Skip to main content

A Tale of Two Farmers

An article very much reminiscent of our Rich Man's tale from Peter Schiff

A Tale of Two Farmers

Farmer Chang only grows oranges. Farmer Jones only grows apples. Each grows only the fruit that he produces most efficiently, trading the surplus for the fruit grown by the other. Both farmers benefit from comparative advantage and free trade. The sole reason that Farmer Chang “exports” oranges is to “import” apples, and vise-versa.

Suppose that one year a frost wipes out farmer Jones’ apple crop. Not having any fruit to trade, but hungry nevertheless, he proposes to trade apple IOUs for farmer Chang’s oranges. Since Farmer Chang cannot eat all of the oranges he grew anyway, and since farmer Jones’ IOUs will pay 10% interest (in extra apples of course) he agrees.

Farmer Chang only accepts farmer Jones’ offer because of the apples that Farmer Jones’ IOUs promise to pay. By themselves, the IOUs have no intrinsic value. Farmer Chang cannot eat them. It is only the promise to pay apples that gives them value.

Now suppose that the following year farmer Jones’ crop is again destroyed, this time by a flood. He and Farmer Chang once again make the same deal, with Farmer Jones getting more of Farmer Chang’s oranges, and Farmer Chang accepting more of Farmer Jones’ IOUs.

Further suppose that similar natural disasters continue to besiege Farmer Jones for several more years, with Farmer Chang continuing to accept Farmer Jones’ interest-bearing apple IOUs in exchange for his oranges. Eventually it dawns on Farmer Jones that he is eating pretty well, without actually farming. He therefore decides to turn his apple orchard into a golf course, and simply play golf all day while enjoying Farmer Chang’s oranges. In other words, Farmer Jones now operates a “service economy.”

Farmer Chang on the other hand is so busy growing all those oranges that he never gets a chance to play Farmer Jones’ course. In fact, he has been accepting farmer Jones’s IOUs for so long that he no longer remembers his original reason for doing so. He forgot about his original desire to actually eat the real apples Farmer Jones had promised to deliver. Instead, he now counts his wealth based solely on his accumulation of apple IOUs.

In fact, Farmer Jones had such a good reputation within the farming community that Farmer Chang was actually able to trade some of Farmer Jones’ IOUs for goods and services provided by other farmers and local merchants. Apparently no one bothered to notice that Farmer Jones’ apple orchard had become a golf course, and that his IOUs were therefore worthless, as he no longer possessed the ability to redeem them with actual apples.

Some might argue that the entire community now depends on Farmer Jones and his worthless IOUs and that everyone will accept them indifferently rather than acknowledging the reality of their folly. Of course, were these revelations to occur, any unfortunate holders of Farmer Jones’ IOUs would officially be forced to realize their losses. However, their true financial situations would improve, as any further accumulation of worthless IOUs would end. As for Farmer Chang, he would literally once again enjoy all of the fruits of his labor.

The real loser of course would be Farmer Jones, for without a viable apple orchard or the ability to buy oranges on credit, he would starve. It would take years to transform his golf course back into an orchard, regain his lost knowledge of farming, and replace his obsolete or dilapidated farming equipment (provided he hadn't already traded it in for golf carts and titanium clubs). In the end, his only alternative might be to sell his golf course to farmer Chang and take a job picking fruit in his orange grove.

Do not wait for all the Farmer Changs to come to their senses and end up picking someone else’s fruit. Protect your wealth before it’s too late. Download my free research report on preserving your purchasing power through foreign equities available at www.researchreportone.com and subscribe to my free, on-line investment newsletter at http://www.europac.net/newsletter/newsletter.asp

Peter D. Schiff,
PresidentEuro Pacific Capital, Inc.

:) Falkor

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cognitive rules of business presentations

In his recent book, Clear and to the Point, Kosslyn explained that the four rules of PowerPoint are: The Goldilocks Rule, The Rudolph Rule, The Rule of Four, and the Birds of a Feather Rule. Here's how they work. The Goldilocks Rule refers to presenting the "just right" amount of data. Never include more information than your audience needs in a visual image. As an example, Kosslyn showed two graphs of real estate prices over time. One included ten different numbers, one for each year. The other included two numbers: a peak price, and the current price. For the purposes of a presentation about today's prices relative to peak price, those numbers were the only ones necessary. The Rudolph Rule refers to simple ways you can make information stand out and guide your audience to important details -- the way Rudolph the reindeer's red nose stood out from the other reindeers' and led them. If you're presenting a piece of relevant data in a list, why not mak...

Value of dollar - Part 1

A Simple Perspective Will Do The date is 2000-05-28. Don't you get tired of all the bad news bears reminding you of all these instabilities, excesses, and 'potential' tensions in the global economy? After all, hasn't it always been like that? Yes it has, but not in money it hasn't. Increasingly, investors find it harder to know where to put their savings. What about Government Bonds? Wrong. Their recent record of capital losses have wiped out your guaranteed yields, probably because the stock market keeps crowding them out, and this even in a strong dollar and low inflation environment. Furthermore, there is no reliable liquidity and potentially poor quality debt in the corporate sector. Foreign assets? Wrong. Most of the world's economies are riskier, have been under performing, and also, there is this thing called currency risk. Like how is the average person gonna cope with currency...

Depreciation of British Pound 1900-2000

When the Bank of England was formed the powers to create money was finally transferred to private hands. The creation of Fed in US, was just a part of this cycle. Though it is a common knowledge US Dollar has depreciated nearly 100% since the creation of Federal Reserve, the same is the case of all the currencies across the globe. For example, below is the UK Parliament data that highlights the depreciating value of Pound.