Martin Wolftotalexchangewith SGCAJ uly05 by 9oiuwiRH

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 2

									(as posted on Single Global Currency Website at
http://www.singleglobalcurrency.org/articles-non-aca.html )



6 July 2005. Martin Wolf of the Financial Times responds to Single Global
Currency Assn. question about G-8 conference and planning for the
Single Global Currency. (See below for that exchange and subsequent
emails.)
  In a July 2 column, Martin Wolf asked for feedback on what the G-8 conference
should do, and the single Global Currency Assn sent an EMAIL with the subject:
When will the G-8 initiate the planning for a Single Global Currency?
  His July 6 column, "G8: What is it for and how can it help the planet?"
carried the question, among others, and he answered:
    "When will the G8 initiate the planning for a single global
     currency?
  I believe a world currency may be a reasonable objective for the very long
term. But it is not politically or, in my judgment, economically feasible at
present. Monetary sovereignty is too important to too many countries.
  In addition, the changes in relative prices needed to cope with the rise of China,
India and other emerging nations are too large without currency flexibility. So,
for the moment, we need to make a success of a world of floating exchange
rates."

[To which morrison bonpasse, of the Single Global Currency Association
responded by EMAIL:]
   "Yes, but for how long must the "at present" or "moment" last? Given the
overwhelming propsective benefits to the people of the world which will come
from a single global currency, don't the leaders of the world have an obligation to
begin planning for its implementation? Shouldn't the welfare of the people of the
world be more important than the clinging to the often poorly used power of
monetary sovereignty? While there is currently stress in the eurozone, the
addition of ten new countries over the next few years will reinforce the view that
countries CAN choose the right monetary goals, i.e. stability over control.
   A 20-year plan would be reasonable. Just setting the Implementation Date as
a Goal would be a major step and would encourage much needed research. Even
announcing a goal of 30 or 40 or 50 years would be helpful.
   Taking the cue from your August 3, 2004 column where you wrote, " But if the
global market economy is to thrive over the decades ahead, a global currency
seems the logical concomitant," then cannot reasonable people plan for such a
"logical concomitant", even if it's for our children and grandchildren? "

[To which Mr. Wolf responded by EMAIL on 6 July with:]
"Half a century perhaps."

[To which morison bonpasse responded by EMAIL on 6 July:]
"Thanks very much. If you were to request in your column that the
leaders of the world should begin planning for a single global
currency by the year 2055, that would be very helpful. By Setting
a Date, you would add a touch of reality to the prospects.
Then people could start to analyze the schedule, with such
questions as, "What would the Global Central Bank look like, and by
what date would it have to be established?" and "What kind of
reserves would be needed, if any?" and even "What should be the
name of the single global currency?"
It took about 30 years to plan and implement the euro.

								
To top