Worldwide Currency?

[pageplant77]

What do you think about the idea of a Global currency?

[Peace God]

I like the idea of no currency at all.

[RoseyCadaver]

It's called the New World Order silly :)!


I like illogic's idea.

[Azunite]

Excuse me? We have different currencies so we can have trading.

[SosbanFach]

illogic's idea wouldn't work because nothing would happen. Few people would work; money is one of the only incentives to do so. Would you work for nothing when you could stay at home, go on holiday or trips out etc? I wouldn't!

[Donkey]

I like the idea of no currency at all.
I like that idea too.

Excuse me? We have different currencies so we can have trading.
Oh come on. Five bananas for five tomatoes - it's not too difficult. It would put humanity back in a much happier place, and there'd be much less control from our superiors from what we call economy. Almost all Western evil derives from economy - greed, wealth divides and poverty. Alas, I am being an idealist and we are controlled too much to turn things back.

[Kahn]

I like that idea too.


Oh come on. Five bananas for five tomatoes - it's not too difficult. It would put humanity back in a much happier place, and there'd be much less control from our superiors from what we call economy. Almost all Western evil derives from economy - greed, wealth divides and poverty. Alas, I am being an idealist and we are controlled too much to turn things back.

And what makes you think getting rid of the economy will eliminate greed? Someone will take control very quickly- and easily, by controlling the food supply, water supply, or another necessity to life.

[Perseus]

Oh come on. Five bananas for five tomatoes - it's not too difficult. It would put humanity back in a much happier place, and there'd be much less control from our superiors from what we call economy. Almost all Western evil derives from economy - greed, wealth divides and poverty. Alas, I am being an idealist and we are controlled too much to turn things back.

I'd rather not have to trade my stuff to get more stuff. I prefer the idea of money. I can have everything I want that I can afford. With the barter system, I'd have to give up stuff to get something new, and in all honesty, that's just ridiculous. If I buy something, I buy it because I either need it or I want it. Now, on both circumstances, said product is useful for me.

[RoseyCadaver]

Someone will take control very quickly- and easily, by controlling the food supply, water supply, or another necessity to life.

Sadly,I feel they already have.

Search up GMO seeds. I think some seed companies are making it almost immposible to save seeds by making hybrid seeds.THe seeds are either infertile,or it's the weirdest fruit or vegetable you will get.

[Iris]

i answered twice by mistake...

[Unlucky_Leprechaun]

Bananas and tomatoes equal dollars and rubles same thing..same concept. Greed is greed no matter what civilization and what country/continent you live on. It has been a part of life since the beginning of man. Every man covets what he cannot have. I say no ot global currencies and attrition will take over...

[Iris]

Oh come on. Five bananas for five tomatoes - it's not too difficult. It would put humanity back in a much happier place, and there'd be much less control from our superiors from what we call economy. Almost all Western evil derives from economy - greed, wealth divides and poverty. Alas, I am being an idealist and we are controlled too much to turn things back.

A problem with the barter system is that there are many important jobs that don't include growing a food or making clothe or anything really tradeable, like firefighting, policing, psychoanalyzing etc.

[trooneh]

Look at Europe to see how an international currency doesn't really seem to work. Also, the USD is essentially a global currency, along with the Euro and the Yen, I believe.

[Donkey]

And what makes you think getting rid of the economy will eliminate greed? Someone will take control very quickly- and easily, by controlling the food supply, water supply, or another necessity to life.

I'd rather not have to trade my stuff to get more stuff. I prefer the idea of money. I can have everything I want that I can afford. With the barter system, I'd have to give up stuff to get something new, and in all honesty, that's just ridiculous. If I buy something, I buy it because I either need it or I want it. Now, on both circumstances, said product is useful for me.

I'm thinking more hunter-gatherer. No one will really pump up an entire river or lake, kill all the animals in a large area or destroy loads of vegetable plants when everyone is dependent on only themselves. You know, tribal shit. I'm not a huge fan of Western culture. If I could have a rebirth, I'd definitely be born into some Mongolian tribe or shit. Raw humanity - unrestricted by barriers that states and supposed societies place onto us; reliant on only those and the closest around them to survive, where instinct and emotion prevails. Trade isn't really massively important to humanity in the first place.


