Legal Tender Act passed

"Beanie" wrote in message ...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is totally under political control.

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left holding the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. So in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.

On Feb 26, 11:13*am, "Beanie" wrote:
"Peter" wrote in message

...

If the period is "too short", what would have changed the outcome if the period
had been longer?

The politicians' desire to placate the people (and/or enrich themselves) by big
gubmint spending.
Once they are unfettered by a solid backing for the currency, the temptation to
keep the printing presses running full tilt is irresistible.
The loss of purchasing power of fiat currencies over the long term is well
documented and I suggest you do a bit of research for complete details.

I guess you may have missed something in the link I supplied. For
that case it was actually impossible for the government to printed
more. That was why the value remained.

To an extent, it is consistent with your point, but I think you missed
mine.

On Feb 26, 12:46*pm, "mazorj" wrote:
"Beanie" wrote in ....

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is *totally under political control..

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left holding the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. *So in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. *If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ostrich.

Head in the proverbial SAND.

Be an ostrich.

The great denouement is happening as we post.

Historically, the funny thing about the World's worst hyperinflations
is that 75% to 95% of the people's savings were toast WELL BEFORE the
spectacular "Lightening" stage of "the Hyperinflationary Blowoff".

Frankly, I hope to point my friends in the right direction.

If they are mentally incapable, well, my conscious is very sad but
clear.

oly

On Feb 26, 3:36*pm, "Beanie" wrote:

What was your point, other than to be deliberately obtuse?

You alleged that a fiat currency must always decline in value and
subsequently mentioned as the obvious reason that there is an
irresistible temptation to print more.

I cited an example where it did not decline. It was an example where
it was impossible in the foreseeable future to print any more and that
fact became widely known. The value (purchasing power) of the
currency actually increased (and was validated by outside observers).
I believe that the cause of the increase was, in part, the knowledge
that printing more was not possible.

I freely admit that the period is only about 10 years, but the example
seems to me clear enough.

In case it is not yet obvious, I submit that the mind of mankind is
able to create other situations where the printing press cannot be
used to print unlimited currency. That such prudence is not commonly
observed does not make it impossible.

"Peter" wrote in message
...
I freely admit that the period is only about 10 years, but the example seems to
me clear enough.

The example you cited is a short term anomaly.
You know, I know it, everybody knows it.
You know you're wrong yet you keep grasping at straws.

"oly" totally dodged my earlier question, and posted the
following non sequitur to the current thread commentary, when he randomly
typed
...
On Feb 26, 12:46 pm, "mazorj" wrote:
"Beanie" wrote in
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is totally under political control.

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only
ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left holding
the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an
inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC
nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. So in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ostrich.

Head in the proverbial SAND.

Be an ostrich.

The great denouement is happening as we post.

Historically, the funny thing about the World's worst hyperinflations
is that 75% to 95% of the people's savings were toast WELL BEFORE the
spectacular "Lightening" stage of "the Hyperinflationary Blowoff".

Frankly, I hope to point my friends in the right direction.

If they are mentally incapable, well, my conscious is very sad but clear.

oly
======================

WTF does any of that have to do with my or Beanie's observations here? They
are not in opposition to your views, they are consistent with, and merely
expand on how the coming meltdown scenario might play out.

Instead of looking for opportunities to flame others after mis-reading their
comments as attempts to disprove your views, how about putting down that
bottle and answering my earlier question? It was:

"If we went overnight to solely using money that held inherent PM content
(gold/silver coinage) or notes fully backed by Ft. Knox holdings, would
there be a sufficient money supply so that there would be no negative effect
on commerce?"

You're the self-styled expert on money here. Put up or STFU, oly.

On Feb 27, 11:37*am, "mazorj" wrote:
"oly" totally dodged my earlier question, and posted the
following non sequitur to the current thread commentary, when he randomly
...
On Feb 26, 12:46 pm, "mazorj" wrote:





"Beanie" wrote in
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is totally under political control.

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only
ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left holding
the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an
inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC
nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. So in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ostrich.

Head in the proverbial SAND.

