NationStates Jolt Archive

You here about it from time to time. Conspiracy nut jobs talking about an NAU, one exists in the EU.

But people always talk about it in a negative. Why? How is having a common currency a bad thing? Would it be good, making trade and travel easier? I could never understand why it is a horrible idea.

You here about it from time to time. Conspiracy nut jobs talking about an NAU, one exists in the EU.

But people always talk about it in a negative. Why? How is having a common currency a bad thing? Would it be good, making trade and travel easier? I could never understand why it is a horrible idea.
a common currency is the end of the world. that's what's wrong with it. literally the end of the world because people talk about a one world government and a one world currency in the last seven years of the world as we know it or however that goes.

One currency would be bad because it would dramatically reduce the number of famous people whose pictures can be put on money. As one of my life goals is to have my face on a unit of currency, I oppose any measure which might worsen my odds of success.

One currency would be bad because it would dramatically reduce the number of famous people whose pictures can be put on money. As one of my life goals is to have my face on a unit of currency, I oppose any measure which might worsen my odds of success.

a common currency is the end of the world. that's what's wrong with it. literally the end of the world because people talk about a one world government and a one world currency in the last seven years of the world as we know it or however that goes.

One of these two objections is sensible. One is not. The question is, which is which?

One of these two objections is sensible. One is not. The question is, which is which?

Bottle's, by an order of magnitude, is the sensible objection. Smokin' hot woman w/high-order brains on a $1M YuanYenEuroDollarPound note? Yes, please.

Well, in the Canadian context (I assume NAU means North American Union), Canadian manufacturing, tourism and cultural industries typically enjoy benefits from a lower Canadian dollar relative to the US. It makes our exports cheaper in American markets, and entices American tourists and film production crews across our border. A common currency would eliminate all of that, so there's a strong political constituency for maintaining the status quo.

There's a more abstract argument to be made about losing control of monetary policy to a shared central bank, but I'm not up to it....at least not this morning.

One of these two objections is sensible. One is not. The question is, which is which?
you have a right to disagree. also, bottle, me and you have a right to believe anything we like. maybe we shouldn't always act on our beliefs, but you can't legisilate thoughts or morality. guess we just agree to or that we disagree.

a common currency is the end of the world. that's what's wrong with it. literally the end of the world because people talk about a one world government and a one world currency in the last seven years of the world as we know it or however that goes.

you have a right to disagree. also, bottle, me and you have a right to believe anything we like. maybe we shouldn't always act on our beliefs, but you can't legisilate thoughts or morality. guess we just agree to or that we disagree.

Um... so are you actually serious?

One of the major objections to unified currency is that it implies a unified political structure. The Euro stems from the EU, which has effectively become a political framework existing above the nation level. A North American Union would theoretically combine unified currency with things like NAFTA and mutual protection pacts to create a supernal level of government above the national level which would include (at least) Canada, the US, and Mexico.

In a way, the relationship of that higher-level government would be similar to how the states within the US interact with the federal government. For many of the people who object to a NAU, the fear is that said higher government would function EXACTLY the same way the US federal government has over the last 150 years or so, slowly stealing more and more power away from the states and assuming greater and greater authority over the lives of the citizens under its control.

Consolidation isn't necessarily bad in and of itself. The problems begin if said super-structure abuses the power it has been given, or if individual nations or citizens are marginalized in the system. Which is certainly a possibility - after all, it's a problem that the EU is already having, trying to reconcile the very different views, priorities, and requirements of disparate nations. Especially involved in the case for allowing Turkey to join the EU.

Another issue many people have with the idea of a NAU is the fear that Canada and the US would be providing nearly all of the economic and military power for the alliance, with Mexico acting as little more than a parasitic leech reaping all the benefits with little contribution. The same could be applied to any other Central American nations that joined such an alliance, their lower affluence and economies pulling the unified currency down in general compared to other forms of currency around the world.

