Nobel-prize winner backs world currency

When an oppressive goverment comes into power (communist Russia / Nazi Germany) you escape, you move to another country. If a one world government takes over, and their intentions aren't as flowery as you were led to believe, where exactly do you escape to? Mars?

Sorry. Double post.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by cognoscente]

The real question is, how long will people like you, and those who share the same paranoia, as the authors of Revelations, live in a world of fear and denial? You provide a single interpretation of the the introduction of a global currency, that is it is a license to enslave the global population in the form of an obligation to some printing corporation... To be honest, your rationale, while it might be relevant to the political climate of today, is actually deluded.



Why do we keep bringing up one-party world governments? Look at the European Parliament. It's hardly totalitarian. Sure, individual national sovereignty will become increasingly more ineffectual or even necessary, but the ultimate goal is bringing democracy and law to a greater number of representatives. For that, compromise is absolutely required. How else are we going to stop the unfair national power interests, the oppressive wars, the subversive dealings of mega corporations hidden behind the protection of a nation with a blind eye to extradition... A world governments brings about accountability. A world currency brings about economic cooperation.

The nation-state, in this century, is going to be about as redundant as the Roman Catholic Church was in the political affairs of the Kingdoms of Europe, which ultimately culminated in the Protestant Reformation and the following continent-wide civil wars in those nations.

Benefits of a World Currency

One of the main benefits I see there is that no one government would have any control over its printing. Authority of printing would lay in the hands of a collective ownership of a global parliament, who are represented equally by all nations on the planet.

1) With the elimination of the need to hold foreign exchange reserves, you don't have global currency hegemony, such as the U.S. does today. In this world, if America under produces, becomes lazy and inefficient, goes into war, and spends its way into oblivion and massive debt, you won't see foreign nations and investors purchasing treasuries at negative interest rates, banking on U.S. tax payers to foot the bill sometime in the future... This brings about so much instability and volatility in the global currency market.

2) Eliminate transaction costs when trading goods, including currencies. Higher efficiency. There is no longer any political motivation to put up tariffs against foreign countries and parties, because they all trade in the same currencies and that would negatively affect your economy for the worse.

3) No more currency risk. Foreign investors can pump their money wherever they want without risking their capital on the chance that some self interested political party is going to arbitrarily adjust its interest rates for selfish economic reasons. This process, one of many moronic ideas starting out in Thailand, was one of poor choices that eventually culminated in the massive 1997 Asian Financial Crisis.

4) No more currency failures one with a single global currency. Many economies will shrink in proportion that actually reflects the productivity of those economies. They will no longer be propped up by false national interests. Everything would be inextricably linked with a global free trade market economy.

5) No more current account deficits. No foreign exchange reserves. This puts the world on an even playing field. Monetary policy becomes impossible, as there would be no need for multiple Central Banks. National self interest and greed are totally dissipated and finally wealth can follow productivity on an equitable basis. There is no way for governments to set exchange rates so as to affect income and employment in their own countries at the expense of others. No more "Buy American" or corporate bail outs for undeserving enterprises.

Unfortunately this won't work because the world's nations, especially in the U.S. are being payed far more than they're actually worth. You have GM grease monkeys being paid $75/hr just because they're "American", at the expense of millions of underpaid individuals all over the world that could otherwise experience a better quality of life if not for the incompetent greed of the American lower class, and their inability to categorize themselves in their appropriate social class.

The only reason a single world currency would be opposed is the fact that a lot of people would lose their political clout and that. Nations would no longer have the tools - monetary policy with their central banks - to CONTAIN wealth in their own nations, to "shore up" jobs at the expense of the third world. Wealth would finally follow productivity in a equitable manner and more people will experience a better life over all. Of course, millions of national citizens today that are so used to enjoying the good life, their false incomes propped up by their governments, will inevitably suffer due to a rise in global equality. They will call on their governments to go to war and secure resources for them like the greedy individuals they are.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by cognoscente]

Henry Kissinger and Al Gore both have Nobel Prizes.

Therefore, I take what Nobel Prize winners say with a grain of salt.