Be an ostrich.

The great denouement is happening as we post.

Historically, the funny thing about the World's worst hyperinflations
is that 75% to 95% of the people's savings were toast WELL BEFORE the
spectacular "Lightening" stage of "the Hyperinflationary Blowoff".

Frankly, I hope to point my friends in the right direction.

If they are mentally incapable, well, my conscious is very sad but clear.

oly
======================

WTF does any of that have to do with my or Beanie's observations here? *They
are not in opposition to your views, they are consistent with, and merely
expand on how the coming meltdown scenario might play out.

Instead of looking for opportunities to flame others after mis-reading their
comments as attempts to disprove your views, how about putting down that
bottle and answering my earlier question? *It was:

"If we went overnight to solely using money that held inherent PM content
(gold/silver coinage) or notes fully backed by Ft. Knox holdings, would
there be a sufficient money supply so that there would be no negative effect
on commerce?"

You're the self-styled expert on money here. *Put up or STFU, oly.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not particularly responding to Beanie's post, and his views and
mine are indeed along the same lines. I may have put the cursor in
the wrong place.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++

First, your "duck in a pen" mindset shows when you complacently
believe that the gold that's supposed to be in Fort Knox is still
there.

Second, the relationship between goods and services and the amount of
gold used as a circulating medium will naturally adjust if, a la Adam
Smith, the "invisble hand" of the free market is allowed to operate
without serious interference. It makes the same adjustments in a fiat
money system too, but instead of a gold-based stability where
sometimes prices go up, sometimes prices go down (and don't change
much over decades), you can pretty much count on prices only going up
in terms of paper money.

Third, bimetallism doesn't work. You gotta choose gold OR silver as
the standard. That's one of history's clearer lessons.

Fourth, I must come to the conclusion that I seriously don't care
whether or not you do well in the coming years, Mr. Mazor. The
financial and monetary system of the USA is obviously fairly impaired
and we are approaching a sharp break from what has been the status quo
in this country from the early 1970s.

Sauve qui peut, but penned ducks are sitting ducks.

Back to point two and the relationship between goods and money. I
like what Dr. Johnson said in Boswell's Journey to the Western Isles.
When well into Scotland, some host pointed out that forty hen's eggs
could be purchased for a shilling in that locale. Johnson's reply was
"It is not that are eggs are so common here, but rather that pence are
dear".

Nevertheless, despite the scarcity of pence, it was entirely possible
to establish prices and get the good Doctor some scrambled eggs.

Under a gold system, prices will be established and some rough
equilibrium will be maintained over time, so long as we abandon the
idea of central banking and serious government interference in free
markets.

oly

"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 27, 11:37 am, "mazorj" wrote:
"oly" totally dodged my earlier question, and posted the
following non sequitur to the current thread commentary, when he randomly
...
On Feb 26, 12:46 pm, "mazorj" wrote:

"Beanie" wrote in
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is totally under political control.

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only
ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left holding
the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a
rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an
inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to
play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over
and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC
nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. So
in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you
to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ostrich.

Head in the proverbial SAND.

Be an ostrich.

The great denouement is happening as we post.

Historically, the funny thing about the World's worst hyperinflations
is that 75% to 95% of the people's savings were toast WELL BEFORE the
spectacular "Lightening" stage of "the Hyperinflationary Blowoff".

Frankly, I hope to point my friends in the right direction.

If they are mentally incapable, well, my conscious is very sad but clear.

oly
======================

WTF does any of that have to do with my or Beanie's observations here?
They
are not in opposition to your views, they are consistent with, and merely
expand on how the coming meltdown scenario might play out.

Instead of looking for opportunities to flame others after mis-reading
their
comments as attempts to disprove your views, how about putting down that
bottle and answering my earlier question? It was:

"If we went overnight to solely using money that held inherent PM content
(gold/silver coinage) or notes fully backed by Ft. Knox holdings, would
there be a sufficient money supply so that there would be no negative
effect
on commerce?"