And, of course, there's also the feeling on the part of some people that a hypothetical NAU would eventually join with the EU and other similarly-formed groups as part of the nucleus for a One World Government system. Which, again, has it's own benefits... but also it's own drawbacks (if you disagree with national policy, you can always move to another nation. If you disagree with global policy, where are you going to go?).

what would back a common currency and how would it be regulated?

would national currencies still exist?

and would there be local versions of the common currency so that bottle may someday be on the money of one of these local versions?

what would back a common currency and how would it be regulated?

would national currencies still exist?

and would there be local versions of the common currency so that bottle may someday be on the money of one of these local versions?

No idea about the first question, second question would have to be a no. Two currencies would be difficult and not practical, I think.

And if you look at the Euro, every nation has its own designs on the coins. Only the banknotes are identical. There's no people on the notes, though, and very few people on the coins.

If the world had one currency in a similar matter the EU has the Euro . The current problems would not have happened. How I long for the days of one world currency. The main obstacle is the US deficit. People want dollars and the easiest way to get them is buy US bonds. But one world wide currency to require government fiscal responsibility and discourage deficits.

No idea about the first question, second question would have to be a no. Two currencies would be difficult and not practical, I think.

And if you look at the Euro, every nation has its own designs on the coins. Only the banknotes are identical. There's no people on the notes, though, and very few people on the coins.
im thinking that we woudl need a "print your own" currency. similar to the postal stamp program that we have here that lets you put your own picture onto a stamp that can then be used to send mail.

then bottle can get her own damned face on a bill if she has the wherewithal to pay the extra fees.

If we had one world currency, then what would rich business whores manipulate in an attempt to become richer business whores?

If we had one world currency, then what would rich business whores manipulate in an attempt to become richer business whores?

yeah how Am i supposed to buy 10 billion Euros making the Euro increase in value then switch to dollars collapsing the Euro?

Um... so are you actually serious?
which are you asking about? sorry if i scared you. PUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRR!
mew meow now do you feel better? kitty wasn't trying to be scary

a common currency is the end of the world. that's what's wrong with it. literally the end of the world because people talk about a one world government and a one world currency in the last seven years of the world as we know it or however that goes.
Cats wearing people close is a sign of the end of the world too, but that didn't stop you, did it? No, you and your ilk went right ahead and slammed on the Apocalypse Button with both hands. Then you put a big, ole heavy Calculus II textbook on it for good measure.
One currency would be bad because it would dramatically reduce the number of famous people whose pictures can be put on money. As one of my life goals is to have my face on a unit of currency, I oppose any measure which might worsen my odds of success.
Don't EU nations produce their own currency designs? Technically, it is all Euros, but you get the different pictures.
Or we could just invent ridiculous denominations. Can someone change my $32 note for two $11's, a $7 and a $3?

Anyway, putting the US, the UK, China and Zimbabwe on the same currency would probably be bad for some reason. For one thing, if people realized that they were really making pennies per day (as opposed to an apparently substantial amount of money that is only worth a few pennies), they might get testy.

Well, on a serious note, it prevents governments from devaluing their currency in times of crisis. And there's the obvious tradition/culture arguments. And probably a few others as well.

which are you asking about? Sorry if i scared you. Puuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrr!
Mew meow now do you feel better? Kitty wasn't trying to be scary

you're freaking me out.

Or we could just invent ridiculous denominations. Can someone change my $32 note for two $11's, a $7 and a $3?

I know it's cliche, but I totally call dibs on the $42 bill.

And if you look at the Euro, every nation has its own designs on the coins. Only the banknotes are identical. There's no people on the notes, though, and very few people on the coins.

Depends... the countries which traditionally had their monarch's head on the coins still do (Netherlands and Belgium spring to mind) others have more abstract designs. I always play the 'spot the country' game with my euros any time I head back to the continent, it's great fun.

I just wish the UK would eventually get round to adopting it - if nothing else because it would really piss off the euro-sceptics

you're freaking me out.

Lol!:D

I dont think The Chinese proposal is worthwhile. The IMF has no profit motivation.

What is wrong with a common currency? Simple, take the euro for example. Although it has bring a lot of economical stabilty (hardly!) to some of the EU countries, it has been a bitch to others. (i.e. Italy)

Different countries can (partially) control their own economies through their central banks. If theres one world currency, there can only be one central bank, and the interest rate thats good for the US might not be the best one for Canada. Or vice versa...

