OK, fair. You're effectively defining "value" as "can be exchanged reliably and quickly for other things with/requiring value indefinitely". So the goldbug assumption is that there's a constant and nontrivial risk of people no longer accepting fiat money in the near term, but there is little to no risk of people not accepting gold. I think we can dispute the data informing this worldview, but that's a self-consistent worldview. Thanks.
There have been historical incidents where that worldview was correct. To say that such circumstances will never occur again seems optimistic. (To say that they will occur as soon or as often as the goldbug expects seems unrealistically pessimistic.)
Comments
OK, fair. You're effectively defining "value" as "can be exchanged reliably and quickly for other things with/requiring value indefinitely". So the goldbug assumption is that there's a constant and nontrivial risk of people no longer accepting fiat money in the near term, but there is little to no risk of people not accepting gold. I think we can dispute the data informing this worldview, but that's a self-consistent worldview. Thanks.
There have been historical incidents where that worldview was correct. To say that such circumstances will never occur again seems optimistic. (To say that they will occur as soon or as often as the goldbug expects seems unrealistically pessimistic.)