I am enjoying this discussion, but a 
clarification, please. James is arguing in favor 
of the FRS, and Pat against it. I had assumed 
that Pat was for a gold system, but he says that 
while he would like that, he is not actually 
proposing it. In which case, what are you proposing?

Also, I do not understand the distinction in this 
sentence: "Let's keep in mind that the function 
of financial intermediation is not to get money 
from savers to investors, like a Keynesian might 
argue, but to enable the purchasing power of 
savers to be employed in the directions that most 
satisfy consumer wants both in the near and more 
distant future, as a good Austrian would argue." 
Isn't that part of what investors do? Of course, 
investors also speculate with the money, as we 
have seen, an "investment" which adds nothing, 
since in speculation, one man's gains are 
measured by another man's loses; there is no net gain.

John C. Médaille