g remains suppressed. 4. Replacing the old currency at an arbitrary rate, not the free market rate, and most likely supplying not enough new currency because under monetary despotism there is no yardstick like the free market rate for currencies. 5. Continuing monetary despotism with all its uncertainties and the expectation of further inflation. 6. Tax increases and their stricter collection - with their deflationary effects. 7. Delays in spending of tax-collected funds after the official currency "reform". 8. Issuance of a new "reformed" currency in quotas only. 9. Insistence on gold payments or gold redemption - regardless of the availability of gold and existing or possible alternative private contractual arrangements, i.e.: part redemption (revival! J.Z., 1999) of monetary despotism in the form of an exclusive gold standard. 10.Issuance of the new currency only to the extent that foreign loans are available as "backing". I have no doubt that there are more right ways and that many more mistakes could be listed. This listing was only made to throw some doubts on unchecked premises, official announcements and "expert" views on the subject, including e.g. those of Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek, Murray Rothbard and Mark Tier. The essence of my case is contained in the above statements. Whosoever wants to know more has to put up with the following notes. WHY ENDING INFLATION NEED NOT LEAD TO UNEMPLOYMENT There is an almost unanimous consent among Libertarians and statists alike that ending inflation would inevitably cause, at least as a side effect and temporarily, unemployment during an adjustment period. Some even consider unemployment itself as a cure and full employment as inflationary. This is one of the reasons why only all too few listen attentively to the conventional libertarian proposals on how to stop inflation and why welfare statists never interrupt their inflationary policies for long. Most people simply prefer inflation to ...