Bananas and tomatoes equal dollars and rubles same thing..same concept. Greed is greed no matter what civilization and what country/continent you live on. It has been a part of life since the beginning of man. Every man covets what he cannot have. I say no ot global currencies and attrition will take over...

Yeah, but there are different kinds of greed. Greed for money results in crime, and other human beings being negatively affected. Greed for status or food can result in the same, but when it's not a large system like money it happens much less and situations become much less desperate when people rely on themselves and their peers to survive. e.g. in the Western world, Bob is addicted to cocaine and needs some money to fulfill his addiction - he turns to crime and ends up mugging somebody - that causes serious distress. Whereas in the tribal world, there is much less room for this to happen as the world is less reliant on 'things' and physical mass; alas, when one needs something to live, those around them are most likely to support them by something which is far more readily available and can be taken from the ground - meat, vegetables or water. There is much less reason to steal as everything is not confined to the one limiting factor that we call currency. You take what you take, if you trade you barter.


A problem with the barter system is that there are many important jobs that don't include growing a food or making clothe or anything really tradeable, like firefighting, policing, psychoanalyzing etc.
I realise my tribal example isn't necessarily relevant when we're all Westerners. Alas, though, it can be reconfigured to the Western world. We could change tribes to communities, for example villages. A local shop sells food; those who supply for the local shop get a certain amount of food and a variety that they would not be able to produce alone, those who work in the shop with the people are given a certain amount of food; if it were based on a token system rather than a currency that is subject to inflation and economy, everyone would be provided for, you would genuinely work for what you and people are happy. So when one person in say a family of three works in a shop to get the food, another can be working in services such as firefighting or a paramedic job, even producing garments as in the shop exapmle - everyone contributes to the community and when organised it could be extremely successful without the barrier of money. This is essentially organised anarchy - people govern themselves, and there is much less control in human life. So, alas, my philosophical rant is over.

[Thanatos]

Yeah, but there are different kinds of greed. Greed for money results in crime, and other human beings being negatively affected. Greed for status or food can result in the same, but when it's not a large system like money it happens much less and situations become much less desperate when people rely on themselves and their peers to survive. e.g. in the Western world, Bob is addicted to cocaine and needs some money to fulfill his addiction - he turns to crime and ends up mugging somebody - that causes serious distress. Whereas in the tribal world, there is much less room for this to happen as the world is less reliant on 'things' and physical mass; alas, when one needs something to live, those around them are most likely to support them by something which is far more readily available and can be taken from the ground - meat, vegetables or water. There is much less reason to steal as everything is not confined to the one limiting factor that we call currency. You take what you take, if you trade you barter.

Ok Tribal world: Bob is addicted to cocaine. He runs out of cocaine, he kills a bunch of people and steals their cocaine.

Currency or items, same shit different name. Money does not cause greed or evil. Thats all part of human nature. Take away money and people will try and gain the largest amount of stuff. It really makes no difference.

[Peace God]

I'd rather not have to trade my stuff to get more stuff. I prefer the idea of money. I can have everything I want that I can afford. With the barter system, I'd have to give up stuff to get something new, and in all honesty, that's just ridiculous. If I buy something, I buy it because I either need it or I want it. Now, on both circumstances, said product is useful for me.
And how do you think money is acquired? It doesn't just fall in your hands, you have to sacrifice things for it as well.

[pageplant77]

Wow, this got off topic quick! haha
I was thinking more along the lines of "would a global currency be any good?"
Would it solve problems like the worldwide recession?
How could it be bad?

I was thinking about this the other day and I'm not very knowledgeable with economics.
So I wouldn't know how a global currency would work out in the real world.

