rubble being cleared off the economy’s foundation, or (2) the
guns of war.
·
Economic deflations (depressions) last for years
and do not respond to government spending or central bank monetary tricks.
·
Gold and silver are money by nature while fiat
national currencies are only money substitutes. Formerly gold and silver along with other money substitutes
formed one single monetary system, but today they form two parallel and
competing systems.
·
If a monetary unit’s purchasing power declines, the
most likely explanation is a money supply inflation. If a monetary unit’s purchasing power rises, deflation is the
most likely explanation.
·
Generally falling commodity prices usually mean a
deflation is in progress; rising prices point to an inflation.
·
Falling paper money prices for gold and silver cannot
foretell a deflation, because gold and silver are not mere commodities among
all others. They are money; they are
the numeraire; they are the denominator, unlike any other commodity. If their prices are falling in paper money,
the fall can only mean (1) the supply of fiat money is falling, or (2)
the supply of gold and silver is rising (being inflated).
Above our axioms the puzzling quotation reveals an
arresting paradox about inflations:
increasing the money supply actually shrinks its purchasing
power. Throughout the German
hyperinflation of 1920-1923 Havenstein contended that his job was to print
money as fast as possible. Why? Because
the country was suffering a shortage of money. But how was this possible?
Wasn’t the country already choking on the tidal wave of paper
money pouring from Havenstein’s presses?
Havenstein had a choice: print more money to ease the shortage of purchasing power caused
by inflation, or stop printing and bring on a deflationary collapse. Either way, Havenstein’s Choice is
only Havenstein’s Trap.
The faster you print money, the faster its value evaporates; stop
printing money and the economy collapses into a deflationary depression. It can only end in the death of the monetary
unit.
THE INFLATIONISTS’ FALSE HOPE
Inflationists presuppose – in the teeth of all history
and logic – that they can increase wealth by increasing the money supply. True, if there were more money there would
be more wealth, but only if the money itself is wealth. Money created out of thin air – fiat money,
whether bank credit created by bookkeeping magic or by crude printing – has no
value in itself. It is not wealth, only
an alleged representative of wealth.
On the other hand, gold and silver inflations do
contribute new wealth, and hence do boost prosperity long term (after initial
dislocations). After 1492 new gold and silver pouring into Europe from the
Americas laid the foundation for growth lasting centuries. Huge discoveries of gold and silver in the
mid-1800s – in the Carolinas, California, Australia, Nevada, and South
Africa -- all contributed to the
world’s wealth and later prosperity.
However, all this new money was itself valuable. Every new ounce mined contributed to the sum
total of wealth. Conversely, every new
unit of fiat money divides the sum total of wealth, impoverishing
many to benefit a few.
HAVENSTEIN’S CHOICE REMAINS
This paradox abides for every inflation. More money ought to makes us all rich, but
it never does. It seems contradictory,[1]
still holds true. Never mind the
enormous volume of paper money thrown into circulation, the actual purchasing
power in circulation decreases with every new emission. The faster the money is issued, the faster
the total purchasing power declines. Two
parallel hyperbolas grapple for supremacy, one graphing the amount of money
circulating, the other depicting its rate of depreciation. Depreciation always wins.
You can easily see the depreciation by turning upside
down the graph of any price index under an inflationary regime. Viewed right side up, the graph shows prices
increasing. However, to
understand what it truly means, you have to turn the graph upside
down: the monetary unit’s purchasing
power is decreasing. More and more
money buys less and less. Nominally
increasing fiat money prices mask a real fall in the value of all
goods against real money, gold and silver.
Check this out for yourself. Look at the price of anything in 1964, the last year that the
United States minted silver money and while the dollar was still tied to gold
at a rate of $35 to the ounce. As a
rule of thumb, you will find that fiat prices have increased by a factor
of about ten times. In 1964, a package
of cigarettes cost about a quarter.
Today, it costs $3.00. (Gasoline
is about the only exception to this rule of thumb. It has actually decreased in price, 20¢ a gallon in 1964, about a
dollar today. However, less than a year
ago, gas prices were over $2.00.)
Until recent years prices in gold and silver had
uniformly dropped. Now that no longer
holds true. At $4.07 silver that 1964
25¢ pack of smokes now costs 73¢. In gold, it cost 0.0071 ounce in 1964, but
today at $280 gold costs 0.0107 ounce.
“Aha!” you
shout, “That proves your theory wrong!”
“Oho!” I
shout back, “In a pig’s eye! That
proves my theory right: they’re
suppressing the gold and silver prices.”[2]
WHAT ABOUT THE GOLD/SILVER RATIO?
