Currency . . . of the Future!

[DrFaust]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7029564.stm

 

"'None of the existing payment systems we use on earth - like cash, credit or debit cards - could be used in space,' said Professor George Fraser from the University of Leicester.

 

"'Anything with sharp edges, like coins, would be a risk to astronauts while the chips and magnetic strips used in our cards on Earth would be damaged beyond repair by cosmic radiation,' he added."

[clsage]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7029564.stm

 

"'None of the existing payment systems we use on earth - like cash, credit or debit cards - could be used in space,' said Professor George Fraser from the University of Leicester.

 

"'Anything with sharp edges, like coins, would be a risk to astronauts while the chips and magnetic strips used in our cards on Earth would be damaged beyond repair by cosmic radiation,' he added."

 

Interesting...Tho' it strikes me as sort of a solution looking for a

problem, if ya' know what I mean.

 

And I'd hope that the chips in debit cards/etc would be more resiliant

than the Prof claims, since a fair bit of the tech that makes orbital

flight possible is based on similar ones.

 

Still, a cool find non-the-less.

 

-Carl-

[Dholcrist]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Seems simple enough to fix. Just make money out of rubber. Done and done.

 

Now, am I going to get royalties for this idea, and when should I be expecting the check?

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Amusing -- highly. Professor Fraser seems to forget that we won't have astronauts in space; we'll have people. With habits in order to reduce 'problems'.

 

That said, Dholcrist's solution, while similarly amusing, isn't going to work; rubber, while useful in that sort of manner, is not likely to be 'highly valuable'. Precious metals, woods, etc. are what money starts as -- most typically, valued by the weight of the metal in reuse. At least originally, a $20.00 gold coin was worth $20.00 because that was the value of the metal. You could, if you so desired, melt it down and have $20.00 worth of gold in your hand. Only when taken off a metal standard (gold or silver) does the 'price' of something skyrocket. Its value, typically, remains the same -- see the second Highlander movie for an example, when Sean Connery hands over a large pearl earring in payment for a well-made suit.

 

The ideal solution would be to simply have globular money.

[Outsider]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Seems simple enough to fix. Just make money out of rubber. Done and done.

 

Now, am I going to get royalties for this idea, and when should I be expecting the check?

 

I'll have finance send you a rubber check immediately!

 

 

They should have named the currency the "Quatloo".

[DrFaust]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

They should have named the currency the "Quatloo".

 

It'll be three quatloos to a quid, but seven zorkmids to the quatloo.

[Dholcrist]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Amusing -- highly. Professor Fraser seems to forget that we won't have astronauts in space; we'll have people. With habits in order to reduce 'problems'.

 

That said, Dholcrist's solution, while similarly amusing, isn't going to work; rubber, while useful in that sort of manner, is not likely to be 'highly valuable'. Precious metals, woods, etc. are what money starts as -- most typically, valued by the weight of the metal in reuse. At least originally, a $20.00 gold coin was worth $20.00 because that was the value of the metal. You could, if you so desired, melt it down and have $20.00 worth of gold in your hand. Only when taken off a metal standard (gold or silver) does the 'price' of something skyrocket. Its value, typically, remains the same -- see the second Highlander movie for an example, when Sean Connery hands over a large pearl earring in payment for a well-made suit.

 

The ideal solution would be to simply have globular money.

 

 

Never, never make reference to Highlander II again, kind sir. Other than that, of course you are correct. But we print money on paper, don't we? Seems like the same concept to me. Though I did fail economics in high school.

 

So your solution is to put into use ball bearings of precious metals as currency?

[Dholcrist]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

I'll have finance send you a rubber check immediately!

QUOTE]

 

(Insert obligatory rubber check joke here)

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Never' date=' [i']never[/i] make reference to Highlander II again, kind sir.

 

The tailor scene was about the only thing I liked about the movie -- and is the only scene that I recall actually shows you the relation between values. Connery had no money; but he had something of value. The tailor recognized the item's value, and gave good value in return for it.

 

Other than that, of course you are correct. But we print money on paper, don't we? Seems like the same concept to me. Though I did fail economics in high school.

 

So your solution is to put into use ball bearings of precious metals as currency?

 

As it were, yes. The only danger is when it gets out of your wallet/pouch and goes careening around your spaceship at sixty zillion mps. Paper, you would think, would remain ideal -- but it's also a question of how much confidence there is in the paper. Which means a question of how interlinked the governments are. I believe the good professor presumes a 17th-18th century timespan between getting from Point A to Point B.

[Silverbullet]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

 

They should have named the currency the "Quatloo".

 

Damn! Beat me to it!

