How I see a one world currency going down.

I was thinking,

If a world currency was established, a singular currency for every country, there would still need to be different breakdowns of that currency in different areas with different types of economies.

What I am saying is that if there was a one world currency that the world would still have to be broken down into zones and those zones could all agree on an international common coin, but each would print their own version of that currency with its own value internally.

So ZONE A dollars would be interchangeable with ZONE B dollars, but both would have their own internal value set on a global market against the rest of the different dollars of each of the other zones. Imagine if there was such a thing as American dollars for the rest of the world but in the US we used state dollars for internal debt settlement. A NY dollar would be worth more or less than a California dollar, but all would be interchangeable internationally as American dollars whos value was calculated based on the net value of all 50 state dollars.

Imagine a singular currency with different values to sub sets denoting economic areas of influence where it was coined. The currency exchange would prosper since it would allow the conversion of one zone's dollars into another zones allowing the exchange of wealth from zone to zone to happen unhindered. You could set the amount of each individual zones currency in circulation according to population initially.

The zones would be broken down into equal portions according to population. Any one zone can then be allowed to prosper causing no discord with others because while one zone is gaining wealth, the rest are increasing the value of their own currency internally as each of their own zones dollars is converted into another zones. There would be no inflation because in this system the purchasing power of the currency internally would always go up as less money is in circulation after wealth is pushed externally.

This shifting of wealth in turn allows those who have wealth taken out of their own zone to compete more externally. If when exchanging their own zone's dollars that are limited in circulation (after a shift of wealth) into another zones coin with more currency in circulation because of a concentration of wealth, you would still get more in return of that zones currency when you went to spend your converted money in that zone. That would keep the amount of coin in circulation under control as well, even in digital format.

Its not even that far off from what we have now, if not just like it. The only difference is that you reduce the number of currencies to a dozen that together constitute a singular currency used by all.

Just some thoughts. I could be wrong.

have a good one.

a reply to: tadaman

could work,, i always like to think about a moneyless society, it is entertaining to think about these things sometimes.
Have a good one too.

a reply to: tadaman

I'd agree if it wasn't for the fact that the Euro is probably done for this year. Had their little experiment in Europe played out okay, and had the UK given up the Silver Pound, maybe.

But since all that failed, it's likely that most world economies would rather rely on themselves, then a group of countries working together. Besides, there's no way the US takes responsibility for Canada, Mexico and others that would be included in this.

Nor would the people accept it. America is far too separatist a nation for that.

~Tenth

originally posted by: tadaman

So ZONE A dollars would be interchangeable with ZONE B dollars, but both would have their own internal value set on a global market against the rest of the different dollars of each of the other zones. Imagine if there was such a thing as American dollars for the rest of the world but in the US we used state dollars for internal debt settlement. A NY dollar would be worth more or less than a California dollar, but all would be interchangeable internationally as American dollars whos value was calculated based on the net value of all 50 state dollars.

Imagine a singular currency with different values to sub sets denoting economic areas of influence where it was coined. The currency exchange would prosper since it would allow the conversion of one zone's dollars into another zones allowing the exchange of wealth from zone to zone to happen unhindered. You could set the amount of each individual zones currency in circulation according to population initially.

So in essence you have a bunch of different currencies with the same name. They have to be distinguishable from each other to allow exchange rates to happen. I'm not sure I see any advantage here.

Today you have a difference in value from a Pound drawn on a London bank versus a Pound drawn on the Bank of Scotland. They have differing exchange rates. It's a pain in the butt, really.

a reply to: tadaman

I think it will be cashless. They're already getting us ready to accept chips in our cards and pondering cashless societies in places like some of the Scandinavian countries and Israel.

I think Sterling would make an excellent world currency.

That aside, a one-world currency assumes close economic and political alignment. It'll happen at some stage, but not yet.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: tadaman

I think it will be cashless. They're already getting us ready to accept chips in our cards and pondering cashless societies in places like some of the Scandinavian countries and Israel.

The Coming ”Brain Chip”

Earlier this year, an office building in Stockholm, Sweden began implanting its workers with microchips for the purpose of identification, to allow staff members to interact with smartphones, open doors, gain access to specific locations, and operate equipment. In doing a report for BBC on the Epicenter building which houses offices for Google and Microsoft, Rory Cellan-Jones volunteered to be microchipped and had a chip embedded in his hand.

In 2004, another BBC reporter, Simon Morton, was embedded with a microchip while working on a report about a Barcelona nightclub that uses microchips for VIP admittance and accepting payment for drinks.

www.activistpost.com...