I think the concern is the loss of independence first and foremost as well as damage to certain countries' economies due to the fact that their individual currencies might more accurately reflect their economic conditions; it makes no sense to have the US, Chile/Argentina and Canada, all fairly developed states, on the same currency terms as the emerging markets of Brazil and Mexico or even less developed nations in Central America. The weaker currencies of poorer countries help them attract capital investment necessary for their development while simultaneously enabling developed countries to purchase their goods and services at lower cost.

The Euro succeeds because its member states have to achieve a certain level of economic development and market liberalization before they adopt it, with the result being that the economic effects stemming from currency changes are minimized.

I would personally not support an NAU unless it was at least as rigorous as the Eurozone's criteria for membership.

As long as it's hard currency and not fiat, there's nothing wrong with a common currency.

You know what's wrong with a common currency? look at the Euro. it killed off such awesome names as: Peseta, Mark, Lira, Drachma, Escudo, and Tolar. Such great names, now lost to the Wikipedia pages.:(

I just wish the UK would eventually get round to adopting it - if nothing else because it would really piss off the euro-sceptics

And lose our £10 notes with Charles Darwin on the back? Never!

And lose our £10 notes with Charles Darwin on the back? Never!

He would deserve to be on a worldwide currency.

He would deserve to be on a worldwide currency.

Right above "In God We Trust." That would be funny as hell.:tongue:


I forgot about the whole interest rate crap. Economics is annoying.

Well, I hear that its not beneficial to everyone...Im not entirely sure Id want Mexico having a hand in my Currency, especially considering how theyve done the Peso in comparison to the Dollar...

Now, If Washington DC got to dictate the terms, then, sure, no problem, but thats not what theyll want down there...

Really, the Optimum Currency Area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimum_currency_area) for the United States is already too large...

In theory, an optimal currency area could also be smaller than a country. Some economists have argued that the United States, for example, really consists of two optimal currency areas and that the United States should have two currencies, one for the western half and one for the eastern half.

You know what's wrong with a common currency? look at the Euro. it killed off such awesome names as: Peseta, Mark, Lira, Drachma, Escudo, and Tolar. Such great names, now lost to the Wikipedia pages.:(

Ay... claro! I do miss the good, ol' pesetas. :(

Cuts down the forex moneys obviously.

Cuts down the forex moneys obviously.

The US would lose the most.
To be honest I doubt we would go along with it, unless there was some debt cancellation for us.

I know it's cliche, but I totally call dibs on the $42 bill.

Actually before the 1996 election the then Keating government proposed having a $25 note (or maybe $22 note) when they started their new term. Me in my very young days wanted Keating to win so we would have something new, ah the ignorance of the young fortunately my wish didn't come true.

It won't work unless there is some kind of taxing authority or capital controls. Otherwise you'll end up with all kinds of local bubbles and local depressions which can't be smoothed out.

The world just isn't an optimal currency area. Fuck, the EU zone barely manages, and that's a lot simpler in theory.

Also, the loss of all the FOREX moneys.

Well, in the Canadian context (I assume NAU means North American Union), Canadian manufacturing, tourism and cultural industries typically enjoy benefits from a lower Canadian dollar relative to the US. It makes our exports cheaper in American markets, and entices American tourists and film production crews across our border. A common currency would eliminate all of that, so there's a strong political constituency for maintaining the status quo.

There's a more abstract argument to be made about losing control of monetary policy to a shared central bank, but I'm not up to it....at least not this morning.

which is why we should just peg our dollar at approx 0.75 to 0.80 American, IMO.

which is why we should just peg our dollar at approx 0.75 to 0.80 American, IMO.

Bringing you closer under our thumb, MWAHAHAHAAHAHA!!! lol :p...



Or would us buying all your shit make us under your thumb?......



have to ponder this, lol...

I know it's cliche, but I totally call dibs on the $42 bill.

Fine, I call me doing this (http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/Jesus%20Christ%20Thumbs%20up.jpg) on the $98

Bringing you closer under our thumb, MWAHAHAHAAHAHA!!! lol :p...



