Global Currency: Good or Bad Idea?

I'd LOVE a North American currency.

Oh heck yes.
If for no other reason than it would cause an absolute panic amongst the fundamentalist, "The UN is the Antichrist" types. Just a few weeks ago Minnesota Representative and general nutcase Michelle Bachmann tried to propose a bill before the house to forbid the President from replacing the dollar with any international currency. This was featured on The Daily Show on the segment "*#@& That's Never Gonna Happen."

the end of the pre-eminence of the US dollar

Its the beginning of the new world order! Zeitgeist was right!!

Bad Idea. It undermines the true value of each country and its currency. This is one closer step to socialism and as Melphistopheles points out, it really would mean the coming of the anti-christ. I really hope I'm not around when this happens.

It'd be next to impossible to keep it all hanging together. The Euro is under a lot of strain at the moment, as the various countries that make it up see their economies drift in scattered directions. The UK fell out of the ERM but not before haemoraging money trying to stay in.
That's with a bunch of broadly similar developed Western democracies. Imagine throwing loads of small nations into the pot and watching the turmoil.

Trading foreign currency is big money business. How does a global currency take into account currency devaluation or inflation?

I would say that I do not know. On one hand we would rid ourselves of currency trading and thus the sometimes volatile fluctuations in currency markets. This could also lead to more stability in worldwide commodity prices. On the other hand it could unexpectedly lead to more instability in commodity prices. I say this because every country’s poverty line, median income lines, etc. is different with respect to other countries (third world vs. first world); part of this difference takes into account the differences of valuation of each country’s currency. Although not necessarily capable of redrawing these lines, creating a single global currency could have the effect of lowering a country’s purchasing power (maybe a wealthier nation) and raising another (maybe a poorer nation). This could add a different form of strain, a strain of the redistribution of, to commodities on top of the traditional strain of supply and demand. This could, as I said before, create more instability for a period of time until the time in which the worldwide chaos settles.

Right now, almost everyone has to buy dollars in order to then buy oil. The US would rather go to war than give up that advantage.

Besides, if Euros are any indication, we'll wind up trading with some really boring, or flat-out ugly, coins and bills.

It will never happen. The G8 can barely agree on where to meet, let alone how to setup, manage, and maintain a world currency. They'd all like to have one, but will never agree to it unless they have exclusive control, which the others will never agree to.

Most currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on... be it global, local or virtual. Believe in it - and it will serve you. Analyze it... Scrutinize it... and you'll find you're about as firm footed as Willie Coyote. "Yipe"

@Kalel - indeed, this is what the Iranian Oil Bourse is trying/going to do.

Regarding the Euro - Frankly I'm surprised that they could do it to begin with! It's quite a feat economically and politically.

No -another layer of control and beuracracy.

If an idea has absolutely no logic or merit behind it, you can bet Obama and his cronies in the House & Senate will be backing it strongly. Global Currency is one such idea, so you can bet we'll see action on it soon. ;o)

Really bad idea. Then again, this is Neatorama.

As an American, I would prefer not to see an end to American economic dominance. But I can understand why others nations would.

People whining about socialism: There is a currency is there not? It's just consolidated. This is not socialism. You need to shut up.
@John: As an American citizen, I would be overjoyed by America losing it's economic dominance. For more, see the recession.
I think this is a good idea.

China's already working on that one, John.

Nobody will lose dominance, stuff will still be worth the same.

I think there would be a lot of problems with a unified currency, as it would give capital that much more liquidity between countries - I expect that would be destabilizing, especially to poorer countries. It also would mean that fiscal policy would be much more difficult to control. Also the relative differences in the cost/values of things would make it hard to have a currency that scaled between the poorest and the richest countries. In a very poor nation I can get basic necessities like a meal for far far less than in a richer developed nation, the currency would need to scale way down to be usable to the poorer nations, which would make it clumsier for richer nations.