You're the self-styled expert on money here. Put up or STFU, oly.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not particularly responding to Beanie's post, and his views and
mine are indeed along the same lines. I may have put the cursor in
the wrong place.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++

First, your "duck in a pen" mindset shows when you complacently
believe that the gold that's supposed to be in Fort Knox is still there.

BZZZT. Your "flamer on steroids" mindset shows when you look for errors
that aren't there. Look up the definition and use of "metaphor". Ft. Knox
was used as a symbol, not as the definitive location for held gold.

Second, the relationship between goods and services and the amount of
gold used as a circulating medium will naturally adjust if, a la Adam
Smith, the "invisble hand" of the free market is allowed to operate
without serious interference. It makes the same adjustments in a fiat
money system too, but instead of a gold-based stability where
sometimes prices go up, sometimes prices go down (and don't change
much over decades), you can pretty much count on prices only going up
in terms of paper money.

Okay, so your answer is that we have enough government-held gold and/or
silver to do away with all forms of fiat money without disrupting trade and
commerce.

Third, bimetallism doesn't work. You gotta choose gold OR silver as
the standard. That's one of history's clearer lessons.

So by limiting the PM to gold OR silver, my question becomes even more
constrained as does the answer. Is there enough government-held gold to do
away with all forms of fiat money without disrupting trade and commerce?
*Alternatively* is there enough government-held silver to do away with all
forms of fiat money without disrupting trade and commerce?

And you MUST deal with my qualifying condition: "Without disrupting trade
and commerce." Otherwise your response is non-responsive.

Fourth, I must come to the conclusion that I seriously don't care
whether or not you do well in the coming years, Mr. Mazor. The
financial and monetary system of the USA is obviously fairly impaired
and we are approaching a sharp break from what has been the status quo
in this country from the early 1970s.

When have I ever said otherwise? IMO the debatable question is whether it
will "just" result in a nasty hard landing and hard times that surpass the
Great Depression in its effects, or will it bring the whole house down
around our ears.

Sauve qui peut, but penned ducks are sitting ducks.

So what's the view from the duck pen of a state employee working and living
in a state capital as a state bank examiner? You expect us to believe that
your views aren't a product of that parochial hot house? If you work in a
sewer long enough, oly, even roses start smelling like sewage.

Back to point two and the relationship between goods and money. I
like what Dr. Johnson said in Boswell's Journey to the Western Isles.
When well into Scotland, some host pointed out that forty hen's eggs
could be purchased for a shilling in that locale. Johnson's reply was
"It is not that are eggs are so common here, but rather that pence are
dear".

A clever but insufficient analysis of supply and demand. If eggs were
scarce as hens' teeth on the Western Isles, do you think they still would
have been going at 40 to the shilling?

Nevertheless, despite the scarcity of pence, it was entirely possible
to establish prices and get the good Doctor some scrambled eggs.

So what? They also could have agreed to exchange a linen handkerchief for
however many eggs. The point is, you have precisely illustrated my point
that a distorted money supply will result in distortions across markets and
regions.

Under a gold system, prices will be established and some rough
equilibrium will be maintained over time, so long as we abandon the
idea of central banking and serious government interference in free markets.

I never said it wouldn't. It's the process of plummeting to a new money
supply/price equilibrium, and whose oxen will be gored how and how badly as
that happens, that is at issue here. You can hardly compare the one-time
local purchase of a few eggs with the much more massive scale of downsizing
a nation's entire money supply.

On a numismatic note, if deflation from a shrunken money supply brings back
the 5-cent 1-oz. candy bar, at least we won't be hearing many more calls to
abolish a "useless" 1-cent coin.
:-)

(Which raises an interesting question: FRB notes presumably could be
recalled and replaced fairly quickly at a fixed rate of exchange, but what
happens to circulating coinage? Wouldn't it take significantly longer to
mint all the needed "new" pennies etc. than the printing of the repacement
notes? And unless and until that happens, holders of "old" coinage will get
a windfall profit as long as, say, 4 "old" state quarters can be used
instead of whatever $1 note replaces the FRBs.)

"mazorj" wrote in message
...

