Knowing that a countrys currency is valued by how much gold it has and that the US is second to the Euro, i don't think a unified currency would be good. The united states is the land of the free and i think that we should be free from stuff like this. Besides, that would be the first step in controlling our minds Joking........ or am I.


WATCH OUT FOR THE FREE MASONS

AS in another thread regarding the Euro vs the Dollar, or a couple threads even, we would go into instant depression if not for the free "loan" we get from many other countries using out dollar. It is probably the only thing that propped our economy from total failure during the GW years. Without oil being bought on dollars- well, there are plenty of economists on this site that could fill in the details on this one.

We are not able to combine, suffice to say, and remain a super power currently, but perhaps if we had a smaller deficit and debt, it might be workable, and in the future, work to our advantage.

No No and definitely Not! To directly tie our economy into theirs "NEW WORLD ORDER!". Please I can barely stomach the UN. Masons. I personally like the all seeing eye on the dollar! I do watch out for the Masons, going to the Feast of the Pascal Lamb tonight, I'll be watching out all night long

I am split on the issue. I voted no, because I like the way dollars look. I mean, Have you seen the new 20?

But seriously, I am not sure if we should just immediately unify with the Euro, but I see nothing wrong with accepting that as currency also here. I believe it would make trade easier and friendlier among international tourists, and since the UN is centered here anyway, maybe we should allow space for both currencies.

Ok, have you seen the average person working in McDonalds these days? They put pictures on the cash register, so that the food would be rung up correctly. They even have to test and train employees on the basics of making change just in case the register drops offline.

Can you imagine the confusion and problems this would create at your local McDonalds, Wal-Mart, or OSCO Drug store??

This is not meant as an attack on anyone with these jobs (I had each one of them at one time) but an indictment of the poor state of our education system in the US.

I wish we could be a Euro country but I think that the EU would DENY us because of our unchecked spending, our unwillingness to cooperate internationally, our debt that we never try to pay off, etc.

The maximum allowed budget deficit under the Euro stability pact is 3% of GDP.

But if the USA would seriously want to join the Euro zone, I'm sure something could be worked out

I'm afraid the Fed will have to go though...

I don't want to come off as someone who thinks he knows everything, so I apologize beforehand. But as a student at UGA, and being an Economics major at that, who's attempting to write his graduation thesis on the privatization of paper currency, I want to think I can shed some light here.

*UGA Boy, how interesting to see another Dawg in here. Quite refreshing.*

First off, the dollar is off the gold standard. It's fiat money, which basically means that it is backed by itself. In the old days of a silver-backed or gold-backed dollar, you could go to the treasury and get a dollar's worth of silver or gold. However now, if you go to the treasury and ask for a hard asset, they'll probably look at you funny. Today, how much gold the U.S. Treasury has means little in terms of the effects to printing currency.

If you look at the statistics from anywhere you might be able to find them (I would suggest one of the websites to one of the Federal Reserve Banks such as the St. Louis Fed, or possibly the CIA Factbook) you will find out that there is a substantial amount of printed U.S. currency in circulation...enough to amount that every U.S. citizen should have over $1,000 just laying around. Granted some people might do that, but I throw that off because I have about $20 in my wallet right now, and that's the only physical currency I have. The only explanation for there being so many Federal Reserve Notes in circulation is that many of them are in foreign countries. So in essence, for the most part we do have a generally unified currency system in the world. It's dominated by a few front-runners with some smaller players as well.

And we've learned in the course of history that competition is a good thing, and competition between money can be a positive element as well.

I actually voted yes on this one but CNVipers' post has actually kindof changed my mind a little. The competition between currencies does have a beneficial effect on economies. On the other hand, we only use our money internationally for trade, and I don't see how taking the SAME form of money as apposed to a DIFFERENT form of money would directly hinder the trade process. To rid ourselves of the dollar though is not something that could realistically be spoken about publicly, with all the flag-wavers stalking about.

Hero, first off, your avatar, edited to remove profanities I admire that. I'm saving it to use as a chat avatar.

But to your inquiry. The trade process wouldn't be hindered much, if at all. It's the fact that there is money to be made in money. Exchange rate differences can lead to a decent return at times. It's all a matter of how a company may want to make money, I suppose. To have one unified currency, it stabilizes that exchange rate risk. Some people like the risk for the return, others do not. And also it leaves seigniorage to the one treasury or entity that prints the money. And given politics, I doubt that most countries would like to forego making money off of printing it.

The answer is no because the currency is the method through which the Fed controls the economy.

The Fed can do a few things to stimulate or reign in the economy: print (or recall) money, or raise (or lower) interest rates, but (or sell) government bonds, and changing reserve requirements for banks.

Going to the Euro would restrict our ability to use monetary policy to control the economy. It would also tie the European economy much more tightly to ours (which some may see as a good thing, but some separation has great advantages).

The reasoning is this: when there is too much money in circulation compared to what the economy needs, inflation occurs because the value has decreased because the supply outstrips the demand. If money were ever in shorter supply then needed, then the value of the dollar would increase.

The government usually does not directly print or destroy money. It uses government bonds to increase or decrease the supply of money. If it sells bonds, it is putting money into the system. If it buys bonds back, it is tightening the money supply.

