Bring Back the Greenbacks by Merwin


(you may have to copy and paste)

Why bring back the Greenbacks, instead of the Gold Standard..? Honestly the Gold Standard needs to be re-implemented prior to bringing back the Greenback dollar and theoretically, they should even work in conjunction with one another.

The premise for the Greenback as I understand it, is... our Government (not the Federal Reserve - "end the fed"), would print our nations currency based on the Gross Value of our nation for a yearly assayed amount, let us use a "hundred dollars" for the example.

So, the total over all value of our country's wealth is assayed at $100 (over simplified, I know) and that is how much money is printed in the first year after the other $300(?) in circulation by the Fed is destroyed. Then as the country recuperated from the Fed's financial rape, and its health began to return, the value of our collective wealth for the next annual check up says our country is now worth $150... so our Congress prints another $50.

The next year after that our country is worth $200, so we print another $50. When bills are damaged we replace only those that are destroyed.

Now if the country's value decreases, then we destroy the damaged bills, and only replace those to keep in circulation the assayed value of our country.

A very simple process... one that will insure the value of our money that we print.

No more inflation, no more abuse or oppression, because... there will be NO MORE FEDERAL RESERVE.

In regard to "electronic monies" this too can flourish, as long as we never have in circulation more funds or less funds... electronic or printed currency, than what our country is worth on any given day of the week.


Comments 7 comments

AKA Winston 4 years ago

CoauthorU profile image

CoauthorU 4 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA Author


Thank you.

CoauthorU profile image

CoauthorU 4 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA Author

From the head of the Fed..? Really..?

AKA Winston 4 years ago


I used to think a gold standard was the right answer but further investigation has led me to abandon that position.

CoauthorU profile image

CoauthorU 4 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA Author

I would have to see more than the Fed's opinion to agree with you.

AKA Winston 4 years ago

I understand. It takes a lot of work and digging. Not everyone is into that sort of thing. It is a somewhat geekish endeavor, I admit. I will only say that I understand how easy it is to fall into acceptance of the creedo that gold is a good answer because on its surface the arguments seem to make sense.

Not big deal either way. Just passing along my experience for what it is worth.

CoauthorU profile image

CoauthorU 4 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA Author

Thanks for dropping by.

I understand as well.

Fiat currency is an agreed upon exchange whether it is paper or a melted yellow mineral. And it is only gold's rarity, beauty, and its ability to conduct electricity that lends it any value.

There are two things on the surface that strike me as notable...

First, for those in power, they that control the economic conditions of the global community... it is not simply the method and rate of exchange nor even the interest generated that is important to them, rather it is control.

Second, it is that to remove the oppressive quality of this fiat control is to stop the unreal value of credit. Simple credit is much better, but still not ideal. And then to have no more "currency" in circulation than the calculated value of say, the GDP, is the goal I suggest that will generate national economic healing. And the only way to do that is to end the fed.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article