Dumb Question: What if the solution would be for the world to standardize on one currency?

[Taverner]

For the sake of argument, let's call it the "Terran Dollar"

If all world's economies started standardizing on this, much like Europe did with the Euro, would the effects be positive, negative or neutral?

[endarkenment]

1. who runs the central bank?

[Doctor Cynic]

2. We're not globalized enough for this to happen.

We'd have once central bank which would have to think of the whole world when it makes decisions.

China could be experiencing inflationary boom, requiring higher interest rates.

Europe could be in deep recession, requiring lower interest rates.

You can only do one for the whole world.

It's a disaster in the making.

[Taverner]

4. What if it were a series of banks, each with different interest rates

Each assigned to a region...although I can just see someone from china getting a loan from the bank in Italy - so there would have to be some reworking required

[CJCRANE]

3. IIRC conspiracy theorists used to call it the "Mondo"...

A global currency under a global government...the effects would entirely depend on who ran the global govt.

However imagine being in a constituency of six billion people...

[DJ13]

5. On a national basis the same could be accomplished with tariffs

The real goal needs to be a standardization of the cost of labor (and materials) from one region to the next.

Thats what tariffs were once used for.

An alternative could be to fix currencies internationally based on a nation's labor rate, and eliminate currency fluctuation's.

Of course the free market types (and the currency exchange traders) wouldnt like either choice, as it would eliminate a source of easy wealth generation.

[Taverner]

6. standardization of the cost of labor

Marx may have been criticized for his labor value theory - but he is the only one in history who tried to do this, and no one has tried since.

All in all, he did a great job considering...

[truedelphi]

11. Sadly the development of Milton Friedman's bastard child,

Supply Side Economics, means that no one can mention the word "Tariffs" without a dozen or more people and Think Tanks calling that person an idiot.

However, the Colonists who were in the Boston Harbor in 1775 understood that through the creation of local jobs you could grow a truly vigorous economy.

The TV pundits still have "experts" on talking about the dangers of using this crisis to bring back "protectionism"

[TreasonousBastard]

7. I suspect positive, but...

since it's never been done, it's tough to tell. Many of the problems are caused by imbalances in monetary values and a common currency would solve that. The Euro may be bitched at in local markets, but companies like Daimler-Benz are happy because they buy from a dozen countires and sell back to them-- the currency trades are often the difference between profit and loss. Sometimes, the transaction costs are so foggy they don't really know if they made money or not in some sectors. And, even though they may bitch, Europeans on the street don't have to change currency to rent a room or buy a meal, or a bottle of wine, just across the border.

There were plenty of times when there was a dominant currency, like the British pound and the dollar, but there were always alternate currencies to play with. Perhaps someone knows what sort of money the Romans used in the empire-- that might be the closest example.

[Taverner]

8. I thought the romans often paid in commodities

Salt, Bread, Grain...etc


But I may be way off here...

[TreasonousBastard]

9. They had coinage, but...

I don't know how much it was used, or whether areas like Greece and the Middle East with older cultures maintained their own monetary systems.

Taxes were often paid in commodities, but you can't run a whole economy on barter.

(Or sell out Jesus with a bag of wheat-- that took a bag of silver)

[Art_from_Ark]

13. Roman coinage was widely used in commerce

Copper coins, such as the as, were used for small purchases, even to pay for public toilets. There were several mints in the Empire, and hoards of Roman coins are still being found in what at one time or another was Roman territory.

Two of their larger denomination early coins, the denarius and solidus, were based on what a Roman soldier would receive as pay for one day, and one month of duty, respectively. Originally, the two coins were made of silver and gold, respectively, but they became debased over time as the demand for coinage exceeded the amount of precious metals that were available (or could be plundered from subjugated peoples). By the middle of the 3rd century A.D. or so, the "silver" coins were merely silver-plated base metal tokens, and inflation became a big problem (yes, they had inflation, even back then.

On a side note, the "denarius" became known as the "penny" in England, and until decimalization in the late '60s, "penny" was still being abbreviated as "d"

[Joanne98]

10. It would have to be backed by gold and traded on the forex!

I could be done but who knows who it would end up benefiting. The Euro was a good idea until the bankers in Brussels used it to screw the workers with.

[MedfordTim]

12. I don't know if this is the solution, but...

...can you imagine how many heads would explode simultaneously at the announcement of such a thing?

:rofl:

[notesdev]

14. Then whoever controls the currency

is basically world dictator.

Whoever that turns out to be, you can be assured it will not be you.

[whosinpower]

15. I don't think it is a stupid question

I think it is coming. How that currency is valued is ultimately what determines if there would be a possibility of a world dictatorship type scenario.

Converting all world currencies into one standard is a chance to reboot the system and start over fresh. If things get bad enough, I think we will hear more of this talk in the future. If the american greenback collapses as the reserve global currency - we will hear this talk ALLOT more.

I think I would rather hear this talk to the alternative - another world war.