We already have areas with different costs of living. London, the Home Counties vs. the rest of the UK. Every other region gripes that people move "down South" because of the money. While house prices are a proportion of your salary, luxury (or self-improvement) items like laptops or desktops cost the same regardless of where you live. So you get more spending power down in the South of England.

So when I travel from new Jersey to Delaware to buy a carton of smokes because it is cheeper and tax free I would have to exchange my money for another type to buy one thing? Seems like a whole lot of hassle.

a reply to: Zerodoublehero

This is all built around digital currency. Instant exchange with a dynamic system of smart pricing put into place everywhere. You would get an exact market that is very stable and wouldnt fluctuate all that much except when dealing with international trade. That end is geared up to favor your spending power abroad in this system.

EDIT TO ADD:
/This also makes it a very easy system to audit and to keep from having funny numbers make their way back into any one region. Fictitious book keeping would undermine the global system so literally the world would be on your back if you cook the books in any one region. /END

Lets say your New Jersey currency gets you 2 packs of smokes more in Delaware for the same cost because your states currency is at a higher exchange rate nationally. Maybe there are 4 more packs available for the same cost from Western Europe whose regional currency is a little weaker than the American currencies valued together as one internationally.

so buying your smokes from Barcelona might get you more bang for your buck whether you are in Delaware or New Jersey. This is a world economy we would be streamlining isnt it? These sort of things should be encouraged. They take the pressure of constant growth off our collective necks.

MORE EDIT TO ADD:
Except in this both Western Europe and the Americas would have the same type of international currency. So you would buy smokes from Barcelona with international zone money, which is instantly converted from regional zone currency into international zone currency at a much higher value (backed by ALL state dollars), and then back into regional (Barcelona zone) currency since you are buying form northern Spain.

Also in my system the US wouldnt be 50 zones. At most we would have 2 or 3 economic zones in all the Americas and they would be zoned according to population size. A country like Russia might have 3 economic zones. A small country like Ethiopia may find itself in the economic zone of a powerful country. This would all change as population size changes. Much like now, population size dictates the concentration of wealth unless efforts are kept to stay competitive. This would use that dynamic to solve the problem by creating a balance as well as a means of measured growth according to our evolving needs.

No, the currency would have the same value everywhere, that would be the whole point of having a one world currency.

Take the U.S. for example $1 is worth $1 no matter what state you are in,it would be the same with a world currency 1 unit of world currency would be worth 1 unit of world currency no matter what country you are in.
I think there would be less fluctuation in the value of a world currency because the currency would be backed by the GDP of all the countries of the world.

We have a near perfect digital currency in the form of "Gold on the Blockchain". This is basically like warehouse receipts that are digital and can change hands at internet speeds world wide. A number of players are rising on this idea but since I am involved I will not post any direct links but a web search for my text in quotes will pull up many of them.

a reply to: tadaman

You are exactly right: "It's not even that far off from what we (does that collective "we" include Park Ave and the NYSE?) have now".

Thanks for trying, but we have laid this out before, and argued ad nauseum over the pros/cons. Until they (whoever "they/we" are) get the Euro hammered out meritocracly, these same discussions will become baseless arguments. Again, some well-thought ideas, but nothing new and still dealing with the Euro 15/16 years later. No way an economy the size of China (and growing, however modestly) is gonna give up their financial sovereignty to 'make things easier'. Heck, the big ole US of A would big the biggest deterrent to a "one world currency".

Those are my thoughts, any thoughts of your's you'd like to highlight/reinforce?

Thanks

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

the 'we" is a collective we. The big evil guys, the small good guys everyone. Fiat money has certain incentives for certain people. It has NONE for most others. This is not fiat money in that there is no magical power of its creation.

The variable determining the amount in circulation is population size initially and at a measured equal rate of increase. The variable determining the value into the international currency to which it is purchased, is the net worth of all currency regionally unto an international system.

In this system, trade is built around small transactions that take full advantage of domestic (regional) weakness and turn it into stronger purchasing power abroad while enjoying stability domestically.

The pressure of that stability is relieved from regional administrations by small entrepreneurship geared around international trade. Small business and large business would both be looking to take advantage of the trade off when converting their regions currency to the international currency and then back into the individual zones fluctuating currency.

International trade is then ONLY LIMITED by the amount of possible transactions at an increasing loss based on the ever fluctuating regional currencies supply, with determinable worth at any moment for every transaction, based ONLY on the supply of currency in circulation in that region.

