This book is absolutely unbelievable vuluable and probably worth paying 1000$ for it (or should I say, 1 oz of gold!).

Not only does it explain in details what the gold standard is, and how it has worked in the past, but it also gives a very good overview of the various currency systems used in the past, the various fallacies about currencies, gold, politics, economics schools, etc.

It also reviews the history of our society through a different angle/lens. I feel like I understand the history now, and all the crises, wars, chaos that seemed to come out of nowhere has found a rational and sensible explanation. I had turned off my TV set and my radio receiver about 10 years ago, stopped reading the news papers and any other kind of useless noise, and all of the sudden, the world makes sense again.

Unfortunately, ignorance is bless...

Many thanks to Nathan Lewis for sharing his knowledge and wisdom. I just wish that the book was twice as thick, so that you could go into more details about the causes and consequences of the various policies and actions taken by the governments or the IMF, etc. because sometimes the short cuts you take are more than hard to follow and even though I think I was able to follow you, I would have preferred to be sure about it.

The book starts and finishes strong--the first 100 pages or so and the last 50. But the middle gets very bogged down in intricate economic history with lots of minutiae. The author begins in the mercantile ages, perhaps the 1600s or thereabouts, and continues to the early 2000s. I was disappointed that the last few years were pretty much not covered, as that is what I'm most interested in. Discussion is not limited to the USA and covers the entire world. I think every economic event, significant or not, was touched on. Discussions of US presidents are mostly limited to Nixon, Carter, and Reagan.

So aside from the start and finish of this, this is mostly a book of economic history. Maybe I was expecting something otherwise when I picked it up. I support the author's premise, and he seems very confident in it. I'm new to the gold standard and I plan to learn more about it. I ended up skimming the middle 200 pages or so as I could not bear to read them in depth anymore after entering them. I understand that history is important for lessons, but I prefer summaries of it. It's never been my strong point, and this book is littered with dates and years that have always been anathema to me.

If you're new to the subject of the gold standard like me, this may not be the best initial choice. Or you might want to skip it entirely and instead seek other books or shorter articles online. This review might be somewhat useless, but if anything I would say to be mindful of the history in this book. Consider using Amazon's preview feature to see what I mean.

*Wow, coincidentally it's unbelievable how much I'm in agreement with Average Joe. I also have "The Coming Collapse of the Dollar" on my reading queue.

Good Insights But Unconvincing

Fiat money serves three purposes: legal tender, token for exchange and store of value. The author seems to propose a money system pegged to gold and believes that it will serve to stabilize the value of the paper money as the value of gold is relative stable in the long run. The author argues that, under the new gold based money standard, the value of paper money can be maintained through adjusting the money supply, possibly by the central bank. The author also believes that a gold-based money system is better than commodity-basket based system or a currency board system exchange system. The author points out that there is an inherent conflict between a country's domestic monetary policy in terms of maintaining an interest target and its foreign exchange policy in terms of keeping a fixed exchange rate.

The question that is not clearly answered is how the supply and demand of gold, and therefore related fluctuations of gold price/value, affects the value of money and the equilibrium between money supply and demand. Equally important and not clearly answered is how a country using the proposed gold-pegged money can defense itself against currency attack by speculators. When there is sell-off of the currency, according to the author, the central bank needs to retire the excess currency (money supply) it took in from people for exchanging gold. This is to maintain the value of the paper money pegged to gold. Reducing money supply seems to push up interest rate and restrain economic growth. A large scale currency attack may also push up gold price as the demand of gold for exchanging the currency intensifies. To keep the pegging creditable, the central bank has to exchange gold for the currency when it is demanded. The central bank either has to keep a gold reserve large enough or buy/borrow gold from the market. To buy gold, the central bank may have to borrow foreign currency (hard currency) to do so, especially when its currency is under attack (weak). Then the problem is essentially no difference than the familiar one we have seeing for a currency-pegging exchange system except the author claims that the value of gold, in the long run, is more stable than all paper money including "hard currencies" such as the dollar, pounds, etc. The author claimed that if the central bank maintains its credibility, then it does not need to keep a large gold reserve. However, if the credibility is better or at least as good as gold, we wouldn't need a gold-pegging or any pegging system. The whole idea to have the money pegged on something is because that people believe the value of that "something" in itself is stable.

