|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 16, 2009 15:33:36 GMT
Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) are calling for a new international monetary system. Full article hereDo you think they are right? Wrong? Does it matter?
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jun 16, 2009 16:46:11 GMT
I think it needs to adopt a different currency to the dollar, but a new monetary system. No. The current monetary system allows for the fact that each part of the world works in a different way and is valued more or less compared to other countries.
dispite the hardship it would cause me, I do however think that removing the ability for companies to "price fix" across the globe would be very good (thus meaning that something that costs $10 in india also costs $10 in the US)
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jun 16, 2009 18:50:50 GMT
The truth is the current system is unrealistic. It basically says that imaginary money is acceptable. An index-backed currency is likle yot be the solution.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jun 16, 2009 18:54:55 GMT
What's an index-based currency?
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jun 16, 2009 18:56:17 GMT
Gold, Platinum, Bronze, Silver commodities basically determining the strength of a currency. Not any one, but a combination of rare materials under a single value.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jun 16, 2009 19:18:27 GMT
Right, that's true. Plus, we need something that can't be easily duplicated or counterfeited. Dollar notes are too easy to duplicate: I think the Chinese were the first to implement dollar currency and they suffered from hyper-inflation. And anything involving technology to "watermark" the notes is too expensive to implement(a few million just to develop some "watermark" and "holograms") and just as easy to duplicate 'cos the counterfeiters can simply purchase machinery with similar functions from somewhere or just modify an existing set of equipment.
Still... I wonder how easily gold, silver, platinum, bronze, etc. can be counterfeited. And also, what kinda equipment can be used to detect if those "coins" are real or fake: maybe machinery to detect the weight, shape, engravings, etc. of each coin? I'm assuming gold, silver, etc. are each used for errr the numerical units like "1 thousand coins", "100 coins", "10 coins", etc. Sorry... my sense of maths needs a little sharpening. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jun 16, 2009 22:16:25 GMT
A 'new' monetary (financial) system we need, I believe - new currencies, not necessarily.
'lead' currencies change over time - once upon a time it was the Pound Sterling (when it colloquially was called 'guinea'), in the future it may well be something other than the dollar (US).
That in itself will not be a problem - safe for American ego.
It is IMHO not an issue to leave, respectively not return to, the 'gold' standard, however financial systems should be tied to the creation of value through production or substantial services. Our current problem is that money was made out of derivates of debts, and debts of debts - no real value, nothing substantial, there.
The concept isn't alien to us - think of value added tax! Which really is a turnover tax, but originally was derived from the concept that someone added value to a raw product by adding something substantial or tangible to it.
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jun 17, 2009 2:48:47 GMT
The gold standard limits currency , which limits profits to those who issue paper fake money. One of the reasons for the move away from the gold standard is because there wasn't enough money to go around , that means a limit on interest , profit, and debt.
Since reserves issue imaginary conceptual money , they can also create the interest rates and leave people wage slaves , slaves to interest , it never stops , I borrowed 500 , I pay 120 a month on that 500, only interest , I never touch the principal , I will pay that forever if I don't double down on payments. This is what happens all over with all money , interests rates killing peoples finances.
I doubt the world will move back to commodity based system , there's not enough money /profit in it. Why be fair when you can be evil ...I've heard that was a business moto, also that the ethics course has tumbleweeds rolling through it.
|
|
|
Post by Lews on Jun 17, 2009 3:10:04 GMT
Who the hell did you borrow that from and how high is your interest? If that's true and not some stupid example, you fail.
Pretty funny this is coming from Brazil, Russia, India, and China. 4 of the leading emerging economies of the world. They don't want to change because it's not fair to the world, it's because it's not fair to them. They need a new system so they can get in at the start and abuse the system with the rest.
It won't go back to a commodity based system because of the complexity with such an interconnected global world, not because of some new world order conspiracy theory.
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jun 17, 2009 4:32:57 GMT
It SHOULD go back to a Commodity though, because we need real value. No currency has real value anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 17, 2009 11:35:43 GMT
Terror's right. Unless there is something backing the system up, it's built on dreams, not reality. That kind of system just doesn't work ecause it has no real intrinsic stability.
