There are those who insist that money, currency, should be based upon gold. That this then restricts money supply to the productivity of mining is taken to be a benefit. We disagree. Well, mostly we disagree:

A gold coin stamped with an image of Victoria Falls has been introduced by Zimbabwe in its latest eye-catching attempt to tame galloping inflation and prevent another collapse in Africa’s worst-performing currency.

The government hopes to curb the hoarding of US dollars and tangible assets such as house bricks by tempting investors with 22-carat, individually numbered coins which are being minted from locally mined ore.

This is, we think, the third time Zimbabwe has faced hyperinflation and the destruction of the currency in recent decades. The authorities seem incapable of restraining themselves from overproducing any monies that they have the ability to produce.

That is, when considering what money should be linked to - gold, a basket of commodities, something purely fiat, whatever - that question of Thomas Sowell’s is always important, “Compared to what?”

It is actually possible for this modern monetary theory idea - government should just print whatever money it needs then spend it - to reach the stage that tying the money supply to the productivity of the mining industry is a good idea. Or, perhaps, it is possible for governments to be so incompetent that it becomes that good idea.

Which brings to mind a slightly different quote when considering how money should be managed and by whom. “You’ve got to ask yourself, do I feel lucky? Well, do ya punk?” The truth being that electoral choices do not always turn out lucky….