Quote:
Originally Posted by brandonstills
I suppose it could be interpreted that way but he does explain himself if you look into it more.
Is telling a child don't put your hand on the stove because you will get burnt a scare tactic though? And even if it is, does it negate the truth? Also, if you want to affect change, the sad fact is, people respond more to emotions than facts. If a smart person wanted to effect change they would present both an emotional and a rational case, with the greater part dedicated to the former; because that seems to be what works the best.
Ultimately you have to look at what is presented and not how it is presented when trying to find truth and come to your own opinion.
If you are interested, this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Rich-Dads-Advi...4364503&sr=8-1
gives a more objective explanation on the problems with fiat currency and why gold is necessary.
Historical evidence and reason seem to be on the side of a gold standard. Public opinion seems to be on the side of fiat currency. Take your pick. |
thanks for the book recommendation. and i agree about fiat currency. i also see pauls' point that historically no paper currency has ever lasted. but i also don't see it as being so simple to revert back to the gold standard. i mean one day we are on paper money and a loaf of bread is $3 the next day all transactions world wide are done with gold backed transactions and a loaf of bread is all the sudden .49c, i don't see it happening that way.