In the main version of his proposal Ideal Money Nash states in a postscript that his proposal is concordant with Hayek's Denationalisation of Money:
...after consulting with some of the economics faculty at Princeton, I learned of the work and publications of Friedrich von Hayek. I must say that my thinking is apparently quite parallel to his thinking in relation to money and particularly with regard to the non-typical viewpoint in relation to the functions of the authorities which in recent times have been the sources of currencies (earlier “coinage”).)
I have a 15 part essay series that explains in great detail how these proposal align. The interesting thing is that Hayek's proposal relies on a theoretical device/currency he calls "the Ducat" while Nash relies on a theoretical device he calls an ICPI (Industrial Consumption Price Index)-basically a globally construstructed inflation target that all central banks would use to measure inflation.
In my works (
https://github.com/jalToorey/IdealMoney/wiki) explaining how their proposals align and why they are relevant and significant to our times I show that each of their devices can be replaced with bitcoin as a basis.
This is a synthesis and thesis of bitcoin in which the conclusion or argument for it is radically different than the mainstream viewpoint championed by bitcoin enthusiasts/fanatics (they believe bitcoin will supplant all centrally banked currencies whereas my works suggests bitcoin will stabilize central banked currencies and end inflation). Instead of denouncing conventional economics it extend it.
Hayek's Denationalisation of Money:
https://cdn.mises.org/Denationalisation%20of%20Money%20The%20Argument%20Refined_5.pdfIdeal Money by John Nash:
https://web.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/texts_and_graphics/Main.Content/IDEAL_MONEY.../Older/PENN_STATE/babu.money.b.pdfHayek's Ducat:
I would announce the issue of non-interest bearing certificates or notes, and the readiness to open current cheque accounts, in terms of a unit with a distinct registered trade name such as 'ducat'. The only legal obligation I would assume would be to redeem these notes and deposits on demand with, at the option of the holder, either 5 Swiss francs or 5 D-marks or 2 dollars per ducat. This redemption value would however be intended only as a floor below which the value of the unit could not fall because I would announce at the same time my intention to regulate the quantity of the ducats so as to keep their (precisely defined) purchasing power as nearly as possible constant
I would announce that I proposed from time to time to state the precise commodity equivalent in terms of which I intended to keep the value of the ducat constant, but that I reserved the right, after announcement, to alter the composition of the commodity standard as [46] experience and the revealed preferences of the public suggested
It seems to me to be fairly certain that:
(a) a money generally expected to preserve its purchasing power approximately constant would be in continuous demand so long as the people were free to use it
(b) with such a continuing demand depending on success in keeping the value of the currency constant one could trust the issuing hanks to make every effort to achieve this better than would any monopolist who runs no risk by depreciating his money
(c) the issuing institution could achieve this result by regulating the quantity of its issue
(d) such a regulation of the quantity of each currency would constitute the best of all practicable methods of regulating the quantity of media of exchange for all possible purposes.
Nash's ICPI:
A possible non-political basis for a value standard which could be used for money would be a good "ICPI" statistic where this acronym refers to "industrial consumption price index". That could be calculated from the international prices of commodities, such as copper, silver, tungsten, etc. that are used in industrial activities.
We can see that times could change, especially if a "miracle energy source" were found, and thus if a good ICPI index is constructed it should not be expected to be valid, as initially defined, into all eternity. It would instead be appropriate for it to be regularly readjusted depending on how the patterns of international trade would actually evolve.
Here, evidently, politicians in control of the authority behind standards COULD corrupt the continuity of a good standard, but depending on how things were fundamentally arranged, the probabilities of serious damage through "political corruption" might become as small as the probabilities that the values of the standard meter and kilogram will be corrupted through the actions of politicians.