posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:19 PM
Ok, so reading peoples responses here there's not anything wrong with a one world currency. The threat lies solely within who has control over it.
There's essentially two ways to do that. Centralized or decentralized.
In a centralized system you end up with a currency that is backed by every nation. This isn't much different from currencies now. Thanks to the
buying of debt on the national level everyone uses this debt to back the value of their currency. More debt means more faith in that currency. This
is a currency that is very sensitive to national level actions. If for example everyone suddenly lost faith in the euro, all euro debt would become
worth less which would make the euro worth less, as well as all currencies using euro debt to prop themselves up.
The advantage to this system is that it is easy to implement. Each nation creates a certain amount of debt, puts it into a pool, and a currency
representing a piece of that pool is created. The disadvantage is that it is vulnerable to currency manipulations. There is also the potential for a
world bank to take control of the currency and effectively rule the world.
The other method is a decentralized system. Here you create a currency that is beyond the control of any national government. This has been done
with bitcoin. The advantage here is that no nation has the power to set monetary policy which creates or destroys the currency. The disadvantage is
that because it doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of any one, any nation is free to use it how they want, it's essentially gold or silver. The most
likely way this will be used is that the banks will create a pool of the currency and offer loans against it. When one bank trades with another bank
they simply swap the credits, no physical currency changes hands. Provided they keep enough of the currency on hand to meet withdrawls they can
essentially create as much virtual currency as they want. In a world of debit and credit transactions almost every transaction is virtual. This
happens now with banks and national currencies but regulations keep the process somewhat in check (more so in some countries than others). Because a
decentralized currency doesn't fall under any nations laws, no nation has incentive to protect it as it's a competitor to their own currency.
Have I covered the pro's and cons of each?
th3dudeabidesDo you trust the issuers of the currency, which in this case would be banks?
In any sane country it's the government that creates and issues the currency. Not a private central bank.
this might be useful also; the creature from jekyll
I've read the book, it makes a fair point against a central bank but a one world currency doesn't necessarily have to have a central bank.
on 15-4-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)