As society has not find any universal stable measurement for "value" as we did for length and weight, we just don't have a stable media to store the value. Actually length and weight are only relatively stable under normal conditions on earth. The light of speed is probably the only constant in the universe we know so far. The value of gold, just like all other currencies and commodities, changes when the supply and demand fluctuates. It may be arguably more stable than other paper money. Nevertheless, it does not totally eliminate some major problems faced by the paper money. Plus, gold system may have its own problems. Is it immune from short-term speculations that could bring down a nation's economy?

Overall, I found the book valuable in providing a lot of economic insights on historical events. But I found the argument for a gold-pegged standard as the solution unconvincing. The ultimate solution may be, when globalization reaches its summit, one world currency is created. Then there is no currency risk. Only business cycles need to be dealt with. Then the money does not have to be pegged on anything except people's faith in the stability and survivability of themselves and responsible management on money supply. When there are multiple currencies, good management of and consistency among policies of exchange, monetary, and fiscal seem to be the gold standard demanded.

Good Insights But Unconvincing

Fiat money has three features: legal tender, token for exchange and store of value. The author seems to propose a money system pegged to gold. This will serve to stabilize the value of paper money as the value of gold is relative stable in the long run. The author argue that the value of paper money can be maintained through adjusting the money supply by a central bank. The author believes that a gold-based money system is better than commodity-basket based system or a currency board system exchange system. The author points out that there is an inherent conflict between a country's domestic monetary policy in terms of maintaining an interest target and its foreign exchange policy in terms of keeping a fixed exchange rate.

The question that is not clearly answered is how the supply and demand of gold, and therefore related fluctuations of gold price/value, affect the value of money and the equilibrium between money supply and demand. Equally important and not clearly answered is how a country using the proposed gold-pegged money can defense itself against currency attack by speculators. When there is sell-off of the currency, according to the author, the central bank needs to retire the excess currency (money supply) it took it from people for exchanging gold. This is to maintain the value of the paper money pegged to gold. Reducing money supply seems to push up interest rate and restrain economic growth. A large scale currency attack may also push up gold price as the demand of gold for exchanging the currency intensifies. To keep the pegging creditable, the central bank has to exchange gold for the currency when it is demanded. The central bank either has to keep a gold reserve large enough or buy/borrow gold from the market. To buy gold, the central bank may have to borrow foreign currency (hard currency) to do so, especially when its currency is under attack (weak). Then the problem is essentially no difference than the familiar one we have seeing for a currency-pegging exchange system except the author claims that the value of gold, in the long run, is more stable than all paper money including "hard currencies" such as the dollar, pounds, etc. The author claimed that if the central maintains its credibility, then it does not need to keep a large gold reserve. However, if the credibility is better or at least as good as gold, we wouldn't need a gold-pegging or any pegging system. The whole idea to have the money pegged on something is because that people believe the value of that "something" would change much.

As society has not find any universal stable measurement for "value" as we did for length and weight, we just don't have a stable media to store the value. Actually length and weight are only relatively stable under normal conditions on earth. The light of speed is probably the only constant in the universe we know so far. The value of gold, just like all other currencies and commodities, changes when the supply and demand fluctuates. It may be arguably more stable than other paper money. Nevertheless, it does not totally eliminate some major problems faced by the paper money. Plus, gold system may have its own problems.

Overall, I found the book valuable in providing a lot of economic insights on historical events. But I found the argument for a gold-pegged standard as the solution unconvincing. The ultimate solution may be, when globalization reaches its summit, one world currency will be created. If there is only one currency on earth, it does not have to be pegged on anything except people's faith and subject to the demand of circulation. When there are multiple currencies, we need good management and consistency among exchange, monetary, and fiscal policies. A single currency will eliminate exchange volatilities but not business cycles/fluctuations.

I'm simply an average joe looking to preserve wealth from the coming inflation in the US dollar. This book did indeed help me understand central banking and how a gold standard can work. However, it contained way too many details with dates and years of various historical events.

What I really wanted, was a book that could help me conceptually understand the commodity of gold in an easy to read format. All in all I appreciated the book and am glad I read it. Perhaps I would have enjoyed this more had I read "The Coming Collapse of the Dollar and How to Profit from It" first as it did not dive into obscure details of historical events.

