trading, and there would be no other "disturbance" as a result of stopping inflation than the closing of some and the opening of other job opportunities - a process which goes on, all the time, anyhow. Ideally, the existing paper currency should not be suddenly withdrawn but merely, for easier handling, reduced in denominations, without quotas or other limits, while stopping further issues and letting it circulate only at its market rate against the free standards and media accepted on the market. Ending Legal Tender would, on its own, soon end most price distortions caused by inflation even when, temporarily, the over-issue of state paper money - at a continuously deteriorating market rate, - would still go on. Temporarily people would still be willing to accept it at its market rate - as long as no acceptable alternatives are offered to them or provided by them. The free market rate and free choice of the standard of value would make stable pricing possible, stable value reckoning and would thus provide employment even while the exchange medium, with which these stable prices are paid, is still deteriorating. But under freedom to issue alternative exchange media, the bad paper would soon be driven out by sound private issues. Ending not only the Legal Tender despotism but also the coercive monopoly of the central bank, would allow good alternative private currencies to drive out the bad government paper currency and this change would also have no unemployment promoting effects. On the contrary: Obviously, to the extent that it would reduce government demand for labour, it would increase private demand for labour. Moreover, every private issue lastly based on labour or labour products, would have to come back to be "redeemed" in this cover (at its nominal value) and would thus promote employment, in the same way as your IOUs, if they were redeemable in your labour, would come back to you and keep you employed. Any additional currency i...
