Difference between revisions of "Bi-metallism"

From International Political Economy
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Bi-Metallic Money Standard and its flaws)
 
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Historically, Bi-Metallism was a currency standard that pegged currencies to two different metals, commonly silver and gold. The standard became largely unpopular and died out over the course of the 19th century as governments and empires became more acutely aware of the serious flaws inherent in it. The biggest problem was that once the ordinary member of the bi-metallic standard became aware of discrepancies between the market price and the official value of gold or silver, it was extremely easy to take advantage, and profit from the system. For example, a mint would issue a certain rate for silver and gold. Say the official bank/mint rate for silver was higher than the market price for silver. Anyone looking to make a profit could trade in their silver for gold at the mint rate and then go to the market and trade in their gold for silver. They would then have more silver than they originally had to begin with. Repeat this cycle and they made a profit. They would return to the bank with a higher quantity of silver and get gold and return to the market. With enough people doing this, one of the two metals would quickly go out of circulation. The mint has practically forced the overvalued currency (in this case, silver) out of the market. Silver will be increasingly hard to come by.
+
<ref>Cohen, Benjamin J. The Future of Money. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. Ch 1</ref>
This discrepancy was unavoidable because official values of gold and silver were fixed while the prices of gold and silver fluctuated due to the fact that both are resources and fluctuation in price level is a natural inevitability of the laws of supply and demand. It was extremely difficult to change the official exchange rate to accord with the market value because then people would lose faith in the system and credibility would be undercut severely, not to mention the power over changing the rate would be viciously contested and subject to corruption. People realized this problem fairly quickly, however, at the time, the standard was popular because certain countries had silver and certain countries had gold and if you wanted to trade with them, it was fairly crucial to have these exchange rates. Britain wanted a bi-metallic currency standard because France had silver and Mexico had gold and they wanted to trade with both of them without extreme transaction costs. When Sir Isaac Newton overvalued gold, he caused silver to be abandoned and sent out to foreign markets where it was cheaper relative to gold. The gold standard took over from the bi-metallic as the central exchange rate mechanism.
+
Historically, Bi-Metallism was a currency standard that pegged currencies to either silver or gold. The standard became largely unpopular and died out over the course of the 19th century once governments and empires became aware of its inherent flaws. Its most apparent problem is articulated in Gresham's Law, famously known as the proverbial phrase, "Bad money drives out good." "Bad money" is money whose intrinsic value is lower than its nominal value. Conversely, "good money" has an intrinsic value that is higher than its nominal value. The intrinsic value is determined by the market according to the law of supply and demand, whereas the nominal value, or official value, is set by the government issuer. The law is premised on the fact that both monies circulate simultaneously in the domestic market as legal tenders. Once the discrepancies between the intrinsic value and nominal value of the monies become known to the public, people will try to make gains from the arbitrage. This can be done in two ways: (1) hoard the "good money" until its official value rises to its intrinsic value; (2) trade in "bad money" for "good money" at the official value and do the reverse operation in the international market. Regardless of which method is practiced, the result is that the "good money" is withdrawn from domestic circulation.
 +
 
 +
In a country with the system of bi-metallism, the "good money" and the "bad money" are simply the two different mints. For the sake of illustration, suppose the domestic country's official bank or mint value for gold is higher than the international market price for gold. Hence, gold is considered to be the "bad money" and silver the "good money." Anyone looking to make a profit could trade in their gold for silver at the mint rate and then go to international market and trade in the silver for gold. They would now have more gold than they originally had. As a result, gold flows readily into the mint, while silver is sucked out of domestic market and flows into foreign markets where it is valued higher. This discrepancy was unavoidable because official values of gold and silver were fixed while the prices of gold and silver fluctuated due to their resource-status. Fluctuation in price level, however, is a natural inevitability of the laws of supply and demand.  
 +
 
 +
<br> It grew increasingly difficult to change the official exchange rate to agree with the market value because the credibility of the system would be shaken, and people would lose faith in the ability of outside actors to manually regulate the market. Furthermore, the justification for someone who has the power over changing the exchange rate would be viciously contested and seem extremely corrupt.  
 +
 
 +
<br> People understood that there was a problem with Bi-Metallism fairly quickly, however, at the time, the standard seemed enticing. Numerous countries had either mass amounts of silver, or mass amounts of gold, and it was vital to ascertain exchange rates with which to trade. Britain advocated for a bi-metallic currency standard because France had silver and Mexico had gold and Britain wanted to trade with both countries without extreme transaction costs. When Sir Isaac Newton overvalued gold, silver to be abandoned and dispersed in foreign markets where it was cheaper relative to gold. The gold standard took over after the collapse of the bi-metallic standard system as the central exchange rate mechanism.<br>
 +
 
 +
<references /><br><br>
 +
 
 +
<br>
 +
 
 +
<br>

Latest revision as of 21:45, 29 October 2010

[1] Historically, Bi-Metallism was a currency standard that pegged currencies to either silver or gold. The standard became largely unpopular and died out over the course of the 19th century once governments and empires became aware of its inherent flaws. Its most apparent problem is articulated in Gresham's Law, famously known as the proverbial phrase, "Bad money drives out good." "Bad money" is money whose intrinsic value is lower than its nominal value. Conversely, "good money" has an intrinsic value that is higher than its nominal value. The intrinsic value is determined by the market according to the law of supply and demand, whereas the nominal value, or official value, is set by the government issuer. The law is premised on the fact that both monies circulate simultaneously in the domestic market as legal tenders. Once the discrepancies between the intrinsic value and nominal value of the monies become known to the public, people will try to make gains from the arbitrage. This can be done in two ways: (1) hoard the "good money" until its official value rises to its intrinsic value; (2) trade in "bad money" for "good money" at the official value and do the reverse operation in the international market. Regardless of which method is practiced, the result is that the "good money" is withdrawn from domestic circulation.

In a country with the system of bi-metallism, the "good money" and the "bad money" are simply the two different mints. For the sake of illustration, suppose the domestic country's official bank or mint value for gold is higher than the international market price for gold. Hence, gold is considered to be the "bad money" and silver the "good money." Anyone looking to make a profit could trade in their gold for silver at the mint rate and then go to international market and trade in the silver for gold. They would now have more gold than they originally had. As a result, gold flows readily into the mint, while silver is sucked out of domestic market and flows into foreign markets where it is valued higher. This discrepancy was unavoidable because official values of gold and silver were fixed while the prices of gold and silver fluctuated due to their resource-status. Fluctuation in price level, however, is a natural inevitability of the laws of supply and demand.


It grew increasingly difficult to change the official exchange rate to agree with the market value because the credibility of the system would be shaken, and people would lose faith in the ability of outside actors to manually regulate the market. Furthermore, the justification for someone who has the power over changing the exchange rate would be viciously contested and seem extremely corrupt.


People understood that there was a problem with Bi-Metallism fairly quickly, however, at the time, the standard seemed enticing. Numerous countries had either mass amounts of silver, or mass amounts of gold, and it was vital to ascertain exchange rates with which to trade. Britain advocated for a bi-metallic currency standard because France had silver and Mexico had gold and Britain wanted to trade with both countries without extreme transaction costs. When Sir Isaac Newton overvalued gold, silver to be abandoned and dispersed in foreign markets where it was cheaper relative to gold. The gold standard took over after the collapse of the bi-metallic standard system as the central exchange rate mechanism.

  1. Cohen, Benjamin J. The Future of Money. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. Ch 1