To read about gold is to read about the history of money. In this very well arranged book, the author present and enjoyable introduction to a central aspect of economics, money, from the differences between soft and hard money, the Gold standard, the uses of Taxes, Central Banking and the history of financial crises. Gold is indeed the most effective way to have stable money, meaning stable prices and this is repeated all along the book so you cannot forget it.

Certainly this is a great book with lots of information and history, where you can understand the financial crisis that have devastated some countries economies, such as the '80 Latin America's crisis or the Asian crisis of '97, most of them problem related to floating currencies imbalance. There is also a very insightful explanation of what happened with Yugoslavia and the rol of the IMF and its "shock therapies" that have only worsened economies that needed their assistance in these moments of perils. Good money is stable money and maybe one day we will be back to it.

A very indepth look at gold, why it has tripled and what the future holds. To be read in small increments for full comprehension. Not light reading. No skipping pages.

...but too detailed and somewhat tedious. Still, an informative study of the world of finance; not just gold. I learned a great deal.

Author Nathan Lewis drops the dismal science of economics to another level of despair by interpreting it as the "cruel science" of realpolitik. True believers in the gold standard, known as "gold bugs," believe the U.S. could face hyperinflation because it destroyed the gold standard and made every nation vulnerable to contagious inflation. As Lewis explains, ever since President Richard Nixon left the gold standard in 1971, the dollar has been backed by the U.S. government's "full faith and credit," not its gold reserves. However, he also introduces theorists who do not advocate the gold standard, since nations can realize its advantages only by pegging their currencies to short-term interest rates. As shown in this thorough, readable history, national treasuries must reassure the timid that global gold and currency markets are so huge and fast that "gold vulture" speculators cannot attack major currencies, and thus force a return to the gold standard (even though the author might wish that they could). We recommend this to gold buffs, economic historians and anyone who might enjoy the debates it could provoke.

With the many serious problems in the housing markets , a falling U. S. dollar , rising commodity costs & rising inflation ; what better time for a very well written & easy to read book on the topic of mysterious GOLD !!

So widely known , but so poorly understood and so much intentional or unintentional misinformation on the history & practical use for GOLD , this book is very well timed !

Not some boring economics book , you learn the Truth about gold and why it has always been an important part in the civilization of man !

A must read in these financially disturbing times !!!

This is a must read for anyone who wants to understand how the financial system evolved to where it is today?

Nathan has written a masterpiece. He takes the concept of money to its very beginning and then uses easy to understand examples to educate us about the simplicity of monetary policy. This book is easy to understand by the average intelligent person.

A person educated in the economics of the day may have difficulty fitting these simple and sound concepts into the complex fallacies that are taught in most economics classes today, but an open-minded, teachable economist will benefit greatly from Nathan's book.

Let me start of by saying that it seems the last reviewer didn't even read the book! This book pushes a "type" of psuedo-gold standard, not the original gold standard. That said, the problems laid out by the reviewer don't even make sense under a true gold standard. A true gold standard does not mean that people use gold coins to purchase groceries or even homes. A gold standard, in the classical sense, means that there is no Federal Reserve or Central bank, at least not in its current form, and the dollar is DEFINED as a certain weight in gold. The monetary act of 1792 actually defined the dollar as 1 ounce of silver and then fixed the weights and measures of silver vs gold at 15 to 1. This was their error, so to speak.

Even under a true gold standard, where no central bank exists, paper dollars do exist, as do checking accounts, savings accounts, et al. The process would work much like it does today with the exception that a paper dollar would be in the form of a receipt on gold. Private banks would hold your gold (some percentage of it) on reserve at the bank while issing you a deposit or savings account with the right to draw on the account in question. But I'm digressing --i don't have time to outline the true classical gold standard. This book espouses no such thing as the classical gold standard ---it pushes a psuedo gold standard which I describe below:

It is a gold peg. Peg the dollar at a certain value of gold --say the current price of $660 per ounce. Currently the FED is responsible for setting interest rates, the discount rate directly and the FED funds rate indirectly through money supply adjustments. The authors of this book want the market to set the rate of interest, and the FED to be replaced with a currency board which has only one directive ---adjust the money supply in order to keep a constant value of dollar/gold ---at our $660 target. Interest rates would then be set by the market and money supply would be set by gold itself ---a much more stable form of money. This would be a pseudo gold standard ----as long as the market is open and free for gold exchange internationally, then there would be an automatical gold convertability for all people. The government would need to hold $0 gold because people could simply go out and convert their dollars into gold on the open market ---if they did on balance, the currency board would then need to decrease the supply of money in circulation in order to keep the peg (assuming all else stayed constant). If the USA went first, then all countries would follow ---this would create a one world currency, gold with dollar/yen/pound/euro simply representing different quantities of the same currency, as pennies, quarters, dimes, dollars, represent different quantities of the same currency now, the US dollar. This would provide automatic adjustment to imbalances of trade ---long discussion here.

