It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Medvedev Shows Off Sample Coin of New 'World Currency' at G-8

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 06:23 PM
Originally posted by Lazyninja

Well this is the last place I expected the call for a global currency to come from. I guess Russia has it's own economic reasons for wanting this.
Yeah, they do: America Tax.
As long as the Fed keep issuing $US without any reference to what goods & services can be bought from the USA with them, instead relying on countries to spend them on OPEC oil, then the amount of $US in circulation keeps rising well beyond any expansion of the global market, which thus devalues all $US in circulation.
Limited growth of resources / more & more money = money worth less.
Thus any country holding $US is seeing that currency value shrink. Its a de facto tax: America Tax.
Its not just in Russia's interest to change the system, but the whole world's. Even the USA's in the long term, as increased costs for US Corporations abroad will create jobs @home.

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 06:34 PM
I wish they would have pulled out a paper bill instead of a coin

like.. I don't need my pants being pulled down by all those coins lol

besides, isnt unity in diversity like a startrek vulcan moto? i've heard it somewhere before..

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Of course there is going to be a one world currency in time

Of course there will be unified laws, a proper court system, and a leadership of countrys represented as a actual functioning UN.

This is actually a desirable long as each country and each state holds onto its local legal and representitive ability.

This is the transition, as Michau Kaku explained, from a type 0 planet to a type 1 planet. to think we would forever be divided is a absolutely insane idea.

Cavemen got together with neighboring cave tribes to unite areas
these became villages, which united with other neighboring villages becoming cities, then city-states, kingdoms, countrys, etc.

this is a natural progression. No doubt when villages united, there were people grumpy about those transitions also...losing their status as village elder or head magicman or whatever...but oh well, its a natural tendency to unite in greater and greater systems...hell, you can even observe this in material science...

organization is one of the most natural events in existance, in things living and not.

The argument, for the enlightened, is not about how do we stop it...its like stopping the tide from coming in, or gravity from working...
The argument is how do we make sure we have independence, freedom, and representation as this natural process occurs.. Anyone whom believes it can be avoided is simply delusional. the very far future, Mars, Moon, and the rest of the colonised bodies of the Sol system will unite
New Worlds Order I imagine it will be tagged with...and once again people here and there will object, not understanding it is a absolute inevitability.

So...suck it up, understand its going to happen, and the biggest thing to quest for is what you want as it happens...because to bury your head in the sand and say it can be stopped is simply childish denial.

It will be done...your choice is do you want a say in how its done or do you want to deal with it imposed on you.

1) That doesn't mean I have to be alive to see it happen. I'm still capable of fighting to the death. Neither will my progeny survive the transition, according to them. S'ok, your Brave New World will certainly be better off without us.

2) How are we supposed to have a say in a whole world government when we haven't even got a say in our national government? Of course, there are storm clouds brewing there, too, and your NWO may not have to worry about us surviving long enough to be a problem for them.

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by Neo_Serf Anyone have any hard numbers of how atrificially inflated the USDs value is due to its defacto but waning status as world reserve currency? How would a full move away from this status quo effect the buying power of the USD?
As far as I know, the amount of US$s in circulation was made a state secret fairly recently (before melt-down tho), so it is impossible to know exactly how bad the situation actually is. Perhaps, GreenBicMan, you could shed some light on this?
The US consumer currently derives significant extra spending power from the US$'s position as main reserve currency. A move away would likely trigger inflation on the back of rising prices of imported goods, low confidence in the domestic economy & lack of a manufacturing base to take over the supply of consumer goods from imports.
Isn't this already happening?

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 07:58 PM

Originally posted by Retseh
"Unity in Diversity"

How ironic coming from a Russian, who along with the Chinese have done everything humanly possible to eliminate cultural diversity throughout the 20th century.

I hope you're not American, because your cultural imperialism is much, much more blatant than either Russia or China. You cannot get away from bloody McDonalds, Coke, Pepsi and crappy Hollywood movies and trash TV.

The fact that your post got a lot of stars only shows how much ignorance there is on here to deny.

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 08:13 PM

looks cool i want one!!


posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 08:14 PM
reply to post by Amagnon
Good post; long & good
The problem with gold backed currency tho is that in a rapidly expanding market, it is inelastic which retards growth. Nor does it solve capitalism's central problem of boom & bust, as history shows. Its obvious why: because gold only has such high value because we say it does. What people will or wont spend it on is still a function of necessity + confidence in the future. Confidence drops = spending drops = markets fall = recession.
The thing with our currency system is that it was never designed, it just came about by accident & minor tinkering here & there, adjusting it just a little @a time from the original ancient barter token system. We need to start again with a system designed to fulfill all the functions of money without creating the problems we see.
I think we have to move to a system of different types of currency for different purposes.
International Trade Currency
An arbitrary value against which each nation's domestic currencies are exchanged based on GDP vs money in circulation.
CashFiat currency only used domestically to buy goods & services. Protected against inflation by a time limit on its value before it must be spent or converted to:
Capital Currency
Based on the value of a scarce resource, like oil. Used for savings, buying real estate & capital investments. Protected from inflation by the inherent & rising value of the resource.
A system like this could prompt people to spend their money quickly or save it, thus smoothing out the up & down swings of our current system, & also prevent the abuse of issuing reserve currency (see USA, wait for EU).
I found this fascinating: The ecology of money. The conclusions struck me as a bit pie-in-the-sky, but it covers the issues.

