Want this question answered?
It would increase the supply of money.
it would increase the supply of money
Yes, as well as silver and the governments promise to pay. I would say no because it is not redeemable in silver or gold. To be backed by silver or gold would mean that you could cash it in for gold. This is why the value of our money has gone down because it is not backed by anything other than the government behind it. Since our government is Trillions in debt they can not guarantee the currency at all.
it ould increase the supply of money
Fiat currency is based on faith that it is worth something, much like an IOU. If the authority printing that currency has good credit, the currency will be worth more, and the opposite is true, as well. Gold-backed currency is just that: currency which represents the exact value of gold printed on it. So, a $1 treasury note = $1 in gold. Traditionally, with a gold-backed currency, you, the holder of that note, would be able to go down to your local bank and exchange that note for the same amount of gold. In short, with a fiat currency, everyone agrees that it's worth that amount, and it is subject to national credit ratings. With a metal-standard currency, the currency is based on the price and value of a particular metal, like gold. There are currently no gold-backed currencies. Every currency in the world is a fiat currency.
it was not backed by gold silver or landIt was not backed by gold, silver, or land.
The Greenback party wanted money to be backed by silver rather than gold. They believed that using silver as a standard for the currency would benefit farmers and debtors who needed more money in circulation.
It would increase the supply of money.
contintal
the continental
the continental
It would increase the supply of money.
It would increase the supply of money.
It would increase the supply of money.
it would increase the supply of money
it would increase the supply of money
colonial scrip