This has an incentivizing effect that would encourage cross regional trade at a more proportionate rate of growth and sustainability as wealth shifts from zone to zone, always benefiting the overall worth of all currency. Also you would not have to touch the formation of industry like in the EU since one day dairy from France could be cheaper and then Dairy from Australia without any losing outright ever.

Fluctuations would be based on regional currency exchanges only and their supply and all currency would have actual worth with no shortages. Make it gold backed, energy backed, grain backed, what ever. It must be digital though. Each zone could offer what it has to back its zones currency and all zones could balance out how much grain to gold a coin has to have backing it for worth to be credited into the one world currency.


This system also compartmentalizes a catastrophic failure or act of sabotage since each zone is still converting to an international standard when dealing with transactions internationally....and no matter what they are going through domestically the overall system is safe.

If anything it helps a struggling zone recover since like I said, it creates more markets and more instances of opportunity for everyone.

This is all about non zero sumness. That is the spirit of the union in coin I propose.

Still just my thoughts. I humbly acknowledge I may be wrong.

EDIT TO ADD:
This has the added bonus of being convertible to colonial economies. Think of mars or the moon having its own place as an engine of growth on earth. An actual good USE for population growth....also, actual growth. The hunger for power will make them more resourceful and pioneering.

Instead of counter acting mechanisms fueled by inefficient and unnecessary greed as a precaution and precursor to survival, you could have consolidated efforts to form and strengthen communities in ever increasing ways since that is how actual growth exits and how actual prosperity is secured.

It makes you want to go out and create something since it will actually exist and is somehow both yours and everyone's. You would then have events like a city on earth sponsoring its own colony on the moon or what ever. Not as an altruistic venture, but as an investment for their regions prosperity. You would see small businesses fall in line to what ever big ventures big business has in mind.

Who knows. Its all just an idea.

a reply to: tadaman

Sincerely, thanks for thoughts. Well-thought out.

And thanks for humbly acknowledging you ARE wrong. Closest digital currency archetype you're describing is Bitcoin - worked well first 18-24 months, but history and greed caught up with it.

We can discuss economics all you could possibly want (I am holding the Ace of Spades and not the one Lemmy was articulating), but any legitimate discussion (it would be/is an argument) concerning a world currency already places you at the back of the class. Thoughts about the closest analog to your description (Bitcoin)? Why is the Euro a catastrophe and Bitcoin worthless??

actually, I see a One-Currency for-the-world being here right now...

the Rothschild currency System is in place... the fractional reserve banking/money creation process is in place

the 'SWIFT' funds transfer (including valuation differences) is already functioning

the multitude of 'Ledger-sheets/books/accounting practices' which are both allowed and kept secret are legend....


we don't need to look further than our noses to be aware of the existence of the corrupt One-World-Currency

the BRICS are... or already have created an alternative for the Western financial system... With BIS/IMF, bullion banks already-in-place

well, that's the way I see things, anyhow

Ill trade johnny 4 chickens and a cow for his daughter lol

a reply to: tadaman

Quick scan of your posts and threads reveals a globalist lover.

Central banker apologist

And here you are pushing for even greater loss of sovereignty.

Not only will your dream die and your masters fail. But it will get SO BAD that you Tadaman, you yourself, may not survive the next ten years.

Don't worry seeing is believing. Keep your eyes in good health condition LOL

a reply to: VanGcouverite

You have discovered me/ You are lucky that you are so important to our plans. I do warn you sir. In the dystopian future we will create after the purge, should you survive it,you may not be around for very long. I say this for in this future dueling will be allowed for acts of grievous offence to the supreme order. If I see you toiling away in the slave pits digging into the ancient caverns of the fallen ones, I will single you out to be prepared for battle. I shall duel you and throw you into the pits of my master Lucifer.

So you read my posts. Awesome. I am now in your head. You think you just read words on a screen. What you really did was read a sequence of triggers hidden in the words I have typed that when read in increasing frequency interlace your consciousness with one of our own creation.

Its beautiful you see. We target powerful and potentially dangerous people to our movement like yourself and make you willing participants in our scheme. Its wonderfully devious. Even now, I have installed the last trigger by this post.

I shall speak further to you on the matter through a more private, personal medium (telepathic).

Prepare yourself. Our engineers are.

a reply to: tadaman

I like your vocabulary

Too bad you will most likely be separated from your body within ten years

Ever worked on a complex project and things didn't pan out as predicted

Too bad masters you like don't have a seat for you underground