Or would us buying all your shit make us under your thumb?......



have to ponder this, lol...

take your time...

*steals your job when I offer to do it for 75% the current wage*

take your time...

*steals your job when I offer to do it for 75% the current wage*

Ugh...Now we'll have to build Two Walls...


*grumbles*

take your time...

*steals your job when I offer to do it for 75% the current wage*

Ugh...Now we'll have to build Two Walls...


*grumbles*

just offer to do it for a pittance, so he gets 75% of a pittance.

Then go to another job and be certain to mention how he just floats form job to job to the company(which it will look like he does if he tries to steal the second job).

You know, now that I think about it, with all the Anglo support going around, Im willing to bet a Canada-US union would probably work out...

Its Mexico that noone wants in the NAU, lol....

You know, now that I think about it, with all the Anglo support going around, Im willing to bet a Canada-US union would probably work out...

Its Mexico that noone wants in the NAU, lol....

Every union needs a Poland.

Every union needs a Poland.
Mexico is more similar to an extra-populous Albania.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/alternate_currency.png

One currency would be bad because it would dramatically reduce the number of famous people whose pictures can be put on money. As one of my life goals is to have my face on a unit of currency, I oppose any measure which might worsen my odds of success.

The Euro is one currency, but comes in different styles from different countries.

French Euro. (http://www.cortland.edu/flteach/Flteach-euro.html)

Irish Euro. (http://z.about.com/d/coins/1/0/0/2/-/-/Ireland_money_coins.jpg)

Italian Euro. (http://z.about.com/d/coins/1/0/1/2/-/-/Italy_money_coins.jpg)

If the whole world used one currency then your chances would be even better because with all sorts of money floating around in circulation no one would think that a particular unknown guy on their money was weird. 3rd world countries could easily be encouraged to put your face on money for a large donation, or even give the opportunity away as a prize in a sweepstakes contest.

you would figure the Irish could put something more then a harp on their coins

The Euro is one currency, but comes in different styles from different countries.

French Euro. (http://www.cortland.edu/flteach/Flteach-euro.html)

Irish Euro. (http://z.about.com/d/coins/1/0/0/2/-/-/Ireland_money_coins.jpg)

Italian Euro. (http://z.about.com/d/coins/1/0/1/2/-/-/Italy_money_coins.jpg)

If the whole world used one currency then your chances would be even better because with all sorts of money floating around in circulation no one would think that a particular unknown guy on their money was weird. 3rd world countries could easily be encouraged to put your face on money for a large donation, or even give the opportunity away as a prize in a sweepstakes contest.

You don't seem to be that concerned with the economy. At least not as much as having your face on currency. :wink:

No. I'm sorry, but you can fuck right off.

We will never accept one of your common currencies. Our currency in Great Britain (in case you've forgotten us, we're the lot that rules the waves and shit like that) is a royal currency, with our glorious queen on it. Changing a royal currency for a common (synonym: dirty prole) currency? To me, thats the very meaning of devaluation.

And yes, I know the putrid smelling folk of Europe are allowed to have whatever picture they like on their coins. But if we joined the Euro (it pains me deeply even to write those words as a hypothetical) our coins would be legal tender across Europe. Frenchies and Krauts might spend coins produced in Britain and dirty our wonderful Queen's holy image with their filthy foreign hands. And for every true British patriot, this would be grounds for war.

No. I'm sorry, but you can fuck right off.

We will never accept one of your common currencies. Our currency in Great Britain (in case you've forgotten us, we're the lot that rules the waves and shit like that) is a royal currency, with our glorious queen on it. Changing a royal currency for a common (synonym: dirty prole) currency? To me, thats the very meaning of devaluation.

And yes, I know the putrid smelling folk of Europe are allowed to have whatever picture they like on their coins. But if we joined the Euro (it pains me deeply even to write those words as a hypothetical) our coins would be legal tender across Europe. Frenchies and Krauts might spend coins produced in Britain and dirty our wonderful Queen's holy image with their filthy foreign hands. And for every true British patriot, this would be grounds for war.


God Save the Queen!

God Save the Queen!

