tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4018985866499281301.post2513783333012853319..comments2024-03-28T21:19:50.901+00:00Comments on Ladrões de Bicicletas: Grilhetas monetáriasNuno teleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07713327330820459193noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4018985866499281301.post-54203601607098084382013-12-22T20:50:00.165+00:002013-12-22T20:50:00.165+00:00J.K. Galbraith (money, whence it came where it wen...J.K. Galbraith (money, whence it came where it went) em 1976 explicou melhor, que esta é uma História recorrente:<br />"The central banks — and by common agreement the Bank of England in particular — policed and protected the convertibility of currency into gold, and the armory of instruments for doing this was now complete. It seemed a very solid structure. […]And in all countries there was a reinforcing morality. Those who supported sound money and the gold standard were good men. Those who did not were not. If they knew what they were about, they were only marginally better than thieves. If they did not, they were cranks. In neither case could they be admitted into the company of reputable citizens. This was not alone the morality of conservatives; it was also the virtue of intelligent and sophisticated men of the left. Socialists and, later, Communists, while they wished to be revolutionists, did not wish to be knaves.<br />In the last century few things more consistently troubled the conservative mind than the fear of paper money. No doubt this was primarily a matter of pecuniary interest — the fear of the creditor that he would be paid off in money of inferior purchasing power, the preference of the merchant for a widely acceptable coin, the ability of the man of means to look at his pile and know that it would persist, that he did not need a strategy for its preservation. But in the minds of some conservatives in this time there must also have been a lingering sense of the singular service that paper money had, in the recent past, rendered to revolution. Not only was the American Revolution so financed. So also was the socially far more therapeutic eruption in France. If the French citizens had been required to act within the canons of conventional finance, they could not, any more than the Americans, have acted at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com