I recommend this book because of the history aspect and the understanding of gold/monetary issues. These authors understand the classical economist theories very thoroughly --with one great misunderstanding. This is the only downfall in the book ---they don't quite understand how inflation of the money supply creates bubbles or misallocated resources. Thus, they don't understand the boom/bust process as outlined by the Austrian school very well. They correctly understand taxes but do not have the same understanding with government spending. They understand free trade.

I would give this book a 5 out of 5 even though there is a big mistake of not understanding other causes of the business cycle --namely the boom bust cycle brought on by monetary inflation and misallocations of capital.

I have to say that I am by nature in favor of stable money, realistic currency valuations, and conservative accounting in private affairs and especially in public affairs. To allow politics to pretend they have a magic solution to defy the laws of economics (or simple arithmetic) to make everyone better off has never worked and can never work. Just as getting a new line of credit that you use up and spend immediately seems like new wealth for a brief period of time, the piper still must be paid on the other end. Even if you come into some money and can pay it off without terrible hardship, you have still pre-spent this money. Yes, there are good uses of credit, but most government expenditures are no better than running up credit cards on going out to eat and buying items that will be worn out long before the credit is paid off.

This is why there is an ardent group of people who want to base the value of money on a commodity rather than using fiat money (money whose value is what the government claims it to be - what we have). This book makes a pretty good case for using gold and for those interested in such things, it is something one could read and get up to speed on the issues involved. Besides a great fondness for gold, these folks have an especial hatred of central banks of all stripes and see them as tools of the forces that would undermine liberty, freedom, and personal independence. While unusual, they aren't crazy and deserve more of a hearing than they are usually given.

Still, there are some basic problems with the story as I see it. The first is that the author uses quotes from various "authorities" as proof texts. There isn't much context provided for the quotes and when there is an interpretation provided to help us understand what the quote means, it is conveniently supportive of the author's point rather than helping us understand the point the author was trying to make in his time and circumstance.

A second problem is that the author is not clear enough about the problems of using gold as money. For example, if gold is used as coins it isn't long before a one ounce coin provides less than an ounce of gold. This is caused by wear (whether natural or induced, called "clipping" - some people scrap off small amounts of gold from any number of coins to get "free money"). Another problem is that people can do things like drill out gold and fill it with lead and then cover up then put a smooth edge of gold around the coin. So, are you willing to assay the coins for each transaction? The author refers to Isaac Newton being in charge of the British Mint, but doesn't really say why. It was because of the debasement of the coins and getting the coins sound again was not an easy task.

If a nation backs its currency with gold reserves, it is almost impossible to prove those reserves are maintained. Nor is it easy to decide the ratio of paper money to the actual reserves. The supply of paper bills fluctuates and nations (or the leaders of a given time) can secretly sell reserves. Either or both of these difficulties (and others) can turn the promise gold backed notes into what amounts to fiat money.

A third problem, and one I really didn't see addressed in the book, is the change in gold supply. The so called inherent value of gold is not really true. In times of famine you can't eat gold, for example. Also, if we have a supply of goods and a fixed supply of money pursuing those goods or growing no faster than the supply of goods, then prices should remain stable. However, if the supply grew faster than the money supply, deflation would actually occur because less money would be available per good to be purchased.

However, what if the supply of gold were suddenly to increase? This has happened more than once. When all that gold from the New World showed up in Europe, it caused deflation and imposed a real economic hardship on many. Also, when new processes allow more gold to be produced, the supply of gold (or silver or platinum) increases and causes inflation as sure as printing more fiat money. This was part of the problem that led to the "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan (not Bryant as the author refers to him) in trying to peg silver to gold. Also, industrial processes use gold nowadays in ways that were not in play in centuries past. So, the gold used in circuits and so forth would not be available for money.

