Monday, December 19, 2011

Tom Woods on the Constitution and Money

Tom Woods has made an important comment at a post in my debate with Denninger/Stills. It is about the meaning of the regulation of money and the Constitution. Given the insight it provides, I repost it here at the top: dead wrong about the Constitution and money, as is Still, who thinks the power to "regulate" money means the power to increase its quantity. No, the power to regulate money was placed in the "weights and measures" clause because that's what "regulating" money meant. Silver dollar coins were the U.S. standard from the very beginning, and "regulating" the currency meant establishing a ratio between the silver dollar and other precious-metal coins that may circulate alongside it.


  1. I'll stick with Edwin Vieira as my constitutional money expert:


  2. Whoops -- "radio" should be "ratio."

    And Bob, I'm of course indebted to Vieira myself.

  3. If the Vieira video is the same one that's part of Ron Paul's congressional committee talks, I highly recommend it. I thought it was a fantasic look at the constitutionality of and history surrounding money.

    Also just took down Rothbard's Mystery of Banking and History of Money and Banking, and would highly recommend those (in that order) for those of you who haven't read them.

  4. Bob and Tom,

    I just wish his book 'Pieces of Eight' wasn't so darned expensive. I had to sell a kidney for that thing.