The G20 Summit in Paris on April 2, 2009 will be the beginning of the fall for the United States as an independant country. We are losing our sovereignty and nothing can be done about it. The New World Order is being ushered in and with it a new world currency standard. What the new currency standard will be we won't know until sometime after this summit is over with. Will a one world currency happen right away? I doubt it. But I do believe that the dollar is dead and will be slowly phased out in the very near future. I believe that temporary currencies will be implemented until the final payment system of the RFID system is put in place. Until this new currency system is implemented I would be very careful about putting money into the stock market. And with breaking news out today that the United States is sending a destroyer out to the south China Sea in response to the incident with that Chinese vessel the other day; it looks as if our relationship with our major debt holder, China, is a bit "strained" at the moment. And remember, Hillary was just in China a week ago asking China to continue to buy our debt. The dollar is sitting on a cliff right now and we don't want China to push it over the edge - which could happen very easily.

YouTube Link

I think I may have posted my video incorrectly. This is only the first time at attempting this. I didn't realize it would take up so much space. I thought I did it the way it said to. Sorry everybody.

This will be my last attempt at this video of what Ron Paul has to say about this G20 meeting. If it doesn't work then you will have to pull it up. I'll see what I did wrong later.

www.youtube.com...

What actually is wrong with that? I hear a lot of crying and baying etc but in all honesty I can't really see anything wrong with it, and it can't be any worse than the system that we have in place now (which is essentially a world currency using multiple issues). Nationalism etc has a lot to answer for, as does fundamentalist religion (of all creeds) and anything that can break down the barriers of misunderstanding between people has to be a good thing, doesn't it?



People have been using the 'predictions' in Revelations for over a millenium as an excuse to rebel/maintain/hold power over people. This is no different. Paraedolia?



What?" Over four five billion years in the making? Patent nonsense. I don't buy all this fearmongering. I'm secure in myself and my life.

Bring it on, I say!

Edit: Oh, and cognoscente, nice post, starred.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by aorAki]

[edit on 12-3-2009 by aorAki]

The ONLY function that any sovereign nation deserves to control is the ability to sign its own laws. They CAN NOT go to war just because they're losing resources or their workers are too uneducated to compete in an increasingly global free trade market economy. National sovereignty is a natural liberty. But as with all natural liberties, there is an extent to which they can be applied. Thomas Jefferson was aware of the "golden rule", that your liberties can not impinge upon the natural liberties of others. National sovereignty doesn't give you the right to interfere with the economy of the world, just because your citizens are doing poorly. Your citizens don't have the right to vote in personal monetary gains and "earmarks" through your legislative bodies and methods of wealth containment at the expense of the rest of the world.

National sovereignty means you have the ability to pass laws as they are applicable to the people that they are concerned with. No world government has the right to pass social laws on people that haven't elected them, I'm aware of that. But conversely, no national government has the right to pass laws, which have international implications for people that haven't ELECTED THEM. Trying to implement "Buy American" is NOT your right. People that haven't elected you lose out economically and socially on such selfish strategies such as these.

The problem with a single global currency is the sinister way in which it's being introduced.

If they would just stop the shenanegans, then a lot more people would embrace one-world government

The posters here talking about the need to "evolve" are sheeple idiots

And acmetal makes me LOL

Without a true NWO, we will never see peace on this planet.

A true NWO, with no borders, no money, just one planet-wide community of humans who seek nothing but knowledge and peace, is what this planet needs and what humanity needs.

The above is the only way we'll ever get rid of the greedy powers that'll kill each one of you, if it helps their cause.

It's the only way that science will truly flourish, not being suffocated by powers that are protecting their very power and wealth and status.

So, long story short, I will support anybody who brings us closer to the above Utopia - but I realize it's going to be hundreds, if not thousands of years before it comes true.

We could be there right now, if we wanted.

What a shame - on all of humanity!

I'll try to cut through what I consider simple notions form the Bible and NWO thinking.

Some guy in Russia is designing a one world currency. So is some guy in Eritrea, Alabama. New Zealand, and just about everywhere else. Some lazy editor picks it up from the hundreds of news service sideline stories and fills a column with it.

Except maybe countries whose currencies are falling off the charts, like Zimbabwe, no one is hunting for a new currency right now. Certainly not the US or China, the ones who would have the most say in such a decision.

The big concern, maybe not mentioned in Revelations, is that there will be a shift from the US$ to something else as the world reserve currencies. As keepers of it since WWII, the US has been able to maintain it's sanctioned pyramid scheme and keep printing more money among the way.

Iran is bitching about this, and that's why noises of putting them in their place are disseminating. It's what wars are about. It's why Iraq was invaded, as Saddam H was going to switch to Euros.

With the current situation, as bad as the US $ may appear to be, it's still considered the safest place in the form of bonds. The Euro and the British pound are as sick or sicker, but less noise is made about it.