[ghost-angel]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Amusing -- highly. Professor Fraser seems to forget that we won't have astronauts in space; we'll have people. With habits in order to reduce 'problems'.

 

That said, Dholcrist's solution, while similarly amusing, isn't going to work; rubber, while useful in that sort of manner, is not likely to be 'highly valuable'. Precious metals, woods, etc. are what money starts as -- most typically, valued by the weight of the metal in reuse. At least originally, a $20.00 gold coin was worth $20.00 because that was the value of the metal. You could, if you so desired, melt it down and have $20.00 worth of gold in your hand. Only when taken off a metal standard (gold or silver) does the 'price' of something skyrocket. Its value, typically, remains the same -- see the second Highlander movie for an example, when Sean Connery hands over a large pearl earring in payment for a well-made suit.

 

The ideal solution would be to simply have globular money.

 

The US hasn't been on the Gold Standard since 1933.

The UK went off it in 1931.

 

Currency only has value because the government says it does. That means you can make "Money" out of whatever you want to.

[Curufea]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

It's based on the GDP - which is why it varies so much between countries.

The money is as valuable as the economy that supports it.

[Zeropoint]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Those things are WAY too bulky to be a workable currency.

 

For that matter, the world is moving away from physical cash anyway. I say the currency of the future is the same electronic system that I use for most of my finances already. If your ship/station has navigation and control computers, it can have banking computers and POS terminals.

[Dholcrist]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Those things are WAY too bulky to be a workable currency.

 

For that matter, the world is moving away from physical cash anyway. I say the currency of the future is the same electronic system that I use for most of my finances already. If your ship/station has navigation and control computers, it can have banking computers and POS terminals.

 

Exactly correct. Maybe you can't take your credit card up there right now and expect to be able to buy an Icee without any problems, but I don't think that's a possibility yet anyways.

 

Maybe when they finish the ISS.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

I'm frankly a little dubious that coins in a weightless environment are as hazardous as the author claims.

 

Of course, this community being what it is, at least a couple of people will come around and set me straight.

 

Even if the Quid does catch on in some form, I strongly suspect that it'll be the medium rather than the unit.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

RFID and small round disks can contain the same info as a credit card without the edges. . . The author is overthinking the problem.

[Sundog]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

RFID and small round disks can contain the same info as a credit card without the edges. . . The author is overthinking the problem.

 

 

He's seeing difficulties where none exist. Sure, the Apollo-era ships were basically made of thick metal foil - the shuttles certainly aren't.

 

And electronic chips aren't that affected by radiation, either. Provided you don't stick them near an EMP generator, they'll be fine.

[Markdoc]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

That said' date=' Dholcrist's solution, while similarly amusing, isn't going to work; rubber, while useful in that sort of manner, is not likely to be 'highly valuable'. Precious metals, woods, etc. are what money starts as -- most typically, valued by the weight of the metal in reuse. At least originally, a $20.00 gold coin was worth $20.00 because that was the value of the metal. You could, if you so desired, melt it down and have $20.00 worth of gold in your hand. Only when taken off a metal standard (gold or silver) does the 'price' of something skyrocket. [/quote']

 

There's basically nothing in this that makes any sense. Our current money is made of paper - if you can make money out of paper, you can certainly make it out of rubber. Or patterns of electrons, which is almost certainly going to be the medium used by the time we are going into space in any numbers. Heck, it's the most used form of currency today.

 

But the idea that a coin was worth x because it contained x amount of metal has not been reliably true for at least a couple of thousand years, and probably never was true: roman denarii that contain almost no silver (but which had the same value as silver ones and circulated with them) are a common find. Likewise, a guinea (made of gold) and a pound (made of paper) had the same value - and that in a gold-based currency. For a long time, guineas were in circulation whose value as gold was far, far higher than their value as money (which is why they were withdrawn from circulation - people were melting them down).

 

Value (which is what underpins money) is essentially a promise of services. It is likewise untrue, that the value of a currency is related to GDP - otherwise, why would the US dollar be losing value while the US GDP is increasing? It's losing value because people because people with US dollars are selling them in larger numbers to buy things elsewhere than they are buying them to use in the US - which means lots of dollars are for sale and thus the value is depressed. Money is a commodity, like anything else that can be traded. Doesn't matter what it's made of.

 

The only reason why coins were made out of rare materials (gold, silver, porcelain, cowrie shells, parrot feathers and large, carved stones have all been currency) was simply as simple anti-forgery methods: it was hard to make fake gold. In some places, where iron was rare, they made their coins out of that instead. So what exactly is the "value" of a large carved stone? Or a pig tusk? In Vanuatu, pig tusks are still used as currency - you can bank them, spend them, even pay taxes with them. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6266274.stm. They are worth - just like a gold coin - what people will give for them, which in turn reflects what people expect to get for them.