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by Bunken Drum

simple answer

stop being greedy

money is a tool to make profit

you know like being a slave?

if you cant see it you as stupid as the guy who said the world was flat

face it


wake the F up

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 11:24 PM
reply to post by Bunken Drum

Thanks for your positive feedback on my post. I haven't yet read the 'ecology of money' ebook you posted yet - will have a look in a while.

The idea of three currencies is interesting - but at some point they have to be exchanged - for example if I manufacture locally, then export - my export earnings have to be converted back into domestic currency. What would be the benefit over a non inflationary gold currency that can be used for all types of transactions?

You mention what is commonly seen as a 'problem' for a gold backed currency - that is lack of flexibility to expand during a boom. This is precisely why this is a good currency - because it prevents inflation of bubbles, over expansion of credit - that we all well know the effects of. This is often cited as a drawback of a gold standard - but those that criticize it, are the gangsters who have a vested interest in boom and bust scenario's.

You also said that a gold standard doesn't prevent boom and bust - but in fact it is far more effective than a fiat currency in preventing these cycles. If you are referring to the great depression as an example, then I am not sure it is a good example.

Based on what I know, the money supply and discount rate was being managed by the Fed, and that a low credit, high monetary supply period preceded the depression - in other words a bubble was created. They over inflated - then they reigned in money supply and upped the discount rate, this caused the depression. They then kept the low money supply - this prevented a recovery. In effect they used the 'gold standard' currency as if it were fiat. Some additional chicanery was done by creating rumors of bank insolvency - and causing bank runs on perfectly healthy banks (I think this was done earlier in the 20's)

It was gangster economics of a type familiar to many today - blaming the gold standard was simply a way to firstly divert attention from the real root cause, and secondly to decrease faith in a gold standard and pave the way for it's abolition - and conversion to fiat.

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Amagnon]

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
Greed isn't the issue here. If greed somehow disappeared tomorrow, we would still need a means to exchange goods & services, which is all money is. Without it, we would have to barter, which worked ok when civilisation was in infancy, but how could barter provide us with the internet?
Wage slavery, greed & the inequality of wealth & power which perpetuate them are moral & social issues. We should wake up?
Ask yourself how is it that we ordinary folk are no longer serfs, literally owned by our masters? Trace the cause through to the 20th century. The only means we have ever had of wresting power from TPTB, without violent revolution (& that ends well... not) is banding together & withdrawing our labour.
How ironic then that here on ATS, some of the most vociferous anti-NWO posters are also completely anti-socialist.
JP Morgan & John D Rockefeller certainly knew what they were doing funding baptist educational institutions. & why do the companies spawned by their empires continue to do so?
Answer: because its cheaper to get the slaves to enslave themselves than to guard them.

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 11:46 PM
Well, December 21, 2012 will arrive before the total change of the NWO takes place, so don't worry, the end of this era will finish with this greedy people.

Ok now talking seriously the idea of a new world order isnt that bad, all you people are mentioning that the final world goverment will finish with the national identity of each single country creating basically a massive work force that would be practically robots.. well that's certainly not true.

During all human history, men has formed bigger groups to be stronger as a whole, remember the famous "together we stand, divided we fall? well in this case is about the same. Just think about the different ethnic groups that lived within the same countries "spain" "russia" "france" just to name a few that come to mind, nowdays they are united into singles countries but that doesnt mean the identity of each region has dissapeared. To name a modern example, look at the EU... they are united in a political and economical way, however the identity of each nation still exists and it's admired by the other nations, Portugal, France, Sweden, Hungary; they all share the same coin but they still have their own identity.

A world goverment can be good certainly, great philosophers like Kahn conceived this idea as a way to finish the wars that never cease to exist because of the "extreme nationalism" which is deadlier than "extreme globalism" itself.

I know that the people that are pushing for this are greedy, luciferian, sauronian, etc; people who only want to have more control than the one they already have, well guess what.. Sooner or later their power will dissapear, it's just very difficult to keep a monopoly of authority for a lot of time, impossible considering it would be a world goverment. Innumerable guerrillas would formed in all the world, making the one world goverment collapse. Just look at las FARC in Colombia or ETA in Spain, practically the goverments of those countries are much stronger than those rebels however it's impossible to defeat them because there will be always a lot of places to move and therefore create more strategies.

Even if these coins had a reptilian or a fallen angel face on them, that doesnt mean your soul would be "doomed" just because you use them. Actions are the ones that guide your soul to the goodness and compassion or to more suffering.. that's the real mark. Not a stupid physical "evil goat" face in your money..

