PDA

View Full Version : "North American Currency"




awake
10-27-2009, 08:26 PM
It is still coming.. even though they deny it... Quote from todays finance committee meeting with Bank Of Canada head, Mark Carney


"Carney made his comments to the House of Commons finance committee when asked whether those hit hard by the strong and rapidly fluctuating Canadian dollar would not benefit more from a fixed rate or a North American currency."


http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSN2725326720091027


Should Canada and America share the same dollar?
"Canada could just adopt the U.S. dollar and be done with it,"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/should-canada-and-america-share-the-same-dollar/article1336523/

Zippyjuan
10-27-2009, 08:48 PM
The first article you post shows vigorous opposition to it in the Canadian Parliament. It does not support what you pretend it shows.

Let's get a bigger picture on just what you were quoting there- Carney was very against- not in favor of- fixed rates of exchange between the Canadian and US dollars- let alone going to a common currency.

OTTAWA, Oct 27 (Reuters) - Canada has no need for a fixed foreign exchange rate despite the damage done to manufacturers by the recent rapid rise in the value of the Canadian dollar, Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney said on Tuesday.

Carney made his comments to the House of Commons finance committee when asked whether those hit hard by the strong and rapidly fluctuating Canadian dollar would not benefit more from a fixed rate or a North American currency.

"There's certainly nothing we've seen through the course of the crisis that has lessened our view that Canada is well served by having the policy combination of the floating exchange rate and inflation targeting," he said.



The second piece is merely an editorial expressing an opinion.

awake
10-27-2009, 09:00 PM
The question for a North American Currency was asked by a committee member to him. Of course he is going to be against it, just like he says he is against inflation by creating it.

Both stories are from today...

pcosmar
10-27-2009, 09:01 PM
The first article you post shows vigorous opposition to it in the Canadian Parliament. It does not support what you pretend it shows.

Let's get a bigger picture on just what you were quoting there- Carney was very against- not in favor of- fixed rates of exchange between the Canadian and US dollars- let alone going to a common currency.


The second piece is merely an editorial expressing an opinion.

I think his point was that the Question is still being debated.

Had the idea ever been completely rejected, there would be no debate.

Zippyjuan
10-27-2009, 09:01 PM
So saying you are against something means you are for it?

Sandman33
10-27-2009, 09:09 PM
I think they are skipping the NAU currency and going straight for the IMF World Bank Global currency.

The jig is up. More people are waking up every day and they are upset. That means time is short and they are forced to rush their agenda.

Henceforth the coming climate treaty in Copenhagen.

Zippyjuan
10-27-2009, 09:19 PM
Canada is concerned about the value of their currency against the dollar. Europe is too because that gives the US a tiny advantage in trade at their expense (lower dollar means higher prices for US imports and lower prices for US exports). The concern over the exchange rates is what caused the question to be raised by somebody. But moving to a common currency also would mean surrendering the control of their own economy to the United States- a move I doubt the Canadians would ulitmately make. Parts of Europe are starting to regret the control they surrendered when they joined the Euro.

Bruno
10-27-2009, 09:21 PM
I think they are skipping the NAU currency and going straight for the IMF World Bank Global currency.

The jig is up. More people are waking up every day and they are upset. That means time is short and they are forced to rush their agenda.

Henceforth the coming climate treaty in Copenhagen.

I share your concern and couldn't agree more.

Dieseler
10-27-2009, 09:27 PM
What are they called, International Drawing Rights?
Something like that.
We fight the Fed and the Fed turns the ball over to the IMF.
Same thing except its just Global now and we surely can't touch it anymore at all.
Game Over.

paulitics
10-27-2009, 09:34 PM
I think they are skipping the NAU currency and going straight for the IMF World Bank Global currency.

The jig is up. More people are waking up every day and they are upset. That means time is short and they are forced to rush their agenda.

Henceforth the coming climate treaty in Copenhagen.

This. People are waking up, the damn earth refuses to warm contradicting their BS climate models, etc. NAU went down in flames with the immigration fiasco over the last 2 years. They are getting desperate.

Austrian Econ Disciple
10-27-2009, 10:41 PM
This. People are waking up, the damn earth refuses to warm contradicting their BS climate models, etc. NAU went down in flames with the immigration fiasco over the last 2 years. They are getting desperate.

We need to work to rid ourselves of NAFTA, CAFTA, Nato, UN, etc. and stay ever vigilant in regards to protocols such as Copenhagen, and their ilk. Just curious has Ron introduced any bills that would abolish our funds for the UN, remove ourselves, remove the UN from US soil, and abolish NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. and remove ourselves from NATO?

Sandman33
10-28-2009, 01:05 AM
We need to work to rid ourselves of NAFTA, CAFTA, Nato, UN, etc. and stay ever vigilant in regards to protocols such as Copenhagen, and their ilk. Just curious has Ron introduced any bills that would abolish our funds for the UN, remove ourselves, remove the UN from US soil, and abolish NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. and remove ourselves from NATO?

EVERY ABC agency needs to be abolished...from the FBI to the CIA to NAFTA to the IMF.

jmdrake
10-28-2009, 09:42 AM
So saying you are against something means you are for it?

Dude. You're missing the point. If the question wasn't even on the table then someone wouldn't need to be against it! Nobody's arguing that the official being quoted is for a North American currency, but rather his opposition is evidence that such a proposal is a real issue.

For the life of me I don't know why you're even debating this. Former president Vicente Fox admitted plans for a North American currency years ago. Maybe promoting "conspiracy theories" makes us look "crazy", but denying them after they have been admitted makes us look stupid.

YouTube - Vicente Fox hints about a North American Union (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYGrn0hZlCQ)

Regards,

John M. Drake