Patrick Elliott wrote:
> I actually looked up the definition of "fiat currency", not fiat in 
> general, and the definition given was a bit less specific as to what it 
> meant,

Googling "define:fiat currency" gives a number of essentially identical 
definitions that basically say "value set by the government."

http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Afiat+currency

> currency representing a value, where the value itself was not *in* the 
> material it was made of. 

Initial fiat currencies were established by taking away the gold and saying 
"this paper is worth X ounces of gold."  It was only later that the pretense 
of having something whose value would be recognised even without the 
government's authority to tax came into play. So I can totally see a 
definition like that being reasonable.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message