Reply #13: currency unions [View All]

[sweetheart]

In practice it would be like the EURO, except that it would be designed to be truly Global from the outset, and not just for a region of one continent.

All existing national currencies are set at a benchmark to the new
currency. They trade in parallel for a while, with the new currency
only for electronic transactions. Finally, the old currency is phased out. Then money is the same all over the planet and there are
no issues about credit worthiness in international trade. It is
the foundation for global goodwill.

A global standard for labour wages could globally equivalence labour pools, that the currency arbitrage (using labour) of today won't happen anymore.

It don't fix everything, but a few things certainly. It lays a good bedrock for a long term global peace and demilitarization. Free flow
of trade goes in parallel with tourism to open soft relations between
nations. The currency parity that a single currency would bring
would divest the profits that are today going to citibank, in to
the. Economic investment is made more efficient.

In practice, a massive communications and server-farm facilities in
each member nation. The central banking structure would have "federal reserve banks" in each nation state. The central banking function would stay with each national, just the whole game
of balancing trade flows, and having to maintain the balance of
payments.

The UN, until it gives up its "nucleocracy" (government by who has
nukes) and become a truly democratic instittuion, then indeed the
bank could be supervised from there.

The pooled goodwill would be the credit issuance policy. As it stands today, many non-dollar economies are effectively dollarized.
Then such places lose choice to create credit (print money) based on
social needs, with a steering committee of elected representatives.

The central bank for the currency would be global, and a supranational institution, like a central bank today is indpenedent,
except in a global sense.

If you search on "currency union"... "the economist" has chatted it
up in their issues in years past. www.economist.com