There are also some aspects of seeming carelessness in the book. For example, calling William Jennings Bryan, a Secretary of State, three time candidate for President, and distinguished in many other ways, as Bryant really needs to be corrected in subsequent printings of the book. Also, some of the graphs aren't quite clear. For example, on page 49 the Y axis says Gold ounces and then gives integers from 0 to 6. Are these straight ounces (of course not) or hundreds, thousands, millions? Not stated in the graph. There should also be a scale showing the graph in dollars (on the right).

And when an author refers to himself as "formerly the chief international economist of a leading economic forecasting firm" without saying which firm it leads to suspicion and doubt. This weakens the reader's faith in the author's credibility.

If you are interested in the case for gold as money, this is along the lines of what I usually hear from its supporters. However, I would also recommend strongly Milton Friedman's excellent "Money Mischief" before you take this material as the final word on this important subject.

I have to say that I am by nature in favor of stable money, realistic currency valuations, and conservative accounting in private affairs and especially in public affairs. To allow politics to pretend they have a magic solution to defy the laws of economics (or simple arithmetic) to make everyone better off has never worked and can never work. Just as getting a new line of credit that you use up and spend immediately seems like new wealth for a brief period of time, the piper still must be paid on the other end. Even if you come into some money and can pay it off without terrible hardship, you have still pre-spent this money. Yes, there are good uses of credit, but most government expenditures are no better than running up credit cards on going out to eat and buying items that will be worn out long before the credit is paid off.

This is why there is an ardent group of people who want to base the value of money on a commodity rather than using fiat money (money whose value is what the government claims it to be - what we have). This book makes a pretty good case for using gold and for those interested in such things, it is something one could read and get up to speed on the issues involved. Besides a great fondness for gold, these folks have an especial hatred of central banks of all stripes and see them as tools of the forces that would undermine liberty, freedom, and personal independence. While unusual, they aren't crazy and deserve more of a hearing than they are usually given.

Still, there are some basic problems with the story as I see it. There first is that the author uses quotes from various "authorities" as proof texts. There isn't much context provided for the quotes and when there is an interpretation provided to help us understand what the quote means, it is conveniently supportive of the author's point rather than helping us understand the point the author was trying to make in his time and circumstance.

A second problem is that the author is not clear enough about the problems of using gold as money. For example, if gold is used as coins it isn't long before a one ounce coin provides less than an ounce of gold. This is caused by wear (whether natural or induced - some people scrap off small amounts of gold from any number of coins to get "free money"). Another problem is that people can do things like drill out gold and fill it with lead and then cover up then put a smooth edge of gold around the coin. So, are you willing to assay the coins for each transaction? The author refers to Isaac Newton being in charge of the British Mint, but doesn't really say why. It was because of the debasement of the coins and getting the coins sound again was not an easy task.

If a nation backs its currency with gold reserves, it is almost impossible to prove those reserves are maintained. Nor is it easy to decide the ratio of paper money to the actual reserves. The supply of paper bills fluctuates and nations (or the leaders of a given time) can secretly sell reserves. Either or both of these difficulties (and others) can turn the promise gold backed notes into what amounts to fiat money.

A third problem, and one I really didn't see addressed in the book, is the change in gold supply. The so called inherent value of gold is not really true. If we have a supply of goods and a fixed supply of money pursuing those goods or growing no faster than the supply of goods, then prices should remain stable (if the supply grew faster than the money supply, deflation would actually occur because less money would be available per good to be purchased).

However, what if the supply of gold were suddenly to increase? This has happened more than once. When all that gold from the New World showed up in Europe, it caused deflation and real economic hardship on many. Also, when new processes allow more gold to be produced, the supply of gold (or silver or platinum) increases and causes inflation as sure as printing more fiat money. This was part of the problem behind the "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan (not Bryant as the author refers to him) in trying to peg silver to gold. Also, industrial processes use gold nowadays in ways that were not in play in centuries past. So, that gold would not be available for money.

There are also some aspects of seeming carelessness in the book. For example, calling William Jennings Bryan, a Secretary of State, three time candidate for President, and distinguished in many other ways, as Bryant really needs to be corrected in subsequent printings of the book. Also, some of the graphs aren't quite clear. For example, on page 49 the Y axis says Gold ounces and then gives integers from 0 to 6. Are these straight ounces (of course not) or hundreds, thousands, millions? Not stated in the graph. There should also be a scale showing the graph in dollars (on the right).

