Megan McArdle has ridiculed the idea of an alternative monetary regime to our current central banking system on more than one occasion. I have tried to suggest that the position is not so simple. The most recent was to suggest that the argument for a gold standard should not be so easily dismissed.
Jeff Tucker recently linked to an interview with Alan Greenspan where he suggests that under current conditions central banks cannot follow policy that will effectively control long term interest rates, and that rather than a fiat currency system we could move to a currency board or a gold standard that would operate more effectively.
In the past I suggested that a "mind-date" between Megan and either George Selgin or Larry White might be in order, but perhaps Alan Greenspan would be more to her liking. Greenspan's interview, however, reinforces my worst impression of him in terms of (a) his waffling in the name of pragmatism and (b) his lack of a strong theoretical commitment in economics. How can someone who understands the points he raised, not argue for that during his reign as the Fed Chair?
I have never held such a high office --- nor do I aspire for it, nor have the talents to achieve it --- but I think that if I somehow was 'drafted' I would like to believe I'd follow the Mises line and "abdicate" or the Leonard Read line and "push the button".