The Denstravaganza off SN continues... been quite a few publications recently (#1556891, #1560586) — and it doesn't look like I'm slowing down! (actually, travelling for the next few weeks... it's BTCHEL in Helsinki Sept 25-26; you comings, bruhvs?! #1560586

We're familiar with this dude (#1532476), and I even recommended the book back in July for another Nordic Node (#1530104) issue.

Lots of people on all sides of monetary matters can learn from this

Most people think the dollar originated with the United States. The dollar, its symbol and its banking arrangements, are so thoroughly associated with the United States that its earlier history seems quaint. Before it became the general money of a republic, the central bank reserve asset the world over, and the currency unit in which much of the world trades and invoices, the “dollar” was a European silver coin that circulated throughout the Spanish Empire and occasionally landed on colonial shores.

If all you take away from this is that "the dollar" as a money (coin, unit of account) is older than America itself, I'm satisfied.

If you compute the implication of that, and realize that "money" is wholly detached from "nation-state," ten fucking points.

"America adopted the dollar, and in America’s rise to global dominance, this already-global money was projected further."

Real people, facing real commercial situations, will make money when they see fit and when it suits their purposes — scrip in the Great Depression, emergency ledger entries during Hurricane Katrina, colonials in Maryland making commerce, the original Joachimstaler dollar itself. The dollar wasn’t America’s money, wielded from America’s center, but good global silver money accepted everywhere. The money-starved colonies adopted it eagerly — even those Maryland farmers and merchants in the late 1700s denominated their paper money as dollar substitutes.

The story of the dollar doesn’t just “start with a coin and then end in a country. It starts with a coin and then ends in a bank.” The United States didn’t invent the dollar. It inherited it, adapted it, molded it, and became extremely good at producing it.

Yes, batman reference... and yes, I love that the "dollar" etymologically and historically comes from a place bearing my name. I was maaaade to do this shit...

I liked that he sidestepped the "origin of money"/stylistic goldsmith banker story: no, actually, monetary matters of the past are way more complicated and unclear than that!

I definitely didn't like him just-so/wave away modern banking issues like deposit insurance (oh magic, fantastic) or deflation-phobia (people don't like lower nominal prices!) or the fascinating theme of indexation

ALSO: for whom does the fiat dollar labor?

Greeley tosses out statements like “there has always been tension between the goals of sound money and those of functional money,” often enough to put most sound-money advocates’ teeth on edge, and sending the metaconversation right back to the political, distributional nature of monetary regimes. The book never fully resolves that debacle: If money was always political and functioned better for some than others, for whom does the current global arrangement — inflation-targeting central banks and money-creating fiat banks — work well?

yes, sir. That _is_ the question, isn't it?