A decent write up explaining this: Definitions of Monetary policy

The EU's policy of mandating a balanced budget is flawed from an economic point of view (but I won't go into that now...). Basically, there is little you can do to ensure that a budget stays balanced, since outlays are fixed and incomes (taxes) are variable. Budget deficits, however, are not directly linked to monetary policy, since the issuance of bonds is a zero sum equation (or should be in a responsible government).

I have no idea and no opinion!

I don't know anything about economics, gold standards, currency or even where the free masons fit in to all of this

I don't see a reason for the US to join a single currency, particularly one with a continental specific name like 'euro'. Perhaps in the distant future, a global currency would be nice. To me, the only benefits of a single currency is less hastle when going abroad, but my country is still sitting on the fence on the euro issue. I'm sure there are many other beneifts, and I'm sure most of these will never affect me directly. I think the euro was important for Europe as we had so many different currencies and yet we practically overlap each other every 100 miles or so. It was just plain inconvenient from the POV of John Smith (or Jean Smith rather) on the street.

Piperplexed Calm down! Its just a currency. Besides, NWO is a US plot...you should be in favour...

Adopting the same currency ties economies in. Whilst it has huge political ramifications (i.e. an indication that the US and EU were going to work together for the mutual good), I think the economies of the US (growth orientated, general lack of welfare state) and Euro area (low growth, high welfare states etc) are too structurally different at the moment.

To be honest it still remains to be seen whether the Euro is going to survive as a currency at all, so perhaps its a little early to start planning the entry of the US into the Eurozone (plus we'd have to change the name).

Starting Point for a New Topic:
Why should the US goin the Eropean Union? Some of the states in the US are of comparable size and population. Why not have the Nation-States of Europe join the US and the US change its name to 'United States of Terria'? ('terria is [i think] is another name for Earth)

Back to old topic:
Currently it is a bad idea:
Umongus national dept
the economy is tructered different.
(others issues should be here, but i can't think of any )

Although I'm no economist, I don't think joining the EU and becoming a Euro country would help us any. I don't see why we should join if not all the European countries want to join. Sweden, United Kingdom, and Denmark are still against the idea of the Euro and will probably not be joining anytime soon. I think that joining the EU can provide stability for some countries (like Croatia, Estonia, Latvia) that need it, but others such as the UK and the US do not need this type of stability.

Eruo Info

I am very much in favor of the United States controlling its own economy and other policies. The EU represents mainly German and French policies, yes I know that there are several other nations within the EU, etc. But when push comes to shove those two nations have the largest influence on most of the EU's policies.

Given that no I do not ever want the EU to have any say in American policies. They have there own to mess up.

Besides as a Free Mason I like out currency too.

I don't think it's so much as question of whether or not the US should merge with the EU as whether or not the EU would let us. And the answer to that would be a resounding "NO". part of the whole rationale behind European union is the opposition of American hegemony, whether we (or the EU) like to admit it or not. The EU allowing the US to merge with them economically would be like hens forming an alliance with a fox.

Besides, membership in the economic union is contingent upon membership in the EC - and that requires a few things which the US would never countenance - like the abolition of capital punishment. As long as the US remains as barbarous as it is - and as long as there's the potential for a neocon government with designs on the world (like our current one) to seize the reigns of American power, this question will remain purely academic: the EU does not want us and would not have us.

The EU doesn't want....that's fine. If we ever adopted the Euro (which would make no sense, seeing as we are not in Europe), that our economy would not be ours. Someone else, other than the American people, would be in control of it. That takes away national sovereignty and that is something Americans will want to give up.

France's Adherence to balanced budgeting...


Europe's Unfunded Pension Iceberg looming...

Given that the EU is unable to coordinate its own economic policy in a satisfactory fashion, I fail to see any reason to merge currencies.

I disagree.....France (almost alone) wants the EU to be able to counter the US. The UK doesn't, Germany doesn't, Italy, Spain, Scandinavia & the central & eastern European countries certainly don't. Most European countries still remember why NATO exists and that the US helped us when Germany invaded AND brought down the Soviets.

There are 25 countries in the EU. Technically there are all equal. It is true that there is a Franco-German alliance that was the 'original' EU and the main engine in the 'Gang of 6' when the EU only had 6 countries.
When Britain joined (which the French opposed) their influence was greatly weakened , as Britain is comparable in economic power and also has the strongest military in the EU.

With 25 countries, many of them strongly pro-US, in the EU, the influence of France and Germany has been greatly weakened. The EU does not stand opposed to America and never will.

And there is always an argument for advanced economies to merge (that is what the EU is) - but the US and EU are too different at the moment. Competition between currencies is never that useful, as in the world today, the strength of a currency is only loosely connected to the strength of a countries economy, international events also play a large role. The gains from merging currencies of similar economies are great - as a larger economic area is the result, but dissimilar economies end up constraining each other if they merge.

I firmly believe we should in no way subject ourselves to adopting the Euro. To do otherwise is to give up U.S. liberty. We're not even a part of Europe. I actually think other countries should adopt the dollar. We're the ones who have ended wars. The U.S. was the country that ended World War II. I would be willing to settle for an Earth coin. On one side it would have a peace symbol - you know a bar that extends into three bars surrounded by a circle. The otherside would be a picture of Earth. I do believe that adopting any such coin would require the US to make it clear to the UN that the US would not surrender to the UN.