And when an author refers to himself as "formerly the chief international economist of a leading economic forecasting firm" without saying which firm it leads to suspicion and doubt. This weakens the reader's faith in the author's credibility.

If you are interested in the case for gold as money, this is along the lines of what I usually hear from its supporters. However, I would also recommend strongly Milton Friedman's excellent "Money Mischief" before you take this material as the final word on this important subject.

I have to say that I am my nature in favor of stable money, realistic currency valuations, and conservative accounting in private affairs and especially in public affairs. To allow politics to pretend they have a magic solution to defy the laws of economics (or simple arithmetic) to make everyone better off has never worked and can never work. Just as getting a new line of credit that you use up and spend immediately seems like new wealth for a brief period of time, the piper still must be paid on the other end. Even if you come into some money and can pay it off without terrible hardship, you have still pre-spent this money. Yes, there are good uses of credit, but most government expenditures are no better than running up credit cards on going out to eat and buying items that will be worn out long before the credit is paid off.

This is why there is an ardent group of people who want to base the value of money on a commodity rather than using fiat money (money whose value is what the government claims it to be - what we have). This book makes a pretty good case for using gold and for those interested in such things, it is something one could read and get up to speed on the issues involved. Besides a great fondness for gold, these folks have an especial hatred of central banks of all stripes and see them as tools of the forces that would undermine liberty, freedom, and personal independence. While unusual, they aren't crazy and deserve more of a hearing than they are usually given.

Still, there are some basic problems with the story as I see it. There first is that the author uses quotes from various "authorities" as proof texts. There isn't much content and when there is an interpretation provided to help us understand what the quote means, it is conveniently supportive of the author's point rather than helping us understand the point the author was trying to make.

A second problem is that the author is not clear enough about the problems of using gold as money. For example, if gold is used as coins it isn't long before a one ounce coin provides less than an ounce of gold. This is caused by wear (whether natural or induced - some people scrap off small amounts of gold from any number of coins to get "free money"). Another problem is that people can do things like drill out gold and fill it with lead and then cover up then put a smooth edge of gold around the coin. So, are you willing to assay the coins for each transaction? The author refers to Isaac Newton being in charge of the British Mint, but doesn't really say why. It was because of the debasement of the coins and getting the coins sound again was not an easy task.

If a nation backs its currency with gold reserves, it is almost impossible to prove those reserves are maintained. Nor is it easy to decide the ratio of paper money to the actual reserves. The supply of paper bills fluctuates and nations (or the leaders of a given time) can secretly sell reserves. Either or both of these difficulties (and others) can turn the promise gold backed notes into what amounts to fiat money.

A third problem, and one I really didn't see addressed in the book, is the change in gold supply. The so called inherent value of gold is not really true. If we have a supply of goods and a fixed supply of money pursuing those goods or growing no faster than the supply of goods, then prices should remain stable (if the supply grew faster than the money supply, deflation would actually occur because less money would be available per good to be purchased).

However, what if the supply of gold were suddenly to increase? This has happened more than once. When all that gold from the New World showed up in Europe, it caused deflation and real economic hardship on many. Also, when new processes allow more gold to be produced, the supply of gold (or silver or platinum) increases and causes inflation as sure as printing more fiat money. This was part of the problem behind the "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan (not Bryant as the author refers to him) in trying to peg silver to gold. Also, industrial processes use gold nowadays in ways that were not in play in centuries past. So, that gold would not be available for money.

There are also some aspects of seeming carelessness in the book. For example, calling William Jennings Bryan, a Secretary of State, three time candidate for President, and distinguished in many other ways, as Bryant really needs to be corrected in subsequent printings of the book. Also, some of the graphs aren't quite clear. For example, on page 49 the Y axis says Gold ounces and then gives integers from 0 to 6. Are these straight ounces (of course not) or hundreds, thousands, millions? Not stated in the graph. There should also be a scale showing the graph in dollars (on the right).

And when an author refers to himself as "formerly the chief international economist of a leading economic forecasting firm" without saying which firm it leads to suspicion and doubt. This weakens the reader's faith in the author's credibility.

If you are interested in the case for gold as money, this is along the lines of what I usually hear from its supporters. However, I would also recommend strongly Milton Friedman's excellent "Money Mischief" before you take this material as the final word on this important subject.