Whether it's backed by mineral wealth or something else, a currency that is backed is both stronger and more stable because it has an actual concrete value to it.
Paper is just paper. Paper you can exchange for oil or gold or something else of actual value is a lot more than just paper.
Kilgore may also be right that that kind of system is no longer as feasible as once it was, but with the amount of commodities out there, I'm not sure that's entirely true - at least not for all countries. South Africa could easily adopt 'The Diamond Standard' for example...
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jun 17, 2009 11:50:30 GMT
I disagree, an indexed currency is useful, but only while there is more of the indexed item than there is of the currency. Once there is more money than there is commodity, then issues start to arrise. Equally Money tends to float to the top, rather than being distributed out, this means that in a limited currency, only a few people will have most of the currency.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 17, 2009 12:00:01 GMT
As opposed to now, DPR, when the money supply is so equally shared, huh? ;D
There's still a bit of trickery involved with commodity-based currencies, as they really rely on no-one actually converting the currency into raw materials, but still...
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jun 17, 2009 12:42:56 GMT
however atm the central bank "releases" a small amount of new currency every year, which is slightly more than the received back so that there is enough free money in the system to allow comerce to occur.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 17, 2009 12:47:49 GMT
They could still do that with commodity based currencies. No-one will ever know exactly how much money is really in the system anyway, because of wastage.
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jun 17, 2009 21:39:00 GMT
The dollar will collapse , the NAU will rise and the whole of America will want the alliance, a new currency will be established called the "amero" an agreement was signed by America , Canada and Mexico not too long ago, you can look up this info , it was reproted by Lou Dobbs at the time of the signing as a "trade agreement/partnership" in which Dobbs said this would be the effective end of America. His guest was also a market analyst , he said we should all watch for the "Amero" , modeled after the EU brand.
Perhaps the fall of the dollar is calculated? to create just enough turmoil for people to accept the solution ie nau , amero as new currency , which will establish all new sorts of regulations and economic policies/controls. Part of this unification is something called the "Trans Texas Corridor" , a super highway linking the three coutries (C A M ). This super highway is being rejected harshly by those who live within it's area for fear of higher incidences of crime (smuggling) and the eminant domain property siezures to build it along with a host of other fears.
I mention Lou Dobbs for it seems that you all think I'm into conspiracies , I assure I am into the truth. I am also into the Occult ( theoretically) and do you know what occult means?
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 17, 2009 21:44:53 GMT
'That which is hidden' yes.
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jun 17, 2009 21:47:16 GMT
Yes , I am a student of that which is hidden and I take it upon myself at great expense to my "reputation" to expose those things to the light.
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jun 17, 2009 22:10:58 GMT
Here's a link to an article that shows to what level major governments will sink to trick the population into something unjust. To falsify events and even , STAGE them , one little example for those of you who try to insist that it is I who is crazy. Legitimate Journalist exposes plot to stage false flag terror as a precursor to begin war with Iran. Going so far as to dress up americans like Iranians to fool everyone , they were also considering manufacturing copies of Iranian military ships to further authenticate the DECEPTION. SEE the link, of course you wouldn't take my word for it. I know it's old , but in case you missed it last year , check. www.alternet.org/blogs/video/93463/
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jun 17, 2009 23:59:30 GMT
I am by no means an expert on monetary systems but I can't see how a "stable, predictable and more diversified international monetary system" could even be implemented. The logistics alone would be night marish and I doubt there'd ever be an agreements as to how it would work. If there's to be a new dominating currency in the foreseeable future it'll probably be the Euro. It's the second largest economy and also the second most held reserve currency. dispite the hardship it would cause me, I do however think that removing the ability for companies to "price fix" across the globe would be very good (thus meaning that something that costs $10 in india also costs $10 in the US) I'm not sure what you are advocating here, DPR and I might have misunderstood your point. Do you want a fixed price for each country or an universal price for the same good? If it's the latter than how would that be possible considering purchasing power and wages?
|
|