[Perseus]

I'm thinking more hunter-gatherer. No one will really pump up an entire river or lake, kill all the animals in a large area or destroy loads of vegetable plants when everyone is dependent on only themselves. You know, tribal shit. I'm not a huge fan of Western culture. If I could have a rebirth, I'd definitely be born into some Mongolian tribe or shit. Raw humanity - unrestricted by barriers that states and supposed societies place onto us; reliant on only those and the closest around them to survive, where instinct and emotion prevails. Trade isn't really massively important to humanity in the first place.
I enjoy the 21st Century. I enjoy all this technology that we have and have created and will create. I would love to live a tribal life, like you do, because it would be very interesting since there's less people and more connectivity, but in a global population of seven billion, that's just not going to happen. Instead of wanting the unachievable, I will gladly enjoy what I have here in the 21st Century. I think your Mongolian example is awful since they were nomadic conquerors, which I would equate to as greed.
And how do you think money is acquired? It doesn't just fall in your hands, you have to sacrifice things for it as well.

Working for my money isn't really sacrificing in my eyes. Sure, selling things is, but the majority of people's money isn't selling their own things.

[Iris]

I realise my tribal example isn't necessarily relevant when we're all Westerners. Alas, though, it can be reconfigured to the Western world. We could change tribes to communities, for example villages. A local shop sells food; those who supply for the local shop get a certain amount of food and a variety that they would not be able to produce alone, those who work in the shop with the people are given a certain amount of food; if it were based on a token system rather than a currency that is subject to inflation and economy, everyone would be provided for, you would genuinely work for what you and people are happy. So when one person in say a family of three works in a shop to get the food, another can be working in services such as firefighting or a paramedic job, even producing garments as in the shop exapmle - everyone contributes to the community and when organised it could be extremely successful without the barrier of money. This is essentially organised anarchy - people govern themselves, and there is much less control in human life. So, alas, my philosophical rant is over.

I see what you're saying and it does make sense theoretically, but in practice it would never work. For one, we'd end up regressing to a stage where every one only looks out for themselves. There'd always be a fear of not obtaining basic items like food etc. if everyone has just what they need to survive and not more. There would still be fights between people but in a society like this it can mean death if you fight with the grocer, for example, because he/she can refuse to supply you with food. Second, there are many people who simply can't contribute to the community-people with mental or physical problems for example, and if society agrees to help support them then the support would ultimately be abused and it would throw off the balance of society. As for the family example where the other members support him/her, it wouldn't work out because at the end of the day the firefighter will be unable to leave or start a family because he/she has no means to support others, as he/she is already relying on family members. And what if he/she has no family members? Also you're underestimating the number of occupations that don't physically provide items. Third, members of this society would be confined to their small patch of land because if they leave to another town or country they will have no food (it'll be a different grocer), no shelter (you can't drag around a bag of fruit to pay for a night at the hotel), no transportation. There'd be ignorance about different cultures, and as the towns expand and encroach on the others territory there'd be lots of fighting.
Basically human nature would prevent us from obtaining the nice Utopian society you laid out.

[Peace God]

Working for my money isn't really sacrificing in my eyes.
:crazy: Why not? That's pretty much what work is.

[Korashk]

Excuse me? We have different currencies so we can have trading.
No, we have currency to make the facilitation of trade easier. There really isn't a need for multiple ones. Although, a one-world currency would be a bad idea, no competition.

Oh come on. Five bananas for five tomatoes - it's not too difficult...
Barter systems are woefully inefficient. There's no standard for value, not everything you have is worth something to someone else, way more risk to the individual than a currency based system, etc. I could go on.

[Perseus]

:crazy: Why not? That's pretty much what work is.

You're not giving up anything that you own to work, really, except for time and gas.

[Peace God]

You're not giving up anything that you own to work, really, except for time and gas.
Not giving up anything?

What you think people do when they go to work? They don't get paid for using their "time" and "gas", the get paid to work. What is work? Sacrificing effort, time, labor, skill, knowledge etc towards a certain goal.

The only time you are not giving up something is if you get paid for no reason at all, but that's not sacrifice...that's just getting paid for no reason at all.

