Magical Sailor Fuku

Which one is it for you? Would you rather a return to the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates based on the gold standard or the current system of floating rates and adjustable pegs? Or possibly scrap the system alltogether and impliment a world currency?

Or you could not understand a single word in the above sentence...

Well, a fixed exchange rate could spark problems... Terra? What do you know about Germany's financial condition at the moment? Las time I heard anything about it, they were still quite poor as a country, because of WW2 expenses....A world currency would have the same problem, because, again, currency IS backed by gold, and some countries don't exactly have such a thing in large enough quantities.

i think the current system is more reliable, and flexible, but it has quite alot more to do with supply and demand than the other two, seeing as fixed rates aren't very important here, it usually will end up costing more as time progresses....
Or, I could be completely wrong on ALL accounts, and just be acting upon my cracked way of viewing things....

What does my post count have to do with anything? O.o;

And I'm not all that knowledgable about this stuff, but the way the US has their currency is a joke. To the whole world.

Regardless, anyone that knows me knows that I want to scrap currency altogether. But I'll choose the fourth option since that more or less fits my response. Because I could care less about currency sticking around. ;p

I thought I pointed that out...but, I guess I wasn't specific enough...
I mean, if there IS something that speaks every language, it is gold, or else, Fort Knox wouldn't be needed...
Though...where does the money you give to people at airports to exchange for other currency go?

Hmm... I though It was a CSS question...

Floating currency is the easiest aproach to balance things and interests between contries. It will be very hard to change it.

"Fixed rate" doesn't mean gold standard. For isntance China (up until recently) didn't have a gold backed currency, but their rate was fixed versus the US dollar.

I chose that option though, because I get the gist of what you're trying to say.

When bankers can create money out of thin air poverty spreads. Gold, silver, seashells? Salt? Sticks. Whatever. But let it all be backed by something physical.

*Grabs a box of pocky and munches it quietly whilst the adults discuss their silly worldly issues* ^_^

Where did you hear that Germany is poor OwS? No matter what then it isn't true. Of the major countries in Europe Germany is the richest and that is despite the problems with poor integration of the former DDR into the economy of the BRD. Also Germany didn't really suffer much economic hardship over the second world war as no reparations were demanded and it was even included in the Marshall aid. Now before the second world war it suffered quite a lot under the effects of the first world war, perhaps that is what you have been thinking about.

To deal with the question at hand then i have to say floating exchange rates. Not only does they allow the authorities of any given country to regulate the flow of money to fit the overall economical goals of that country. It also means that the economy can adapt to outside influences and to changing conditions. Having an overinflated currency is also prevented by the use of floating exchange rates.

All that being said if a group of countries, such as the EU, has very close economic ties they need to fix their exchange rates with each other in order to avoid the unity breaking and the common economic policy to fail due to internal competition between the different currencies within it.

On a related note, since I have been watching the economy slowly prepare to implode... gold has hit $700 an ounce @_@

[url=Found: Provision in Iraq bill bars US watchdog, auditors
from monitoring reconstruction money... Developing...]Yahoo News[/url].

And the DOW is about to hit a record high. Yet another set up for a great fall...