The Saudis may decide to bite the bullet and pull OPEC away from the US $. They are meeting about it in 9 months. Then, if that happens, all Hell will break loose.

In the meantime, key players like Japan and China are being extorted to keep buying T Bills, for fear of losing the combined trillions they already hold.

It's hard to say right now what actually will happen. The US still holds a lot of cards. But it may end up in a sort of forced receivership some time in the next of couple years. But not before places with less asset backup like Russia, Iran, Eastern Europe, Britain, Mexico go under under.

But no one with any real say either benefits from or is interested in a new world currency right now. Winners do not bring about radical changes to help out losers, despite what the religious or idealistic may think.


Mike F





[edit on 12-3-2009 by mmiichael]

Oh I forgot to mention...no religion either...

..ups.....someone got assassinated for saying that out loud....

For the life of me, I can't see how my right to hang onto my own "stuff", that I worked to get, that came from my own territory, infringes on anyone else's right to go out and work to get their own "stuff", from their own territory.

And for the record, I don't want "my" share of their "stuff", which I really can't see how I have a claim to, anyhow. Tell ya what, when they get around to distributing their "stuff", you can have my share, OK?

nenothtu out

This isnt how it "started." It started with globalization, which if one goes back far enough, began with Rome. I didnt hear any bleating about NWO as they were shifting jobs around the world, knocking down trade restrictions, etc. This is simply the natural and expected consequence of "free trade."

Not saying I am thrilled with the idea. But, it certain isnt something unexpected or radically surprising in any way. If you think this is the "beginning" of anything, you have been dozing in the flock yourself my friend. The beginning of this was a good ways back.

Next is stellar currency then interstellar currency, you're right, it's evolution.


They really are funny like children, aren't they? Ha ha. Very annoying lots of time though.


reply to post by Doug Gaveld

---

Yes Doug you're absolutely right, one world government does make sense evolutionwise.. only now is not the time. People are not ready for either one world government or currency. Eventually.

I can see where you have a strong emotional attachment to the "stuff" that you think you worked hard to get. The fact is it was your nation-state that brought about the conditions, which even enabled you to acquire such wealth. There's no other inherent reason you are able to extol the value of your occupation and your work to such an extent. The functioning of a nation-state is contingent upon the ability of the state to secure prosperity for its citizens (the nation), who in-turn legitimize the state's rule. This often comes at the expense of others. There are people that are working just as hard as you believe you are but receive much less in return. Reward, in this case, does not follow merit, nor is wealth returned at an expectation equivalent to the amount of productivity one engages in.

The Third World does not have the level of security to provide the same opportunities for its citizens. It does not have access to secure oil reserves, to food, water and technological infrastructure, so it's unable to make a claim that they are working or feel they deserve just as much as First World citizens. They are scoffed and denigrated as uneducated and worthless if they try to make this case.

Free trade alleviates these difficulties, but that affects the wealth of the major, so-called sovereign nation-states, whose own citizens could not compete otherwise. Whenever their business models become redundant, they blame free trade, instead of their own inability to compete in a larger market. The response of the state is to pump their businesses, especially in agriculture, with exorbitant amounts of tax-payer provided subsidies. Resultantly, the Third World suffers, because they can't compete with subsidy-driven industries, based on tax payer money, created instantaneously through electronic credit at the Central Bank, and ultimately funded by large treasury and debt holders, such as Japan, China and Russia. You can see where the difficulty of less sophisticated countries lies in circumventing the superior abilities of the big shots.

What happens in the Third World as a result is increased militantism, political instability, and unsubstantiated populist regime change, which the U.S. and other large nation-states actively interested in suppressing in the guise of "democratization". With Iran's democratic election of Mosaddeq in 1944, isn't it suspect that the C.I.A. and MI6 responded by aiding a military-backed coup, and installing a Shah, essentially an Emperor conducive to U.S. strategic energy interests?? All Iran wanted was a share in the resources that they thought they owned.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by cognoscente]

It's a really nice counterargument you got there cognoscente.


To cognoscente, vcwxvwligen, skeeveve.

I expect in the future ATS will divide into two big camps.. the ones who want to have one world government and the ones who don't. It can't be helped.

You misunderstand my post. I meant that this is how they will start promoting the idea of a one world currency to the population. Control the MSM and you can easily brainwash the majority into agreeing to anything.
Yes I agree this plan has been in place for a long time.

I agree - - nothing stops progression. It is the only natural progression.

All you have to do is watch Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot" - - to understand how important it is for this entire world to work together.

And NO I am not gullible or in denial. I fully understand: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."