[Perseus]

Not giving up anything?

What you think people do when they go to work? They don't get paid for using their "time" and "gas", the get paid to work. What is work? Sacrificing effort, time, labor, skill, knowledge etc towards a certain goal.

But it's still not like three chickens for a cow.

[SuperSuraj]

Wow, this got off topic quick! haha
I was thinking more along the lines of "would a global currency be any good?"
Would it solve problems like the worldwide recession?
How could it be bad?

I was thinking about this the other day and I'm not very knowledgeable with economics.
So I wouldn't know how a global currency would work out in the real world.

I'll answer your question while everyone else talks about going back in time to bartering haha

Imo it wouldnt be beneficial because it wouldnt stop the global recession, one collection of nationals will always be producing more than other simply because of geographical advantages. Therefore one nation holds the power (the nation producing what the other nations want) and thus they can swing things their way, forcing other nations to pay more for what they require to survive. Economic warfare, works much better than military war fare, this is basically how the Oil Producing Nations have the entire civilized world on a string.

Regardless of what currency we are using there will always be nations in control, and nations being controlled, thats economics imo, its just manipulating the world to benefit you. Idk i'm taking economics next year so i'll be waaay more knowledgeable on this kind of an idea, and maybe i'll bring it up in class? :)

Oh and the last thing, i don't think the global recession is entirely based on currency and inflation, while that is a huge part of it, the real issue is every single nation in the world runs on basically the same form of energy, while only a handful of nations produce that energy, without getting too far off topic, a global currency would simplify but not eradicate a global recession because of this reason alone, hope that helped a little haha, sorry for any typos i don't feel like checking i wrote too much :P

[pageplant77]

Idk i'm taking economics next year so i'll be waaay more knowledgeable on this kind of an idea, and maybe i'll bring it up in class? :)

lol I took economics last year. Trust me, It's really boring. I almost passed out in that class every day and I never really understood what was going on :what:
I only passed that class with a B.

But yeah, bring it up. I want to hear what they would say about this. (If this thread isn't locked by that time)

[SuperSuraj]

lol I took economics last year. Trust me, It's really boring. I almost passed out in that class every day and I never really understood what was going on :what:
I only passed that class with a B.

But yeah, bring it up. I want to hear what they would say about this. (If this thread isn't locked by that time)

I'll be in AP gov/ econ hahah it will probably be even more boring, but maybe i'll learn more? and i def will haha

[HaydenM]

no a worldwide currency wouldnt work. for one america wouldn't agree to it, australia wouldn't, uk wouldn't, no civilised culture would. It would be unregulated and corrupt. Imo it would screw the world up more than it would fix it. It would convert everything into a number. Physical currency would become redundant and once that happens it is easy to control anything and anyone by simply hacking.

[TheMatrix]

no a worldwide currency wouldnt work. for one america wouldn't agree to it, australia wouldn't, uk wouldn't,

I agree with this part.


no civilised culture would. It would be unregulated and corrupt.

Not necessarily.
With proper management and regulation, it could work........in principle.
In practice.........no. Greed will take over, and the whole thing would cause a global problem, and we already have enough of those.


It would convert everything into a number.

Isn't it already like that?


Physical currency would become redundant and once that happens it is easy to control anything and anyone by simply hacking.
Care to elabourate on how you can control anything by hacking? Money doesn't make us under the control of one particular person by them simply pressing a button, now does it? Is that what you meant?


Now I think I speak for all of us when I say that in principle, it is a good idea, but in practice it just wouldn't be possible and would cause problems.

[Huskyboy132]

I was just thinking about this. I went to romania with my school for a fieldtrip and now i realize, no fucking change center accepts Romanian Lei (their currency). A world wide currency would really make peoples lives so much easier, but of course, once you lose individual currencies you lose trading and would probably lead into another financial crisis.

[HaydenM]

Isn't it already like that?


Care to elabourate on how you can control anything by hacking? Money doesn't make us under the control of one particular person by them simply pressing a button, now does it? Is that what you meant?