While I appreciate these monarchist sentiments, I must take issue with the idea that the Queen needs saving by some all-powerful deity. In reality, the Queen, or more precisely the institution of monarchy, is formally superior to the Lord our God. This is why the monarch is granted the title of "Defender of the Faith".

From this we can deduce that the monarch defends God, not the other way around. I would wager that "Queen save God" was the original phrase, but we can only speculate which foul Republican hand was culpable for the twisting of this into the nonsensical and quite frankly heretical 'God save the Queen".

you're freaking me out.
the meow and purr is from my avatar. you''ve seen her, right? i pretend it's a girl kitten because it's so cute.

No. I'm sorry, but you can fuck right off.

We will never accept one of your common currencies. Our currency in Great Britain (in case you've forgotten us, we're the lot that rules the waves and shit like that) is a royal currency, with our glorious queen on it. Changing a royal currency for a common (synonym: dirty prole) currency? To me, thats the very meaning of devaluation.

And yes, I know the putrid smelling folk of Europe are allowed to have whatever picture they like on their coins. But if we joined the Euro (it pains me deeply even to write those words as a hypothetical) our coins would be legal tender across Europe. Frenchies and Krauts might spend coins produced in Britain and dirty our wonderful Queen's holy image with their filthy foreign hands. And for every true British patriot, this would be grounds for war.
you don't have the largest navy anymore. or maybe you and one other country are tied. i thought you abandoned the seas to the us navy, which is the largest according to guiness records books. at least guiness navy records i know about and have read. RAOW!

you don't have the largest navy anymore. or maybe you and one other country are tied. i thought you abandoned the seas to the us navy, which is the largest according to guiness records books. at least guiness navy records i know about and have read. RAOW!

Pish. What a pile of colonial codswallop. Numbers? Weapons? No indicator of the strength of a Navy. We have history, the Queen, and God himself (he's from Yorkshire) on our side.

Psh. Numbers are no indicator of the strength of a Navy. We have history, the Queen, and God himself (he's from Yorkshire) on our side.

Of course, it was England the one who was able to sink Spain's mighty Armada, after all.:wink:

If we had one world currency, then what would rich business whores manipulate in an attempt to become richer business whores?

Tacos, somehow.

Tacos, somehow.

"Ooh, baby, manipulate my taco!"

...

I'm sorry, but it had to be said.

You don't seem to be that concerned with the economy. At least not as much as having your face on currency. :wink:

It's good to keep your priorities straight.

And the way our economy is going, it's better for your emotional health to focus on the more cosmetic aspects of fiscal policy.

well there's nothing WRONG with a common currency. obviously currency speculators arn't going to support the concept. the only problem is, it isn't going to solve anything either.

well it would solve that one thing, it would kill currency speculation, but that's about it.

is currency speculation THAT much of a problem? it might be one small element of one, maybe, but it certainly doesn't appear to me a major driving force.

While I appreciate these monarchist sentiments, I must take issue with the idea that the Queen needs saving by some all-powerful deity. In reality, the Queen, or more precisely the institution of monarchy, is formally superior to the Lord our God. This is why the monarch is granted the title of "Defender of the Faith".

From this we can deduce that the monarch defends God, not the other way around. I would wager that "Queen save God" was the original phrase, but we can only speculate which foul Republican hand was culpable for the twisting of this into the nonsensical and quite frankly heretical 'God save the Queen".

I lol'd.

No. I'm sorry, but you can fuck right off.

We will never accept one of your common currencies. Our currency in Great Britain (in case you've forgotten us, we're the lot that rules the waves and shit like that) is a royal currency, with our glorious queen on it. Changing a royal currency for a common (synonym: dirty prole) currency? To me, thats the very meaning of devaluation.

And yes, I know the putrid smelling folk of Europe are allowed to have whatever picture they like on their coins. But if we joined the Euro (it pains me deeply even to write those words as a hypothetical) our coins would be legal tender across Europe. Frenchies and Krauts might spend coins produced in Britain and dirty our wonderful Queen's holy image with their filthy foreign hands. And for every true British patriot, this would be grounds for war.

