I think we're all pretty much in agreement that Pound's economics wouldn't
have stood up to the inquiry of professional economists, but wouldn't
different standards apply in terms of a poetic inquiry?
 
I'm thinking in particular of Pound's interest in American banking
practices in the colonial period and in the early republic.  The Adams
Cantos, surely among the least studied and appreciated portion of the
poem, are filled with references to the problems of paper money.  When
currency is backed by nothing more than an agreement among its users,
what's to guarantee its trustworthiness?  Money is therefore a social
phenomenon, without any intrinsic value.  The incredible inflation that
Adams deplores (at least Pound's Adams) seems to have important
connections to Pound's own dealings with paper (poetry backed by nothing
more than selective quotation).
 
This is, as some of you may recognize, a step beyond Paul Alec Marsh's
valuable work on the American background to Pound's ideas about money.
I think that Alec presents Thaddeus, who issued his own paper money, as
too problem-free when it comes to influence.  Have a good look at
Thaddeus's famous scrip--it's actually signed by his brother, Albert!
 
Jonathan Gill
Columbia University