Like a lot of modern libertarian types, my first in-depth exposure to economics came from the minority ‘Austrian School’ of economics. The Austrian school shares a lot in common with Chicagoan economics, but it parts ways with Chicago — and indeed most other economic schools — on the question of money supply.
Via Thoughts on Freedom comes an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal rehashing the argument, common amongst Austrians, that central banks should be abolished or downsized in favour of a return to the gold standard:
In the aftermath of this financial catastrophe, as we sort out causes and assign blame, with experts offering various solutions — More regulation! Less complex financial instruments! — let’s not lose sight of the most fundamental component of finance. No credit-default swap, no exotic derivative, can be structured without stipulating the monetary unit of account in which its value is calculated. Money is the medium of exchange — the measure, the standard, the store of value — which defines the very substance of the economic contract between buyer and seller. It is the basic element, the atom of financial matter.
It is the money that is broken…
If capitalism depends on designating a person of godlike abilities to manage demand and supply for all forms of money and credit — currency, demand deposits, money-market funds, repurchase agreements, equities, mortgages, corporate debt — we are as doomed as those wretched citizens who relied on central planning for their economic salvation.
Think of it: Nothing is more vital to capitalism than capital, the financial seed corn dedicated to next year’s crop. Yet we, believers in free markets, allow the price of capital, i.e., the interest rate on loanable funds, to be fixed by a central committee in accordance with government objectives. We might as well resurrect Gosplan, the old Soviet State Planning Committee, and ask them to draw up the next five-year plan.
There’s a lot to be said for this analysis. Of the three broad schools of economic thought I know the proverbially dangerous minimum about — Keynsianism, Monetarism and Austrianism — their downfalls have been stories of crisis. Keynsianism was mortally wounded by the stagflation of the 70s because it wasn’t meant to be possible. Monetrism will probably suffer a similar blow to its credibility in this crisis. Austrianism rejects both Keynsian fiscalism and monetarist fiddling with the supply of money; and demands free markets for both. This is a crisis almost custom made for Austrian economists, but there are probably too few for them to storm the gates of the policy-setting citadels around the world.
(Continued)