In 1964 the government fixed gold and silver at $35 and
$1.2929, a ratio of about 27:1. Today
the ratio stands at 68:1. The change in
ratio can only mean either (1) silver has become much more plentiful than gold,
or (2) the market has been deceived into believing silver ought to be much
cheaper than gold.
Alternative No. 1 we can reject out of hand, because it
is demonstrably false. In the past 35
years mankind has continued to consume (use up) silver in ever increasing
amounts and vast silver stockpiles have disappeared while most of the gold ever
mined is still in existence. Compared
to silver, only miniscule amounts of gold are consumed yearly, like the gold
necklace your sister wore on a date and lost.
Contrary to the worshippers of the free market
mechanism, Alternative No. 2 certainly is possible without conscious and
concerted manipulation. Fashion
– the change in social mood - rules the investment world as strictly as it
rules hemlines. Fashion (social mood) makes bull and bear markets. No
matter how attractive some investment’s fundamentals may be (silver, for example,
after ten years of supply deficits), if it is out of fashion, most investors
just won’t see it.
On the other hand, something more sinister than mere
social mood may be at work. Somebody
may be actively manipulating the market. Since we can prove from history[3]
and from statute[4] that the U.S. government and the Federal
Reserve, as well as foreign central banks, all manipulate markets, the
manipulation hypothesis cannot be rejected as frivolous or without factual
foundation. Indeed, on its face it
offers the most logically preferable explanation because it is the most
obvious, the simplest, and explains the most things. Occam’s Razor, you
know.
PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED
I keep hearing analysts citing the falling gold price as
a sign that Gigantic Deflation is coming.
In fact, history teaches us that can’t possibly be true. Look at Roy Jastram’s figures below to prove
it to yourself once and for all.
People who make this “falling gold price presages
deflation” argument have adopted the inflationists’ presupposition that gold
and silver are mere commodities, and that “money” is whatever government says
is money.[5] They believe that gold and silver, along
with all other commodities, will drop under a deflation.
But gold and silver are not commodities like all other
commodities. They are money by their
nature. However vociferously tyrants
and inflationists may scream that gold and silver have been “officially
demonetized,” their monetary essence remains.
The question is, how hard will the frauds try to suppress that? How many people or nations must they
impoverish or shoot before they will give up?

PROOF FROM TWO CLASSICS
In his books The Golden Constant (1976) and
Silver the Restless Metal (1980) Roy Jastram defined “`inflation’ and
`deflation’ in a sense descriptive of prices’ behavior. Inflation refers to a period of rapidly
rising prices; deflation connotes an interval of swiftly falling prices.” (p. 84).
This differs, of course, from the definitions I use: inflation is “an increase in the money
supply” and deflation is “a decrease in the money supply.” Jastram’s usage focuses on the effect
of the change, mine focuses on the cause.
However, as we will see, his work supports my conclusions, namely,
that gold and silver should gain purchasing power in a deflation. (See table, “Gold, Silver, & Prices
under Inflation or Deflation”).
FIX YOUR OWN CONTRADICTION
Now I am left with an apparent contradiction of my
own. How come the prices of gold and
silver rose in all the deflations Jastram listed and fell in all inflations, except
in inflations since 1933? What
changed? Why would their purchasing
power now rise in an inflation?
Does that also mean their purchasing power will fall in a disinflation,
the slower inflation we saw from 1980 – 1995?
The reason gold and silver’s value now rise
in inflations instead of dropping is because the once-unified monetary system
that embraced gold, silver, and money substitutes (bank notes, etc.) has
been split into two systems sealed off from each other, fiat money versus
metallic money. These separate
systems now meet only at their exchange rates.
They no longer belong to one system, but form alternative and competing
monetary systems. When confidence in one blooms, the value and price of the
other wilt, and vice versa.
Before the days of central banks and government run
currencies, money supply consisted of gold and silver coin and bank notes. Both the metallic monies and money
substitutes worked together in one system.
Since central banks have ascended the throne of monetary monopoly,
however, both gold (1934) and silver (1873 & 1967) have been pushed out of
the system – “demonetized,” as the inflationists claim.
There now exists a fiat money system based on
debt but claiming a theoretical gold backing of 15%: the gold “reserves” which
the US government claims to hold against gold certificates issued to the
Federal Reserve. However this only
forms a 15% reserve[6] when
measured against outstanding Federal Reserve currency (“bank notes’). When compared to the wider measures of money
supply, the vast amount of bank-created deposit currencies, credit card debt,
money market funds, and on and on, the percentage of gold “backing” the system
becomes minuscule. (See Tables,
“Theoretical Gold Backing,” & “Price of Gold Needed.”) Even the banks’ so-called “reserves” held in
fiat Federal Reserve currency are tiny, a paltry 0.83% of the banking system’s
liabilities.