A recent text i studied for english was a dystopian (alternate future) novel which part of the storyline was based on when money lost it's physicality. Money in today's society is based purely off a promise. That note in your hand is a promise by the government to say that it is worth something. If you cant physically hold your money then constraints can be put on it. It can be controlled by the government.

On the matter of a worldwide currency. Who would control it? It's great in theory to say it would be open but it would be run by the Brits probably (the highest currency as far as I am aware). It would be easily corruptible by any country to make them better off.

[Portable Desert]

I love the idea. Less confusing to have to convert and stuff.

[User Deleted]

Yep, we should go to metric in the U.S. too.

Maybe even consider choosing the easiest language as a global one.

[RoseyCadaver]

I think it would be cool to go back to the old silver and gold thing :),or trading.Either way I'm happy.

[CaliKid24]

nah, no competition. it wouldnt work.

[curtlaw]

What do you think about the idea of a Global currency?

Honestly, without different currencies, the global economy might as well kill itself.

[TheMatrix]

On the matter of a worldwide currency. Who would control it? It's great in theory to say it would be open but it would be run by the Brits probably (the highest currency as far as I am aware).
That's irrelevant. If a global currency were to be established, then all other currencies would "vanish". So the Brits, if they wanted to, would have to use other means of gaining control.

[pageplant77]

Now I think I speak for all of us when I say that in principle, it is a good idea, but in practice it just wouldn't be possible and would cause problems.

Just like communism. It looks good on paper, but in the real world, it sucks.

[TheMatrix]

Just like communism. It looks good on paper, but in the real world, it sucks.
Got it in one! Good job!

[Wicked_Syn]

Not a good idea.

There are some countries out there that are super poor, and the people in them have like no money..........so, if we like all have a single currency throughout the world, and it just so happens to be so much, then those countries that are super poor aren't going to have any cash!

[TheMatrix]

There are some countries out there that are super poor, and the people in them have like no money..........so, if we like all have a single currency throughout the world, and it just so happens to be so much, then those countries that are super poor aren't going to have any cash!
As if they had any in the first place. This would be neither an improvement nor "dis-improvement"(currency-wise); it might just be a hassle to implement.

[Sporadica]

our currency tells the world a little bit about ourselves. When we have a global currency or even a continental currency there's too much togetherness. I personally don't feel that the whole world should be together, we need to be different because it can help us show respect for each other

[SosbanFach]

There are EU countries not willing to join the Euro. Why would it be different for a worldwide currency?
£££££££££££££££££££££££££££

[pageplant77]

I personally don't feel that the whole world should be together, we need to be different because it can help us show respect for each other

Yes, because that's worked out so great in the past. Not saying that a global currency would solve any problems though.

[pineinchneis]

After the euro debt crisis, noones going to want to start a single currency, especially one induing economically weak countries like Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal.

[Maxxie]

A single bartering currency would become even more fractured and class-ist, seeing as how people don't always want the things you will have, and you don't want the things other people had. That's why legal tender works - it a singular, un-biased form of trade, albeit a bit unpredictable.

A singular WORLD currency would have way to many nations competing over the same currency, and look what happened in Europe. So, no. Keep government centralized and mandated currency in place, the world is already a shithole without more stuff to fuck it up.

[danny7]

Excuse me? We have different currencies so we can have trading.

true. If we had da same currency, what's the point of trading besides gettin anyting but profit?

One good comparison is: the U.S. and Puerto Rico has the U.S. currency. but in the U.S. something that costs $5 , in Puerto Rico dat exact same shit can cost like $11, trust me i've been there.. imagine the whole fukin world wif dat shit??

[TheMatrix]

true. If we had da same currency, what's the point of trading besides gettin anyting but profit?

One good comparison is: the U.S. and Puerto Rico has the U.S. currency. but in the U.S. something that costs $5 , in Puerto Rico dat exact same shit can cost like $11, trust me i've been there.. imagine the whole fukin world wif dat shit??
Please don't bump old threads.
:locked: