UN wants new global currency to replace dollar

[Cliffy]

If you can't find proof you are a stockholder or stock owner of the Corporation of Canada or the Crown Corporations of Canada have a boo at the Banking Act Section 457 about banks creating the money in Canada.

Seems money is worthless as you say;

Update: It seems that the above text was quietly passed into law in December of 1991, via Bill C-19. I need to find a reputable source for this.
What it says is that when this act is passed into law, the bank reserve requirement will fall over a 25 month period until the Bank Act of Canada no longer requires the bank to keep ANY reserves.
What i did find was Bill C-84. This bill was sponsored by the Minister of Justice and was described as:
An Act to correct certain anomalies, inconsistencies and errors and to deal with other matters of a non-controversial and uncomplicated nature in the Statutes of Canada and to repeal certain Acts that have ceased to have effect
This a housecleaning bill. Section 457 is one of them. If you have a “time bombed” clause like section 457 and it has expired, why keep it in the Act? In other words, it is a lot nicer saying:
457. [Repealed, 1999, c. 31, s. 14]
than:
457. “We changed this requirement. Banks don’t have to have ANY money in the vault to back their loans. We, the government of Canada, authorize them to mint as much checkbook money out of thin air as the market will bear. We will stay out of the banks business as they must know what they are doing. However, if they screw up, we will make sure the citizen bails them out via inflation and extortion…ooops, we meant taxation. Well, we would do that anyway. Good luck with that!”
This is why if you look at the Bank Act today, you will see no mention of any reserve requirements at all.

 

[Liberalman]

I sometimes feel that a world currency would be better since we do a lot of trading with other countries and it would put everybody on a level playing field.

This would give bring back the jobs to this country because there would be no advantage of setting up manufacturing in other countries.

 

[earth_as_one]

Quoting earth_as_one Canada's system is a little different. Privately owned banks print 95% of Canada's money. 5% is printed by the Canadian government.

Can you explain that? I'm not sure I follow you.

That's a little difference. Read the rest of the referenced paragraph for the rest of the differences.

Even though Canadian banks print most of our money, they don't print all of it. Also Canadian banks are tightly controlled and regulated by the Bank of Canada. Ultimately Canada's banks are backed up by the Bank of Canada. Since the Bank of Canada is fully owned by the Canadian government, Canadians back up Canada's banks. All Bank of Canada profits go to the Canadian government, not private interests.

In the US all money is printed by Americans banks held by private interests. The American banking industry is far less regulated and controlled than Canadian banks and the Federal Reserve is 100% controlled by private interests. Recently American tax payers have been put on the hook for the failings of their bankers, even though they never see any of the profits.

Regarding the Euro, I would not be in favor of giving up the Canadian dollar and adopting the Euro. I'm ok with being flexible in international trade, but we should use the Canadian dollar when possible. (in other words try to get other nations to hold our currency so we can increase Canadian bank profits (Though printing money and inflation).

I agree somewhat with Petros, that we already have an international currency with gold. I would include all precious metals (Silver and platinum). I would also include all commodities as a form of international currency ie: oil, copper, iron, grains, hogbellies...

 

[Machjo]

I sometimes feel that a world currency would be better since we do a lot of trading with other countries and it would put everybody on a level playing field.

Obviously.

This would give bring back the jobs to this country because there would be no advantage of setting up manufacturing in other countries.

8O This would cost jobs in the short term since the advantage would automaticlaly accrue to the poorer country. Canada is not among the poorest countries, and so would not benefit in the short term. In fact if anything, in the short term it woudl cost jobs, especially in currency trading sector.

This does not mean however that it's not a good idea. The job losses woudl be temporary, only in the transition stage, as this policy would also save money for those who before had to spend money on currency traders. Over time, they'd simply end up spending that money on something else, thus creaint new jobs elsewhere, but we hope they'd be more valuable jobs and not make-work jobs like currency trading.


So yes, a world currency woudl be beneficial from the standpoint of efficiency, but by definition, increased efficiency also means job losses. So though there would be benefits, job creation woudl have nothing to do with that.

 

[earth_as_one]

What authority would control and regulate a world currency? Who would profit from printing money and inflation?

 

[Machjo]

Machjo, if currency traders are opposed to it, I am convinced that it is a good idea. Also I notice that Jack Layton supports Canada adopting the Euro. Interesting. If Euro becomes more widely used, if UN designates it as a world currency we should definitely look into adopting the Euro.

I'm sure you figured it out already, but tone of voice cannot be heard online, so just to be sure, you did notice that it was in teh fun and jokes section, right.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

At last resort, Parliament would still have the power if it wished to impose policies on the Bank of Canada, whether to stabilize the currency, promote inflation, or otherwise.

Parliament wouldn’t do that Machjo, except in an emergency.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Well, up to now, I thought that'd be a good idea. But now you've said that, I have my doubts.

Does that mean if I tell you not to vote liberal, that you will vote Liberal?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I sometimes feel that a world currency would be better since we do a lot of trading with other countries and it would put everybody on a level playing field.

This would give bring back the jobs to this country because there would be no advantage of setting up manufacturing in other countries.

Liberalman, in effect we did have one currency when we had the gold standard, before gold standard was abolished. In the old days, currency used to be fixed, the value did not change all the time. Third world counties used to officially devalue their currency from time to time, to reflect the economic conditions.

If value of all the currencies relative to each other remains fixed, in effect that is not any different from having a single currency. But after they let the currencies float freely, now there may be a need for world currency.

That need would disappear if we went back to the gold standard and fixed currencies.

 

[Machjo]

Parliament wouldn’t do that Machjo, except in an emergency.

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that it stillhas that power.

 

[Machjo]

Does that mean if I tell you not to vote liberal, that you will vote Liberal?

You take care of your health? Huh, I won't do that anymore then.

 

[Machjo]

Liberalman, in effect we did have one currency when we had the gold standard, before gold standard was abolished. In the old days, currency used to be fixed, the value did not change all the time. Third world counties used to officially devalue their currency from time to time, to reflect the economic conditions.

If value of all the currencies relative to each other remains fixed, in effect that is not any different from having a single currency. But after they let the currencies float freely, now there may be a need for world currency.

That need would disappear if we went back to the gold standard and fixed currencies.

The gold standard was different from a world currency. Sure it provided stability, but currency trading was still needed for international trade.

 

[AnnaG]

Does that mean if I tell you not to vote liberal, that you will vote Liberal?

:roll: Don't be childish.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The gold standard was different from a world currency. Sure it provided stability, but currency trading was still needed for international trade.

Machjo, as I recall, there was no currency trading in old days the values of currencies were fixed against each other. I think currency trading started after gold standard was abolished.

If the price of each currency is fixed against gold, that effectively means that prices of all currencies are fixed relative to each other. In some respects, that is similar to having a world currency, in that there is no advantage in owning one currency as compared to another (there was no currency trading).

 

[petros]

What authority would control and regulate a world currency? Who would profit from printing money and inflation?

Read up on inflation in Zimbabwe and the German bank note printer (Canada contracts to these volks too) that made a fortune.

Wednesday, Jul. 02, 2008
Cutting Off Zimbabwe's Currency

By Thomas Marzahl / Berlin

Bowing to a request from the German government, a German company that has been supplying Zimbabwe's embattled regime with bank note paper has stopped its deliveries, further increasing pressure on President Robert Mugabe.
The Munich-based firm Giesecke & Devrient, which reportedly supplies about half the southern African country's skyrocketing needs for paper to print money, made the decision after its president received a phone call Tuesday from German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
"We have taken this step in response to an official request from the German government and calls for sanctions on Zimbabwe from the European Union," Heiko Witzke, a company spokesman, said Wednesday.
A Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said that in his call to CEO Karsten Ottenberg, Steinmeier underlined the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe and the mounting calls for stiffer sanctions on the Mugabe regime. She said the ministry had been holding talks with the company for several weeks.
Germany's development minister, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, had written to the company last week asking that it stop its "terrible" dealings with Mugabe, who was sworn in Sunday after he stood as the only candidate for reelection. Protesters brandishing placards saying "No cash for terror" also demonstrated outside the firm's headquarters last week.
Zimbabwe's opposition movement has been brutally suppressed and its candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai, withdrew from the presidential contest prior to the vote, citing violence and intimidation.
Hyperinflation, estimated at 1 million to 2 million percent per year, is running rampant in the economically devastated country. Zimbabwe's central bank cannot keep up with the demand for ever larger bills and the paper to print them on.
Bank note denominations now run to 75 billion Zimbabwean dollars. A pint of milk, if it can be found at all, can now cost 3 billion dollars, or about 30 U.S. cents.
The company's code of conduct states that its products and services "contribute to the social progress and technological advancement of society." Asked whether supplying a government widely regarded as despotic with paper for its currency violated that code, the spokesman said Giesecke & Devrient did not involve itself in "political" issues. "The important point is that it's not up to us to rely on political considerations in supplying bank note paper," he said. "We only deliver to central banks, not regimes."
The German company, whose slogan is "creating confidence," supplies central banks and governments in nearly 100 countries with high-security paper for bank notes and other financial instruments. Its 2007 sales were $2.46 billion. In its annual report, the company stated that its bank note business with African countries had been especially successful. Giesecke & Devrient said World Bank regulations prohibited it from revealing details of its contracts with Zimbabwe.
Citing a bill issued to a Harare printing firm, Munich's Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that in March, Giesecke & Devrient delivered bank note paper worth $856,000 to Zimbabwe. The spokesman would neither confirm nor deny the figure.
The family-owned firm once supplied the Weimar government of 1920s Germany with paper for its currency at a time of hyperinflation, and also printed the tickets for the 1936 Olympics during the Third Reich. Its current business also includes smart-card technology, integrated chips to store biometric data and border-control systems.

 

[einmensch]

Who prints our bank notes?

The Bank of Canada Act of 1934 stipulates that the Bank of Canada has exclusive authority to issue bank notes. In that capacity, it handles the design, production, control, and distribution of notes. It is also responsible for preserving public confidence in our bank notes.

Because the printing process is complex and requires specialized equipment and knowledge, the Bank does not print bank notes. The printing is handled by two Canadian firms: BA Banknote Inc. and the Canadian Bank Note Company Limited.

Each firm prints 40 bank notes to a sheet. BA Banknote Inc. prints sheets of 10 notes down and four across, and the Canadian Bank Note Company Limited prints sheets of eight notes down and five across.

Bank of Canada is a private company with a catchy name
Air Canada is also a private company

The only reason Rothschild isn't on coins and $20 notes is because he said so---The Federal Reserve is a private company-- The 3 Pesidents that printed currency were all assasinated. Does the bank of Canada pay taxes??
Banks tell us how may hospitals we may have and where we need to cut expenses
A bank creates $$ out of nothing--simply types the amount ,sends it to an account, and collects from 4-18% interest on the amount--cool business--and who owns it?

 

[Machjo]

Machjo, as I recall, there was no currency trading in old days the values of currencies were fixed against each other. I think currency trading started after gold standard was abolished.

If the price of each currency is fixed against gold, that effectively means that prices of all currencies are fixed relative to each other. In some respects, that is similar to having a world currency, in that there is no advantage in owning one currency as compared to another (there was no currency trading).

Even then, if I was a Canadian consumer and I wanted to buy a book from Germany, I'd still have needed to exchange enough Canadian dollars for a sufficiently-valued money order or bank draft to then post to the publisher in Germany to send me the book. In that case, the bank or the post office woudl have served as the currency trader and would certainly have made at least some profit for the service.
Of course technology has progressed, but the principle is still the same today. Even if we had a gold standard today, if I wanted to buy that book, I could buy it online using my Canadian credit card in euros an woudl of course liely be charged for the conversion or alternatively not get as good an exchange rate as the banks.

So the gold standard is by no means synonymous with a world currency; it's only a standard to which a particular currency may be pinned.

 

[Machjo]

SJP, perhaps I should clarify that by the term currency trader I was not using it in the limited sense of full-time professional specialized currency traders who make a living buying and selling money, but rather anyone who provides the service of converting money, be it the post office selling a foreign-currency money-order, the bank selling a foreign bank draft, the automatic teller in the US giving you US dollars though your bank card only has Canadian dollars, etc. etc. etc. All of these services can qualify as currency trading, even if currency trading may be a side business or just a part of the business in most cases.

 

[ironsides]

What authority would control and regulate a world currency? Who would profit from printing money and inflation?

Some idiotic group like the World Bank would be given the authority, and who owns them, why The Federal Reserve System of course. Run buy a world consortium of bankers. Nothing will change and the world will go on.

 

[Machjo]

Some idiotic group like the World Bank would be given the authority, and who owns them, why The Federal Reserve System of course. Run buy a world consortium of bankers. Nothing will change and the world will go on.

But it would still eradicate make-workd jobs for currency-traders, thus saving us money. So it would still be a step in the right direction no matter how you cut it.