Further, the “gold reserve” does not function as a
constraining reserve the public can reach by convertibility, but only as an illusion. It gold plates the fiat money
system to lend it the illusion of redeemability without the tedious
restraint of a genuine anchor.
DEFLATION LIKE PROCRUSTES,
OR CROOKS LIKE CLINTON?
Is that why the prices of gold and silver are
falling? Or is a mysterious,
disembodied “deflation” stalking the world, chopping off values like Procrustes
chopping off his victims at the ankles? Many otherwise astute analysts think
this “deflation” is causing the prices of gold and silver to remain low. Their prices, these people claim, foretell a
worldwide deflation.
But if gold and silver “prices” are falling then
it can only be the result of an inflation of the gold and silver
money supply, not a deflation in fiat money, or even an economic
deflation.[7] That’s what Jastram’s figures show. Otherwise you have to adopt the
inflationists’ viewpoint that gold and silver are mere commodities and not
money at all.
Where can this “gold and silver inflation” be coming
from? Inflation with gold and silver
money is not only possible, but also a historical fact. Every year the supply
also increases as more gold and silver are mined, but normally that happens so
slowly that the amount of metals added to the money stock no more than matches
the growth of the economy. But what if
gold and silver supply suddenly surged?
In the past it has only proven beneficial, as I mentioned above.
But today no such source of new physical
gold and silver underlies the gold and silver inflation (drop in their
prices). Still, prices dropping point
to supply increasing, but where? If not
from the ground, then only from paper gold and silver in the form of
derivatives and metal leasing.
WHAT ABOUT GOLD AND SILVER PRICES?
What you expect to see is not what you do see. How do you explain the contradiction? With verifiably rising fiat inflation
(increasing paper money supply) you would expect to see silver and gold prices
rising as the realisers edge for the escape hatch. Yet both metals are dropping while the paper dollar
strengthens. How do you explain that?
Greenspan is inflating the fiat money supply so
fast that we should soon, indeed, already see a drop in fiat’s value
that sends gold and silver soaring. But
that is precisely the reaction the Fed must suppress. Rising gold and silver are the safety gauge that alert the world
to dangerous inflation. Greenspan needs
to wire down that safety valve.
What do we need to prove a crime? Motive, means, and opportunity. Greenspan and the Treasury have the means
and the opportunity. With stocks
collapsing, the dollar threatened, and the US economy fainting, they also have
a powerful motive. Can the jury point
to the winner?
That makes all the talk of gold “forecasting deflation
by declining” just so hogwash.
ANOTHER KIND OF DEFLATION
Because our money is borrowed into circulation our fiat
system can cause another kind of deflation: the great writing down of debt, the revaluation of all
values. Debt builds and builds, and
suddenly some creditor runs for the door with the shout, “I want my
money!” That triggers a universal
questioning of debt (remember “change of social mood”?). Around the world, the
creditworthiness of every debt is scrutinized.
Rotten debt is simply written off – the creditor’s money “goes to money
heaven” (to borrow Doug Casey’s happy turn of phrase). Bankruptcies abound as the malinvestment
induced by the previous paper money inflation (“easy money”) are recognized as
failures and written off.
But in the very best of times the debt-based fiat
money system already lives under a perpetual twofold deflationary threat. New
money can only be created by borrowing it into existence.[8]
So think about it:
(1) If all
the money is based on debt, then the writing down of debt must reduce the
entire money supply, by definition. A
loan written off is bank credit destroyed.
(2) The
money supply must grow by at least the amount of the interest burden, or
bankruptcy is guaranteed for some players.[9]. The less the money supply grows, the more
numerous the bankruptcies.
What follows from the great debt deflation? It must reduce economic activity as demand
for money increases and money becomes harder to get. More companies going bankrupt means fewer companies hiring and
more companies laying off workers.
Fewer people working means people have less money to spend which means
they buy less which means that even for those companies that don’t go
bankrupt, it’s tougher to make a profit.
In other words, times get tougher and tougher and the economy sinks into
a self-reinforcing depression – for years.
WHERE DOES IT END?
The whole picture of inflation confuses us because it
acts differently as it develops.
History, however, does not equivocate about inflation’s end: it destroys the monetary unit. Commenting on Havenstein’s Choice in a
recent newsletter, James Turk wrote,
“Within a few short years, the Reichsmark was inflated away; it
was destroyed as a currency. … What really killed the Reichsmark? …
Hyperinflation was only the result; it was not the cause. The cause was a `flight from the
currency’. No one wanted to hold the
currency, and quickly exchanged it for any good or service. That’s why the Reichsmark was losing
purchasing power in the first place; the demand for Reichmarks was
declining.