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Szerablyn]

posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 11:51 PM
it's about time!!

i like stuff like this coming out public, so i can tell all the people who think i'm a conspiracy theorist, "i told you so!!"

as long as they don't chip me... but even then, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 01:38 AM
reply to post by Amagnon

What would be the benefit over a non inflationary gold currency that can be used for all types of transactions?
The Trade Currency would simply act as an exchange rate for private business, incurring no costs for buying or selling of currency, just a nominal fee for the secure electronic transfer. Also, it would prevent Govt from overborrowing from its central bank because the exchange rate of national fiat currency, Cash, against the Trade Currency would be set by GDP / Cash in circulation. To overborrow would thus be to automatically devalue Cash.

You mention what is commonly seen as a 'problem' for a gold backed currency - that is lack of flexibility to expand during a boom. This is precisely why this is a good currency - because it prevents inflation of bubbles, over expansion of credit
I partly agree, but credit bubbles aren't the whole picture. New innovation creates whole new market areas: automobile, domestic electricity, radio & TV, video & DVD, personal computers... Whilst a growing market may become a bubble, it need not. Everyone is blaming sub-prime mortgages & consumer credit for the current woes, but if non-payment was the real problem, the whole system would have already collapsed. The real problem is that lending institutions owning debt in a confident market are seen as great investments; their share price gets inflated way beyond the value of the debt they own. This inflated value is whats lost when the bubble busts & a bit more as panic sets in. If investment was done in Capital Currency only, people would be a lot more wary of paying inflated share prices to begin with, because the currency itself would gain value as the scarce resource it represented did.
Without flexibility tho, only those with wealth already would ever be able to do anything large scale. Microsoft & Apple would never have got going, or they'd be part of IBM.

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 02:02 AM
reply to post by Amagnon

You also said that a gold standard doesn't prevent boom and bust - but in fact it is far more effective than a fiat currency in preventing these cycles. If you are referring to the great depression as an example, then I am not sure it is a good example.
There have been several financial crises before the 30s tho. 1880-1913 off the top of my head. We hear all kinds of explanations for each problem & as times change so do opinions. How about we just look @ the entire system which keeps breaking down? Is it possible that there is something fundamental about capitalism which causes these problems? If not, then what other conclusion can we come to than that the system is so unstable that a whole multitude of different things have, can & thus will, cause it to fail?
Now I'm not an economist & I expect there's a raft of problems with my above idea, but 1 thing I do know is that what we have doesn't work & what we had stifled progress (how long to get from the steam engine to industrialisation?), so we need a new idea.
(Oh yeah, re: credit bubble - check my siggy link)

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 02:11 AM
I agree the move to one goverment and one currency is inevitable and would be the ideal solution to alot of current world issues. I dont think this will happen for quite a few years yet but i look forward to it as it will be a big step towards becoming a united planet and civilization. That being said i dont prescribe to the Alex Jones/wingnut theories on the NWO.


posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 03:20 AM
All right ATS-ers...

After many years of inactivity, I'm gonna have to come out of retirement for this thread....

...for I have had some experience with these alleged Belgian coins...

...and I will share this experience with you, so that you might be similarly enlightened...

...prepare yourselves...

...The half peanut butter ones are the best, especially if you can get the ones with the rice crispies in 'em too...

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 03:27 AM

Originally posted by Question
reply to post by PjZ101

Does it not say somewhere in the bible that when the time is right, the anti-christ WILL in fact proclaim himself to be so? Some would think "Oh that's ridiculous! if he stated that he was the anti-christ, he'd be killed instantly!"

Hmmm... I thought the Antichrist is supposed to proclaim himself to be God.

I might be mistaken though, I haven't read Revelations. I like to read books from start to finish, but I never seem to get very far into the Bible. Still, everyone keeps trying to tell me how it ends...

On topic though: This [expletive] is frightening. What's even more frightening is that when I link the article to 'normal' RL people the typical response seems to be "oh weird", before moving on to a more 'entertaining' subject...

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 03:54 AM
reply to post by Bunken Drum

er no we wouldnt


get off your butt for free and go work for free just because you can?

or make some other bugger rich who makes the money you use

OH WHATTTT omg how can someone PRINT money ?


you are dealing with the people who run the world my friend they do not like the idea of no money or file sharing

because that would set a presedence for being kind.. the ironic part is

they give us the tools to "SHARE" then hammer us for doing so under the bullhsizzle they call copyright laws

sue microsoft
they enabled it with there stupid operatiing system in the first place did they not?

so who should get sued? me? for sharing a file for free. or microsoft for giving me the tools to do so?

corporations are the problem and they want to own you like a commidty

in fact they do UK.PLC

we are a public listed company on the stock market .. and who do you think are its shares?


get a clue

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 06:02 AM
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
So if we all worked for free, who would decide what happens to those products or resources that are too scarce for everyone to enjoy? Or perhaps we'd all be willing to accept that some were more equal than others?

posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 08:28 AM
reply to post by Retseh

Ironic, indeed. Coming from an American whose country has done more damage to the world.

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in