 

Likewise the idea that the cost of something only skyrockets when taken off "the metal standard" (or presumably the pig tusk standard, which works the same way) has no basis in fact - there have been numerous episodes of ruinous inflation in metal-based currencies. In the post-revolutionary war US, there was hyperinflation, despite the fact that the Continental Currency was not only gold-backed, it was (in theory) freely convertible to gold. The world's worst hyperinflation event occurred in Hungary in the 1920s with the collapse of the pengö - despite the fact that it was gold-backed and even (in theory) convertible to specie. There are plenty of other examples. Hyperinflation occurs when the normal economic causes of inflation are intensified by serious damage to the economy by events like wars, civil war or social upheaval. It's got little or nothing to do metal - which is why in the early 200's Rome, under (and after) Caracalla suffered gross inflation due to military reversals, and over-indebtedness - despite the fact that their currency was made of precious metals.

 

Prices fluctuate in response to demand: if demand is high enough, or goods scarce enough, the price will skyrocket, regardless of any metal standard. All the metal standard does is enforce the standard of scarcity on governments, reducing their ability to devalue their own currency.

 

Its value' date=' typically, remains the same -- see the second Highlander movie for an example, when Sean Connery hands over a large pearl earring in payment for a well-made suit.[/quote']

 

Ugh - don't mention that movie. That scene was one more outrage piled on a whole heap of outrages. In reality, try to pay for a suit at a bespoke tailors with an earring (pearl or no) and you will be urbanely but firmly shown the door. Most people in modern society (sensibly enough) want nothing to do with barter. As anyone who has dealt with pawnbrokers knows, the "value" of an item - even things like jewelery - is an extremely flexible concept.

 

cheers, Mark

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Bullion money does have an intrinsic value above and beyond that of the bullion content, which does fluctuate in time and space; and that's not even getting into bimetallic ratios.

Oh, making jokes here. How much gold can latinum press in the HERO system?

(Must ..try...harder..)

[Clonus]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

I do not believe that anyone would want to pay to lift currency into space and space is not particular good for plastics manufacturing until you get out to Jupiter. It's more likely they'd just go with thumbprint debit.

[Narratio]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

I remember a series of stories, long time ago... Cities in Space or Cities in Flight I think, James Blish author. Anyway, he had a currency system that was based upon rare metals. Then somebody came along with a masive find of rare metal and the currency value changed to be based upon longevity drugs. Which lead to a situation whereby you could use the drugs to prolong your life or use them to buy the latest Sony Playstation CCCXII.

 

But, money has sharp edges? Nope, no blood there. Paper cuts perhaps?

[Nyrath]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

The ideal solution would be to simply have globular money.

In John Morressy's Del Whitby series, the unit of currency is the "cash-cube." It has the advantage of packing more closely than globular money, but it has the draw-back of sharp edges.

[Narratio]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

Nope, can't have it. Sharp edges are a thing to be feared, or so says the learned doctor.

 

As to the whole 'cosmic ray' thing. I've got doubts. Ram chips have had redundent bits in them since IBM's original PC and the interminable count of the POST. Is this a real problem?

[Nyrath]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

I remember a series of stories' date=' long time ago... Cities in Space or Cities in Flight I think, James Blish author. Anyway, he had a currency system that was based upon rare metals. Then somebody came along with a masive find of rare metal and the currency value changed to be based upon longevity drugs. Which lead to a situation whereby you could use the drugs to prolong your life or use them to buy the latest Sony Playstation CCCXII.[/quote']

Cities in Flight. The metal was germanium, valued because it was the basis of transistors.

 

What happened was that some joker figured out how to synthesize germanium, which utterly destroyed the germanium standard. The entire galaxy became broke, with the OC dollar worth less than a sheet of toilet paper.

 

They went to the anti-agathic drug standard, but it never worked very well.

 

An even more severe problem was demonstrated in "Pandora's Millions" by George O. Smith (part of the Venus Equilateral stories). In that story the entire economy is destroyed when the ivory tower engineers realize that their matter transmitter is also a matter duplicator. You can read about that disaster here. (scroll down)

[Nyrath]

Re: Currency . . . of the Future!

 

As to the whole 'cosmic ray' thing. I've got doubts. Ram chips have had redundent bits in them since IBM's original PC and the interminable count of the POST. Is this a real problem?

Yes, this is a real problem.

http://parts.jpl.nasa.gov/docs/Dmg_Space-00.pdf