Kalel said:
>Besides, if Euros are any indication, we’ll wind up trading with some really boring, or flat-out ugly, coins and bills.

The fact that different members of the EU have their own designs keeps things pretty interesting. I've found it interesting to see the different nations' coins in change when I was in Europe. If the practice was global, it'd be much more interesting - I think it'd be fun to occasionally see a Botswana, or New Zealand coin show up in change. Also the Euro banknotes are differentiated by color which makes them much easier to work with (it's too bad they didn't vary the size between denominations so they'd be easier for the blind to use as well). Personally, I find that the designs of some nation's banknotes are very interesting and attractive, and again it was interesting to see different nations' designs.

So how much would this currency be worth in Zimbabwe?

Nothing new here- Where do you think "talent" is coming from...? That was once a near-global currency too. Okay- From mostly Roman-European perspective the world wasn't as big as we know it today, but still you could pay with Talents from East to West, From North to South and even far beyond those borders.

Euro countries cannot even keep their deficit spending on line (a unique currency key point), so the world?

And, accoding to the international risk sharing theory, I really don't feel ready to share the risk with Mugabe.

Anyway : do we have the conditions to create a world unique currency, or are we creating a world currency to have the conditions needed to create it? *hum*

If you can't see why a global currency is one step closer to global tyranny, you are a fool and are in for a very rude awakening. I'll regret saying this but most of you supporting this will sadly deserve what's coming to you in the near future. Problem, reaction, solution. (Google it)

A global corrency does NOT mean the US doller goes away only that there is a currency that can be used / traded between countries / buying commodities.
as things are now a canadien CO shopping in Australia for iron ORE for Example would eather find a bank or broker to convert CDN dollar to US dollar @ bank / broker rate than the Au Co converts there money from US to AU and depending on the US economy changes the rates whereas a world currancy would be worth a fixed rate abd only local economy changes would effect Exchange rates

Didn't several European countries get screwed when they went to the Euro? Look at Great Britain which kept their pound. The English pound has done better than the Euro.

World Currency? My vote: no

I personally would hate it. I mean the Euro coins and notes are really boring to me. I like it when the country has their own completely different designs.

We already have international currencies: GOLD AND PRECIOUS METAL BARS.

Governments have been shuttling around pallets of gold bars for millenia to pay other countries bills.

'International currencies' are just a code word for the next thing they really want: GLOBAL TAXES.

What have we learned in the past year about highly centralized financial systems? Anyone?

OMG ANTICHRIST!!```~~111
OMG SOCIALISM11~~12!!
OMG THINGS I'M NOT EDUCATED ABOUT!!

....

I like the idea and there's not a doubt in my mind we will end up there someday. I would have to learn a lot more of how this would be handled and what the repercussions would be if done in the near future before I could say if i thought that it being implemented *now* would be a good or bad idea.

I know in all my politics classes, when we've talked about it, the main reason people didn't want it was just sentimentalism with their country's money, which I can understand (though not to the extent of that being the only reason).

One world currency???

We've had one- GOLD
We have another- SILVEr

This suggested "One World Currency" will just be more fiat money (money created and envalued by governmental decree). It will have no real value and will lead to another god-damned bubble while empowering the "One World Government" creating it.

Live Free or Die!

I believe that a world currency is a great idea!
^
just not yet. Nemo ^ is right. once we can bring the world unto a single general "worldness", then a central currency can be born. I say that the obvious time to release a global currency is when there will be a global government, to regulate it, to mint it, and to keep a treasury of it. AND IN OTHER WORDS, A SINGLE WORLD GOVERNMENT DOESN'T MEAN MOST POWER, IT MEANS IT WILL ACT AS A PARENT TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS.

Bad, bad idea, very bad. Everyone else has explained it better than I could.

Just another notch in the 'ol control belt......ahhhhhhhhhhhhh....yup, few more notches; then i'll have them!!