*Starts humming Rule Britannia*

You here about it from time to time. Conspiracy nut jobs talking about an NAU, one exists in the EU.

But people always talk about it in a negative. Why? How is having a common currency a bad thing? Would it be good, making trade and travel easier? I could never understand why it is a horrible idea.

Trade and travel aren't all that difficult. The difficulties in exchanging currencies are exaggerated. I've done plenty of traveling outside the US and have had few if any problems converting dollars to whatever the local currency is. And ATM's and credit cards make for even easier access to the local currency.

Losing control of your own currency leads to loss of control over your economy and loss of freedom of action in international affairs. I refuse to be subject to such control by non-American financial institutions and/or governments, and I am far from alone in that position. And to the extent that we are currently subject to such influence, I oppose it.

I refuse to be subject to such control by non-American financial institutions
Because American financial institutions have done such a sterling job up to now....

you would figure the Irish could put something more then a harp on their coins

a harp beats the hell out of faces of dead asshole politicians. and i'm not even irish.

if it were up to me, i wouldn't put any human face on any denomination of any currency anywhere. just artifacts and innovations on one side, and scenes from nature on the other. and even the artifacts and innovations would be set in scenes depicting their harmonious integration with nature as much as possible.

Did anyone ever bother to actually answer this guy's question? The term "Optimal Currency Area" was used once or twice, but no one bothered to explain it.

You here about it from time to time. Conspiracy nut jobs talking about an NAU, one exists in the EU.

But people always talk about it in a negative. Why? How is having a common currency a bad thing? Would it be good, making trade and travel easier? I could never understand why it is a horrible idea.
The problem is twofold:

1. One currency means only one official interest rate. So a single central bank would have to do monetary policy for the entire currency area. In the EU, that meant for example that Ireland and Germany got the same interest rate. Ireland was growing rapidly and developing a housing bubble and should have had much higher rates. Germany was close to a recession at times and saving too much compared to consumption, and should have had lower rates. All the ECB could do was try and hit some sort of average.

2. The value of your currency impacts the way your trade balance is going to work out with the rest of the world outside the currency zone. Generally the flows of trade and money over time play a major role in determining the value of a currency, and you end up finding an equilibrium. The Euro however is again an average of many different countries in the EU, probably making exporters in some countries worse off than they would be otherwise, and vice versa.

So there are disadvantages in having a currency zone. As you said, there are also advantages. The main question when deciding whether to do a common currency is determining whether the benefits outweigh the costs. If they do, meaning that the economies in question are close and in-sync enough, you get what is called an "Optimal Currency Zone". The US, with all its different states, is probably one. The EU may well be, and probably will definitely become one over time. The world as a whole definitely isn't one.

But all this stuff usually doesn't get considered when people come up with much sexier talking points, like concerns about "national sovereignty".

It's good to keep your priorities straight.

And the way our economy is going, it's better for your emotional health to focus on the more cosmetic aspects of fiscal policy.

Your priorities are... how should I put this... rather bizarre. But, you know what they say here: whatever floats your boat, mate.

What the issue would be? This: http://www.daujones.com/detail.php?usrid=8067

(for those of you who do not speak German, a person apparently tries to spend his Italian Euro coins first because 'you do not know how stable their Euro is'. Chlodwig (the narrator) pondered explaining him what the currency union really means but decided not to, 'why being cruel')

Another problem: Gideon Gono could become president of the wglobal central bank. He has proven his skills to create properity in Zimbabwe already. (I suspect him just passing by the building of the global central bank would cause inflation already ;) )

'll tell you what's wrong. its the new world order, one world government. probably zog, while we're at it. we most definitely should not use one common currency. instead, we should all use gold.

Pish. What a pile of colonial codswallop. Numbers? Weapons? No indicator of the strength of a Navy. We have history, the Queen, and God himself (he's from Yorkshire) on our side.
whatever. can't accept that you don't have the navy you used to? get over having a sore rear end. GRRRRRRRRR! HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS! scratch! colonial codswallop? you know we were a british colony, but i guess you don't care. bye

Meh. If a bunch of folks wanted a single currency, go for it, under the condition that all legal tender laws are repealed.