It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Annee
Very mature. However - you did not answer my question.
What exactly makes you knowledgeable on this subject?
Originally posted by TheAssociate
The Nobel Prize lost all meaning and credibility when the first ever Nobel Prize for a work of fiction was awarded to al gore. Who cares what a Nobel Prize winner has to say about world currency?
Originally posted by cognoscente
Global currency does not equal global statehood. An international world government is the ideal, and that is what we should be pursuing. Regional law should be decentralized. There is no need for a uniform constitution. That would not accurately reflect the political locality of the world's numerous different cultures and societies. All international standards would act as ideal baselines, one which each nation aspires to achieve, drafted by concession by each nation. Goals would include economic integration, political stability, minimization of arms, universal human rights and freedoms, and whatever else everything sees as necessary. Public office in these positions would not be allowed to be held by private citizens. They would give up their rights and become a different level of citizen, one which is accountable to stricter laws and restrictions of personal freedoms.
Each nation on the planet would hold an obligation to printing a quota of the share of money, based on their share in a proportion of the global population. It would be totally decentralized. Money would more accurately reflect the economic value of any region, all else equal.