"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 27, 11:37 am, "mazorj" wrote:
"oly" totally dodged my earlier question, and posted
the
following non sequitur to the current thread commentary, when he randomly
...
On Feb 26, 12:46 pm, "mazorj" wrote:

"Beanie" wrote in
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
but the cheapening of fiat money is totally under political control.

Politicians all like to point out to the electorate on how the
brought
home the bacon to their home district.
Since there isn't enough money around for fund all the pork, the only
ways
to get it are borrow or print more money (aka quantitative easing).
Currently we do both.
China is the largest holder of US debt and is going to be left
holding
the
bag as the dollar dwindles in value.
The Chinese have a tiger by the tail - if they start to dump their
T-Bills, the dollar and the value of the t-bills will drop lock a
rock.
If they hold on to them, there value will slowly be eroded by an
inflation
rate that exceeds the interest being paid on the t-bills.
Either way, they will get screwed.
China need the US market to sell their cheap goods, so they have to
play
ball with Uncle Sam and are willing, for the mean time, to bend over
and
take it as a matter of political expediency.

Yep, much like the political expediency of the Mexican standoff that
prevents us from being too critical of human rights issues in OPEC
nations.
We give lip service to human rights there but don't dare to do anything
substantive against most of the hands that control the oil spigots. So
in
practice, we let the victims of such abuses bend over and take it.

As has been noted in Realpolitiks, nations do not have friends, just
interests. If the making of laws and sausages is too revolting for you
to
see in action, don't even think about diplomacy and foreign policies.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ostrich.

Head in the proverbial SAND.

Be an ostrich.

The great denouement is happening as we post.

Historically, the funny thing about the World's worst hyperinflations
is that 75% to 95% of the people's savings were toast WELL BEFORE the
spectacular "Lightening" stage of "the Hyperinflationary Blowoff".

Frankly, I hope to point my friends in the right direction.

If they are mentally incapable, well, my conscious is very sad but clear.

oly
======================

WTF does any of that have to do with my or Beanie's observations here?
They
are not in opposition to your views, they are consistent with, and merely
expand on how the coming meltdown scenario might play out.

Instead of looking for opportunities to flame others after mis-reading
their
comments as attempts to disprove your views, how about putting down that
bottle and answering my earlier question? It was:

"If we went overnight to solely using money that held inherent PM content
(gold/silver coinage) or notes fully backed by Ft. Knox holdings, would
there be a sufficient money supply so that there would be no negative
effect
on commerce?"

You're the self-styled expert on money here. Put up or STFU, oly.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not particularly responding to Beanie's post, and his views and
mine are indeed along the same lines. I may have put the cursor in
the wrong place.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++

First, your "duck in a pen" mindset shows when you complacently
believe that the gold that's supposed to be in Fort Knox is still there.

BZZZT. Your "flamer on steroids" mindset shows when you look for errors
that aren't there. Look up the definition and use of "metaphor". Ft.
Knox was used as a symbol, not as the definitive location for held gold.

Second, the relationship between goods and services and the amount of
gold used as a circulating medium will naturally adjust if, a la Adam
Smith, the "invisble hand" of the free market is allowed to operate
without serious interference. It makes the same adjustments in a fiat
money system too, but instead of a gold-based stability where
sometimes prices go up, sometimes prices go down (and don't change
much over decades), you can pretty much count on prices only going up
in terms of paper money.

Okay, so your answer is that we have enough government-held gold and/or
silver to do away with all forms of fiat money without disrupting trade
and commerce.

Third, bimetallism doesn't work. You gotta choose gold OR silver as
the standard. That's one of history's clearer lessons.

So by limiting the PM to gold OR silver, my question becomes even more
constrained as does the answer. Is there enough government-held gold to
do away with all forms of fiat money without disrupting trade and
commerce? *Alternatively* is there enough government-held silver to do
away with all forms of fiat money without disrupting trade and commerce?

And you MUST deal with my qualifying condition: "Without disrupting trade
and commerce." Otherwise your response is non-responsive.

