Investigate the Dror Goldberg 2007 paper titled "THE MYTHS OF FIAT MONEY"
This paper may be found in several locations among which are:
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal....5goldberg.pdf
http://econweb.tamu.edu/papers/2007-04.pdf
It is my position that two inter-related concepts keep people trapped on the same merry-go-round.
The first concept is that money is a *thing* and the second concept is that money is a natural monopoly.
This two faceted inter-relationship ignores evidence through history that does support my thesis that money is a communication.
In the Goldberg paper we find some discussion of the stone donut money of Yapp. However, Goldberg never mentions Kocherlakota who would point out the mnemonic usage of the stone donuts. In fact, the actual money of the people of Yapp is an aural recitation of favors given and favors received while the stone donut (which often times never is moved in location) serves only as a reference. (Mnemonic function)
When the thesis is accepted that money is a communication, then the absurdity of laws against "uttering money" becomes obvious. If people have a natural right of freedom of speech and freedom of contract, then "uttering money" is but a simple extension of those two natural rights.
I do not deny that silver may be used in coinage form as transmitters of value nor gold in the same fashion; my claim is simply "Why stop there?" My claim is that paper claims of title may be transmitted as bearer titles (warehouse receipts) on any product or commodity already in existence. My claim is that any contract to create and deliver value as described in the contract can become money by assignment to the bearer. My claim is that the Ithaca Hour is equally as valid as a money as the federal reserve note.
Hayek nailed it. If you want stability in money formats, you must allow competition.
Levi Philos