[87]In the Purchasing Power of Money (1911) I sketched a plan for controlling the price level, i. e., standardizing the purchasing power of monetary units. This plan was presented more briefly, but in more popular language, before the International Congress of Chambers of Commerce, at Boston, September, 1912. The details were most fully elaborated in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, February, 1913. Following these and various other presentations of the subject, especially the discussion at the meeting of the American Economic Association in December, 1912, the plan was widely criticized by economists, both favorably and unfavorably, as well as by the general public.

On the whole the plan has been received with far more favor than I had dared to hope and even the adverse criticism has usually been tempered by a certain degree of approval.

The object of the present paper is briefly to state the plan and to answer the more important and technical objections which have been raised. Answers to the more popular objections, omitted from this article through lack of space, will appear in a book, Standardising the Dollar, which I hope to publish in 1915.

I shall begin with a skeleton statement of the plan; space is lacking for more. In brief, the plan is virtually to vary each month the weight of the gold dollar, or other unit, and to vary it in such a way as to enable it always to have substantially the same general purchasing power. The word "virtually" is emphasized, lest, as has frequently happened, any one should imagine that the actual gold coins were to be recoined at a new weight each month. The simplest disposition of existing gold coins would be to call them in and issue paper certificates therefor. The virtual gold dollar would then be that varying quantum of gold bullion in which each dollar of these certificates could be redeemed. The situation would be only slightly different from that at present, since very little actual gold now circulates; instead, the public uses gold certificates, obtained on the deposit of gold bullion at the Treasury, and redeemable in gold bullion at the Treasury at the rate of 25.8 grains, nine-tenths fine, per dollar. The only important change which would be introduced by the plan is in the redemption bullion; we would substitute for 25.8 a new figure each month. The gold miner, or other owners of bullion, would, just as now, deposit gold at the United States Mint or Treasury and receive paper representatives, while the jeweler, exporter, and other holders of these certificates would, just as now, present them to the Treasury when gold bullion was desired.

There would also be a small fee or "brassage," of, say, 1 per cent. for "coinage," i. e., for depositing the bullion and obtaining its paper circulating representative. In other words, the Government would buy gold bullion at 1 per cent less than it sold it. This pair of prices, for buying and selling, would be shifted in unison, both up or both down, from month to month, it being provided, however, that no single shift should exceed 1 per cent., a figure equal to the amount by which the two differ. The object of this proviso is to prevent speculation in gold.

To determine each month what the pair of prices should be, or, what is practically the same thing, to determine what amount of gold bullion should be received and paid out in exchange for paper, recourse would be had to an official index number of prices. If, in any month, the index number is found to deviate from the initial par, the weight of bullion in which it shall be redeemable the next month is to be corrected in proportion to this deviation. Thus, the depreciation of gold would lead to a heavier virtual dollar; and an appreciation, to a lighter virtual dollar.

There are, of course, other details and possible variants of the plan, some of which will be referred to later when necessary. The objections to the plan are classified under the following heads:

1. "The plan assumes the truth of the quantity theory of money." There is nothing whatever in the plan itself which could not be accepted by those who reject the quantity theory altogether. On the contrary, the plan will seem simpler, I think, to those who believe a direct relationship exists between the purchasing power of the dollar and the bullion from which it is made—without any intermediation of the quantity of money—than it will seem to quantity theorists.

2. "It contradicts the quantity theory." This objection, the opposite of that above, is raised by some, who, like Professor Boissevain, believe in the quantity theory, but imagine that the operation of the plan could not affect the quantity of money at all (or would not affect it to the degree needed). But evidently an increase in the weight of the virtual dollar, i. e., a reduction in the price of gold bullion, would tend to contract the currency, by diverting gold from the mint into the arts; because its reduced price would cause an increased demand and consumption. A decrease, of course, would have the opposite effect.

3. "It might aggravate the evils it seeks to remedy." This objection, raised by Professor Taussig and a few others, is based on the preceding. It is claimed that an increase in coined money may take place for years "without visible effect on prices; then comes a flare-up, so to speak." I doubt if Professor Taussig meant the first half of this statement to be quite so strong. The evidence only justifies the statement that the rise is slow at first and rapid later while similarly the effect of a scarcity of money is slow at first and rapid later. Professor Taussig then proceeds to apply the same idea to my plan: