George Selgin: Do we really need Central Banks?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 чер 2016
- The Cato Institute’s Professor George Selgin and the Institute of Economic Affairs’ Professor Philip Booth discuss the role of Central Banks during the financial crisis, examples of countries with historically successful free banking policies, and whether or not in 2016 we really need Central Banks.
George Selgin is a senior fellow and director of the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the Cato Institute and Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Georgia. His research covers a broad range of topics within the field of monetary economics, including monetary history, macroeconomic theory, and the history of monetary thought.
This video is part of our Paragon Initiative: the most comprehensive project ever undertaken by the IEA.
This five year programme will provide a fundamental reassessment of what Government should - and shouldn’t - do. It will put every area of government activity under the microscope and analyse the failure of current policies.
Eye opening. Especially after what I've been taught at school.
Eye-shutting, more like.
go back to sleep , clover
@@CC3GROUNDZERO ?
Central bank in Canada was public till 1974 till Pierre Trudue joined the Bank of international settlements. He sold out Canada's citizen's. We went from 18 billion debt we paid ourselves to over 2 trillion we have to private owners to print our own money. Kinda left that out.
Amateur hour
Watching in 2019.
Who's gonna say it? ..Okay I'll say it.
Bitcoin.
Absolutely! It's time for a revolution. Bitcoin is the revolution!
The gold standard can be an excellent solution. ¿Why don't they want to go back to the gold standard?,
¿who is preventing it? I would like to buy the book The Theory of free banking (George Selgin),
¿is it very difficult to read ?.
Total greetings from Perú.
¡FREEDOM!
brilliant, thank you.
Great interview
El patrón oro puede ser una excelente solución. ¿Por qué no quieren regresar al patrón oro?,
¿quiénes lo impiden?. Me gustaría comprar el libro La libertad de emisión del dinero bancario
de George Selgin, ¿es muy complicado de leer?.
Saludos totales desde Perú. ¡LIBERTAD!
I think I'd go for option 2; that is using a central bank to set the money supply but without it's current powers, over using a gold standard.
I think the gold standard would be unnecessarily expensive, and (correct me if I'm wrong) if economic growth outpaced the extractable reserves of gold we would have a money shortage. Or the other way round would be if technology vastly increases the reserves that are economically extractable, there could be a flood of gold into the market, leading to inflation and excessive lending.
I'm only a layman, so don't take my answer as even slightly definitive. An under-production of gold would simply increase the relative value of gold (supply and demand), so your Dollar would be convertible for 1 gram of gold today, whereas yesterday it may have been 2 grams (enter the speculators). Over-production would do the opposite. I suppose this is the problem with gold- it's availability fluctuates, and as it's value increases over time, it becomes impractical to convert your money for a miniscule speck of gold. Also, who controls the production, can affect the markets. I'm guessing this is the idea behind Bitcoin- there is a fixed limit to the quantity, so it is more difficult to manipulate (or will institutions holding it make it manipulable?), and a digital speck is easier to handle.
Crypto faces the same problems as regular money in that it requires the trust of the users. Peoples' trust in various currencies varies, and if the trust in the Dollar, for example, wanes, something else will take it's place.
I'm desperately trying to read up on all of these aspects/variables/systems to understand them and see if there is a clear and better system. I suspect the best option will be a combination of many or all systems. Some binge-watching and reading of Professor Selgin's work is on my agenda. 😁
@@dandare1001 Yes, I still have my doubts with the practicalities and effectiveness of a gold standard due to the reasons I mentioned. Bitcoin makes some sense, though in practise it has clearly failed to step up from an unstable, speculative asset to a universally-accepted currency. I think there _might_ be something to the idea of free banking, where banks can issue their own currency and are incentivised not to print too much money because their customers want stability.
It is a difficult subject to get one's head around and I don't expect I'll have come to a conclusion any time soon, if ever, due to its niche nature, depth and complexity.
@@MUSTASCH1O Going back to one of your original points about running out of money - wouldn't the increase in value of gold (or any limited asset) necessitate the making of smaller denominations as the underlying asset value increased? So money "printing" would only be making smaller denominations as time went on, and in cases where the value dropped, the smallest denominations would go out of use (as they do under the regular system), only to be reinstated if the asset value increases again. Under our current systems it always goes one way i.e. new things have a higher monentary price, not necessarily value, over time.
A loaf of bread may have been 10 cents, 80 years ago, and now it costs a few Dollars. Imagine if its price had stayed the same, or had become less over that time.
It would require us to rewire our brains a bit, or at least I would have to. -
"Remember the good old days, when a potato cost ten times as much?" 🙂
Bitcoin is the answer.
Bitcoin?
I kinda like friedman's monetary system that allows free banking
Idk why gold standard seems a big no to be me but what's amusing is i don't have any particular reason behind it too much
AI is the solution for regulating money supply. Carefully, monitored AI.
Central Bank is necessary nahi toh muhje RBI assistant ka job kon dega
Arey bhai 🤣😂
Which drag queen did Selgin steal his glasses from?
your mom
I don't agree.
well run central banks provide more stability.
"stability" for the ruling class and their cronies for sure.
@@RLance1313 if you're really worried about it, focus more on tax policy.
@@bigreaper7425 proof?
@@xas22 what do I need to prove?