Fourth, I must come to the conclusion that I seriously don't care
whether or not you do well in the coming years, Mr. Mazor. The
financial and monetary system of the USA is obviously fairly impaired
and we are approaching a sharp break from what has been the status quo
in this country from the early 1970s.

When have I ever said otherwise? IMO the debatable question is whether it
will "just" result in a nasty hard landing and hard times that surpass the
Great Depression in its effects, or will it bring the whole house down
around our ears.

Sauve qui peut, but penned ducks are sitting ducks.

So what's the view from the duck pen of a state employee working and
living in a state capital as a state bank examiner? You expect us to
believe that your views aren't a product of that parochial hot house? If
you work in a sewer long enough, oly, even roses start smelling like
sewage.

Back to point two and the relationship between goods and money. I
like what Dr. Johnson said in Boswell's Journey to the Western Isles.
When well into Scotland, some host pointed out that forty hen's eggs
could be purchased for a shilling in that locale. Johnson's reply was
"It is not that are eggs are so common here, but rather that pence are
dear".

A clever but insufficient analysis of supply and demand. If eggs were
scarce as hens' teeth on the Western Isles, do you think they still would
have been going at 40 to the shilling?

Nevertheless, despite the scarcity of pence, it was entirely possible
to establish prices and get the good Doctor some scrambled eggs.

So what? They also could have agreed to exchange a linen handkerchief for
however many eggs. The point is, you have precisely illustrated my point
that a distorted money supply will result in distortions across markets
and regions.

Under a gold system, prices will be established and some rough
equilibrium will be maintained over time, so long as we abandon the
idea of central banking and serious government interference in free
markets.

I never said it wouldn't. It's the process of plummeting to a new money
supply/price equilibrium, and whose oxen will be gored how and how badly
as that happens, that is at issue here. You can hardly compare the
one-time local purchase of a few eggs with the much more massive scale of
downsizing a nation's entire money supply.

On a numismatic note, if deflation from a shrunken money supply brings
back the 5-cent 1-oz. candy bar, at least we won't be hearing many more
calls to abolish a "useless" 1-cent coin.
:-)

(Which raises an interesting question: FRB notes presumably could be
recalled and replaced fairly quickly at a fixed rate of exchange, but what
happens to circulating coinage? Wouldn't it take significantly longer to
mint all the needed "new" pennies etc. than the printing of the repacement
notes? And unless and until that happens, holders of "old" coinage will
get a windfall profit as long as, say, 4 "old" state quarters can be used
instead of whatever $1 note replaces the FRBs.)


Following all this with some interest. Could we alone return to a
gold/silver-backed currency in today's global economy? Wouldn't all
countries have to act in unison and use the same PM as the basis for their
own money?

"mazorj" wrote in message
...
(Which raises an interesting question: FRB notes presumably could be recalled
and replaced fairly quickly at a fixed rate of exchange, but what happens to
circulating coinage? Wouldn't it take significantly longer to mint all the
needed "new" pennies etc. than the printing of the repacement notes? And
unless and until that happens, holders of "old" coinage will get a windfall
profit as long as, say, 4 "old" state quarters can be used instead of whatever
$1 note replaces the FRBs.)

I imagine that clad coinage would be demonetized.
Why not just issue gold and silver coinage in troy ounces or fractions thereof?
I'm pretty sure people would readily adapt to that system.
I've seen people adapt to a runaway inflation, so adjusting to minor PM
flucuations should pose no problem.

FRNs will, sooner or later, become worthless.
Better the gubmint gets a handle on it now rather than allowing the monetary
situation to descend into chaos.
I don't know if the gubmint has enough gold/silver to back the currency required
for daily commerce but I'm almost positive that the US public AND the gubmint
together have enough PMs to make the system work.
Offer free conversion into US coin of any gold and silver held by the public.

I'm in my 60s, so the chances of the system crashing and burning as in post-WWI
Germany in my lifetime are, IMO, remote.
Nevertheless, I feel the FRN system is a giant con game and is doomed to
eventual failure, certainly within the next 50 years.