Really depends on how you calculate these things....there are 3 mains ways: (a) official/semi-official inflation data, (b) silver, (c) gold.
I think silver is actually the best, because up until 1965 it was in nearly all the coins. Since it was in actual circulation (unlike just a 'gold backing') therefore its scarcity effects could be assumed to have impacted prices.
$1 coin(s) = .85 oz/silver
Therefore 4 cents = .034 oz /silver
Current silver price is $58/oz, therefore 4 cents = $1.97
The problem with silver is that it’s value is primarily industrial rather than monetary and there are a bunch of uses for silver in technology that didn’t exist back then.
The problem with silver is that it’s value is primarily industrial rather than monetary and there are a bunch of uses for silver
Maybe, but it has risen far less than gold since 1971. Up until 71' by decree the ratio was 1/35 - now the ratio (in prices) is 1/72.
Silvers 'industrial demand' has been far offset by its demonetization .... it seems that its biggest use was "coinage" before and that far outweighed its current industrial demand.
It’s fair to note the offsetting factors but being subject to such fundamental changes in demand makes it suspect as a steady measure of value.
Gold has basically just been valued as a store of value the whole time and it actually helps that it wasn’t heavily used in exchange because that didn’t change radically.
Really depends on how you calculate these things....there are 3 mains ways: (a) official/semi-official inflation data, (b) silver, (c) gold.
I think silver is actually the best, because up until 1965 it was in nearly all the coins. Since it was in actual circulation (unlike just a 'gold backing') therefore its scarcity effects could be assumed to have impacted prices.
$1 coin(s) = .85 oz/silver Therefore 4 cents = .034 oz /silver Current silver price is $58/oz, therefore 4 cents = $1.97
The problem with silver is that it’s value is primarily industrial rather than monetary and there are a bunch of uses for silver in technology that didn’t exist back then.
Maybe, but it has risen far less than gold since 1971. Up until 71' by decree the ratio was 1/35 - now the ratio (in prices) is 1/72.
Silvers 'industrial demand' has been far offset by its demonetization .... it seems that its biggest use was "coinage" before and that far outweighed its current industrial demand.
It’s fair to note the offsetting factors but being subject to such fundamental changes in demand makes it suspect as a steady measure of value.
Gold has basically just been valued as a store of value the whole time and it actually helps that it wasn’t heavily used in exchange because that didn’t change radically.
You're right. If you are going to compare it to gold and silver the decline in purchasing power will definitely be even worse.
Posted image encase other Stackers having trouble seeing image.
thanks. Why can't I see the image in the post? It just says "show full tweet" and is just loading.
That's odd. Not sure.
Thanks.
I hate these charts. It was a different world between now and then.
Different world but don't change the fact that people are getting poorer holding dollars.
But people live leaps and bounds better today than in 1870 and it’s not even close
That is most certainly true.
The 7-Stage Cycle: How Every Reserve Currency Collapses (Dollar = Stage 5) #1279186
https://xcancel.com/greenbackd/status/1996287158647472349