“Interestingly, these same circumstances faced by the Reichsbank
are what the Federal Reserve is now facing . . .Unfortunately … the governors
of the Federal Reserve have learned nothing from the Reichsbank. The Fed is pump-priming like a crazy person. Instead of focussing on building demand for
dollars – so that people don’t take flight from it – they instead are pumping
more dollars into circulation to overcome what are perceived as deflationary
forces in the economy, just like the Reichsbank did. And the end for the dollar will be just as brutal.”[10]
To most people today, a flight from the US dollar sounds
crazy – crazier than the Fed’s pump priming.
But believe me, from a historical or an economic perspective, Greenspan
& Co. have put the dollar on the fast track to oblivion. You may toy with Treasury bills for a while,
but the only safety against a depreciating currency is gold and silver.
The faster Greenspan inflates, the tighter the cabal
tries to suppress gold and silver, the more the government manipulates markets,
the faster they hasten the day when the dollar dies.
If you enjoy Franklin Sanders’ commentary, visit The
Moneychanger at www.the-moneychanger.com and subscribe to
his monthly newsletter.
Endnotes:
[1] What this contradicts is the inflationists’ false presupposition
that inflation can create prosperity.
It confuses us because what holds true for inflation initially doesn’t
hold true permanently. True, at first
the inflation increases economic activity, but as time goes on larger and
larger doses are needed to give the economy the same jolt. And since the inflation actually sends money
into bad investments -- investments no
one would undertake unless the inflation had fooled them -- then in the long
term inflation promises only a depression.
[2] “They” means, in this case,
the U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the bullion banks or other agents
in cahoots with them.
[3] E.g., Roosevelt’s
manipulation of silver, gold, and the dollar in the 1930s, plus the US
government and Federal Reserve’s never-ending manipulation of interest rates,
money supply and exchange rates since then.
Add to that various central banks “managing” their currencies’ exchange
rates.
[4] E.g., the Exchange Stabilisation Fund with the stated
purpose of manipulating the price of gold and the US dollar, and the secretary
of the Treasury’s statutory mandate to “protect” the dollar’s exchange rate.
[5] After all is said and
done, since Aristotle’s time there have two and only two theories of
money. The first presupposes that money
must have value in itself. This is the
so-called “intrinsic value” theory of money.
The second presupposes that money is a social convention or social
construct: it makes no difference what
we use as money, or that it has any value in itself, only that everybody agrees
(or is forced) to receive it as money.
It ought to be obvious that the first leads to cultural integrity,
honesty, prosperity, security, stability, property rights, and independence
while the second leads only to cultural crookedness, institutionalised fraud,
poverty, theft, insecurity, instability, influence peddling, socialism, and
tyranny.
[6] Nominally 15%, because I think that’s the number they aim
at. That’s the goal the Euro Central
Bank set for itself when the Fed’s rate was the same. Lately their aim has soured, as the chart shows gold reserve
against currency amounts to only 12%.
[7] It is true that because of
the hindrances governments have imposed on the metallic system – difficulty of
conversion, tax on acquisition, tax on gains – that in the present short term
gold and silver are less spendable than fiat. Therefore in a debt-busting panic the price of both metals might
drop as the crowd rushed for paper dollars to stay liquid. However, this would be a temporary
phenomenon.
[8] For example, you go to the bank and “borrow”
$10,000. Five minutes before the bank
credited it to your account, that $10,000 didn’t exist. Your loan called it into existence. The bank created the $10,000 out of
thin air, by double entry bookkeeping magic:
the loan to you an “asset” of the bank, the deposit to your account a
“liability” of the bank. Neat and
clean, money is born from nothing. It
makes no difference whether the government borrows from the central bank or the
public borrows from a commercial bank, either way the money is borrowed into
existence.
[9] It’s the game of
cards explanation. Five men are on
a desert island. Four one to play
cards, the fifth has a deck. He
proposes, “I will loan each of you thirteen cards for one hour, provided you each agree to pay me back fourteen
cards at the end of the hour, and I’ll take your clothes for collateral.”
Once the four
players agree, they have just guaranteed that at the end of the hour one
or more of them must go bankrupt and lose his shirt. There are only 52 cards in existence, so to
pay back fourteen cards at the end of an hour, some of the players must lose
cards to the others. Anyway you cut it, somebody will end up
short at the end of the hour and the “banker” will get his clothes.
Thus in a
debt-based fiat money system where money must be borrowed into
existence, the money supply must always keep on expanding by at least the
amount of the interest burden, or some of the players must go bankrupt.
[10] Freemarket Gold & Money
Report, Box 5002, North Conway, NH 03860.
20 e-letters per year, 24 gold grams or $220. www.fgmr.com. 11/5/01, p. 2. This is one of the newsletters I read very closely.