Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

**Ocean1** · 14th February 2016, 20:15

Originally Posted by Brian d marge

oh really

Prices fell 0.5% in fourth quarter, the most since 2008
Currency slumps more than half a U.S. cent after data

New Zealand is on the brink of deflation after prices fell more than economists forecast in the fourth quarter, heaping pressure on the central bank to cut interest rates to a fresh record low.

and I'm a fk wit ? at least I have a clue whats going on

So not only is inflation a dead certain killer of monetary policy deflation is too?

I can sorta see where you get your can't possibly win argument strategies from.

**Brian d marge** · 14th February 2016, 20:18

Originally Posted by bogan

A number of times on this page, and also way back in post #958

Using a currency to make hostile acts on another currency is a superceding action; not an inherent attribute to cause the inevitable failure of all currency.

Specifically, your example is not well supported by market dynamics (rapidity of buying high and selling low will actually deflate it, not inflate it), and I'd be surprised if such actions had ever been taken in any sort of widespread way.

#post 958 ;
I know what a currency is and does; medium of exchange (trade), standardised value measure, and storage of account.

these quotes from your own source:
"At present there are 177 currencies being used in the world"
"Excluding the early paper currencies of China up until the 15th century and the majority of paper currencies that existed in China until 1935, there are 609 currencies no longer in circulation. Of these, at least 153 were destroyed as a result of hyperinflation caused by over-issuance. The remainder were revalued, destroyed by military occupation/liberation, renamed for political reasons, or were converted to another currency. "

So from your own source, there are more currencies currently in use now, than have failed. And all that have failed have been due to hyperinflation from over-issuance.

http://www.rapidtrends.com/history-o...oney-failures/

and the other one I quote ....

A study you might find intriguing was done on 775 fiat currencies by DollarDaze.org. In this study, it determined that: “There is no historical precedence for a fiat currency that has succeeded in holding its value.”

The study showed that 20% failed through hyperinflation, 21% were destroyed by war, 12% destroyed by independence, 24% were monetarily reformed, and 23% are still in circulation and approaching one of the other outcomes.

So again unless I missed some thing .... I think it was me ,,,

So as long as inflation is kept under control by issuance (basic govt function), there is no historical evidence that a currency can fail (the remainder categories are obviously in the superceded/converted category).

Obviously hyperinflation is not my idea of success either, but it is in minority; extreme minority if you weight it by represented value exchange. To say all money fails just because some has, is completely illogical.

Ummmmnnnnn No, idependence would be the minority .......

Carry on .....let me know when ya tire

**bogan** · 14th February 2016, 20:31

Originally Posted by Brian d marge

#post 958 ;
I know what a currency is and does; medium of exchange (trade), standardised value measure, and storage of account.

these quotes from your own source:
"At present there are 177 currencies being used in the world"
"Excluding the early paper currencies of China up until the 15th century and the majority of paper currencies that existed in China until 1935, there are 609 currencies no longer in circulation. Of these, at least 153 were destroyed as a result of hyperinflation caused by over-issuance. The remainder were revalued, destroyed by military occupation/liberation, renamed for political reasons, or were converted to another currency. "

So from your own source, there are more currencies currently in use now, than have failed. And all that have failed have been due to hyperinflation from over-issuance.

http://www.rapidtrends.com/history-o...oney-failures/

and the other one I quote ....

A study you might find intriguing was done on 775 fiat currencies by DollarDaze.org. In this study, it determined that: “There is no historical precedence for a fiat currency that has succeeded in holding its value.”

The study showed that 20% failed through hyperinflation, 21% were destroyed by war, 12% destroyed by independence, 24% were monetarily reformed, and 23% are still in circulation and approaching one of the other outcomes.

So again unless I missed some thing .... I think it was me ,,,

So as long as inflation is kept under control by issuance (basic govt function), there is no historical evidence that a currency can fail (the remainder categories are obviously in the superceded/converted category).

Obviously hyperinflation is not my idea of success either, but it is in minority; extreme minority if you weight it by represented value exchange. To say all money fails just because some has, is completely illogical.

Ummmmnnnnn No, idependence would be the minority .......

Carry on .....let me know when ya tire

The quote I higlighted in that post, the bit you rewrote, is pretty clear "all that have failed have been due to hyperinflation from over-issuance" so yeh, you missed it again, twice, while both specifically searching for it, and when it was specifically pointed out to you.

Holding it's value is not required, nor desired, for success. You're taking the results way out of context.

Hyperinflation is the only failure option listed, the others are not failures (destroyed, reformed, still going); so that 21% is total failures, and 21% is a minority; vastly more so if you weight it by throughput, which is logical to do.

**Brian d marge** · 14th February 2016, 20:34

Originally Posted by Ocean1

So not only is inflation a dead certain killer of monetary policy deflation is too?

I can sorta see where you get your can't possibly argument strategies from.

Now ya rambling

Why would inflation be a killer of policy

In some cases yes it could be ... And would cause a shift in policy

Phillip the Arab had to change his monetary policy ....

But not all roses in nz and that ocr is doing a sterling job eh wot

Tui

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

**Brian d marge** · 14th February 2016, 20:36

Originally Posted by bogan

The quote I higlighted in that post, the bit you rewrote, is pretty clear "all that have failed have been due to hyperinflation from over-issuance" so yeh, you missed it again, twice, while both specifically searching for it, and when it was specifically pointed out to you.

Holding it's value is not required, nor desired, for success. You're taking the results way out of context.

Hyperinflation is the only failure option listed, the others are not failures (destroyed, reformed, still going); so that 21% is total failures, and 21% is a minority; vastly more so if you weight it by throughput, which is logical to do.

What .......

Yes I did miss it didn't I

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

**Ocean1** · 14th February 2016, 20:49

Originally Posted by Brian d marge

Now ya rambling

Why would inflation be a killer of policy

Fucked if I know, it's your claim.

Originally Posted by Brian d marge

But not all roses in nz and that ocr is doing a sterling job eh wot

Well given that it's structural target is 0-2% inflation then yes, it's doing a fucking excellent job.

**Brian d marge** · 14th February 2016, 20:55

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Fucked if I know, it's your claim.

Well given that it's structural target is 0-2% inflation then yes, it's doing a fucking excellent job.

Damn one of us really must stop drinking

Dont ever remember making that claim

They might be your machinations

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

**mashman** · 15th February 2016, 07:54

Originally Posted by Brian d marge

So from your own source, there are more currencies currently in use now, than have failed. And all that have failed have been due to hyperinflation from over-issuance.

I take it that was in response to the price/cost of goods rising?

**Katman** · 12th April 2016, 19:22

And in the latest affront to the democratic process, MP's have been given only five days to consider the thousands of public submissions against the TPPA instead of the usual four weeks.

**Oakie** · 12th April 2016, 19:29

Originally Posted by Katman

And in the latest affront to the democratic process, MP's have been given only five days to consider the thousands of public submissions against the TPPA instead of the usual four weeks.

It's OK. They'll probably all be the same anyway.