Kalel said:
>Besides, if Euros are any indication, we’ll wind up trading with some really boring, or flat-out ugly, coins and bills.

Are you serious? Euros are a f*kton easier to use than US dollars, plus they don't get dirty and leave your hands feeling like you touched a dirty public toilet seat.

1 Euro + 2 Euro coins makes things a lot easier as well. So what the hell are you talking about boring or ugly? That's already the US dollar.

if you are stupid enough to want a "world currency" then you deserve what you get.....servitude.....and global taxes. nah, you can have your NWO and the Bilderbergs and your Rockefeller cartels, I'll take my chances as a survivalist as long as the DoHS doesn't peg me as a "terrorist".

" Nemo ^ is right. once we can bring the world unto a single general “worldness”, then a central currency can be born"

will never happen. remember the twelve tribes of Israel? the world will never live under peace but rather will be in servitude to a superior being.

Why have a currency when you can get a Microchip in the wrist?
Thanks to technology, soon we will live in a safe world free of terrorists with flu shot and GMO foods for all!

How could it be a bad idea? If anything it will show the world that we don't really need money in the first place.

Thus leading to a resource based economy.

I think it's pretty obvious that the US dollar has lost its once-undisputed leadership as a currency, largely thanks to the country's failure to manage its wealth (read: housing market corruption and Madoff). People have been getting out of the dollar - a new world currency would also remove the worthless activity of money trading.

We don't even need a single currency in the US, for all the reasons given above. Why should a bankrupt state like California get the same dollar as the more profitable states? Bring in the Texas doubloon, the California shekel and the Illinois crown. The single US currency has been a disaster

Currently the dollar is as close to a global currency as we get. Even that amount of dependence on one type of currency, though, as led to the recession lasting too long in the United States. Here is an interesting article on the same topic: http://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/Global-Economics/Yuan-Currency-3f/sl35291137bp313cpp10pn1.html

This is an absolutely horrible idea! In fact the current dollar model is a fractured system. When they got rid of the gold standard in 1913 they essentially empowered a Central Bank, ie the Federal Reserve, to control the worth of money, by controlling the amount of money that is in the system. The creation of a global currency would simply take it one step further wherein the central bank would control money around the entire world and not just the US.

This is not an issue of left or right! People from both sides of the spectrum are warning of the detriments of this type of system to the freedoms and liberties of the people.

Anyone who supports this type of system essentially believes that a small group of people should dominate over the rest. That is in essence fascism.

We need to go back to the gold standard, wherein there is something of worth backing our money. As long as the system is a credit based system, it doesn't matter if there are 5,000 different currencies in this country, there will still be problems with manufactured inflation. The current system is too easily manipulated.

Bad idea. It would lead to massive inflation around the world.

For example, when Italy went from the Lira to the Euro, it caused massive inflation. The Euro was worth a lot more than the Lira and when the switch was made, the price of a good that cost 3 Lira, now cost 3 Euros. The cost of living went extremely high in a country that was already expensive to live in.

Also, it would increase the buying power of China drastically. If the Yuan was replaced with this new global currency, their wealth would increase at least 3 fold. Of course, it would be cost-prohibitive to import Chinese goods, but it would still be a massive gain for China, and a massive loss for the US.

Also, a return to the gold standard would be a very bad idea. It sounds great at first because there is at least something tangible to back the currency, and makes it difficult to increase the money supply (which hyperinflation is caused by an increase in the money supply). But the value of gold fluctuates too.

Also, if we returned to a gold standard, it would allow gold hoarders to manipulate the money supply. That's not just in the US, but around the world. Do you want the Chinese to hoard gold and disrupt our economy?

It is better that we put the trust in central bankers and expect them to responsibly discharge their EXPLICIT duty of maintaining the stability of a fiat money supply.

A return to the gold standard probably would be a good thing, but it would mean that the federal government would have an excuse to round up the gold again.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Trusting the Federal Reserve not to inflate is not exactly rational.