It doesn't matter how you design the monetary system, what matters is that it's centralized -- a mandated system backed by SWAT teams. Create that, and you've just created a system that will inevitably result in sweeping financial destruction throughout the economy.
I don't follow. Can you elucidate how the first sentence leads to the second?
That entire article is moot because (a) we're not on the gold standard and (b) it fails to account for risk. But I'll humor you and prove the article illogical two different ways.
Assume we were on the gold standard. The amount of gold in the world is limited. Most importantly, it does not grow exponentially with our economy (which is in fact the product of two exponentials -- population growth and technology growth). A gold standard is therefore deflationary in nature, meaning that the value of 1 oz of gold grows over time. This means that on the gold standard, interest rates would be FAR lower (probably even 0%) due to the inherent "interest" built into gold. However the article assumes both a gold standard (in the first paragraph), and moderate interest rates (5%). Therefore the article is inconsistent and illogical.
Let us instead limit our scope to risk-free loans (e.g. T-bonds). Take risk out of the equation and interest rates simply counteract inflation, meaning that the buying power of your loaned money remains constant. However, the article assumes both risk-free loans (since it does not account for losses due to defaults), and that one can purchase absurd quantities of goods with interest compounded over several years (which is not true if buying power remains constant). Therefore the article is inconsistent and illogical.
Furthermore, you did not state how this relates to the first half of what I quoted -- something about SWAT-team enforced standards. I am still utterly in the dark about the relevance of this to monetary policy. (Wouldn't any policy, e.g. gold standard, require some form of law enforcement to keep people from robbing each other?)
I don't follow. Can you elucidate how the first sentence leads to the second?