The major problem with currency unification is the agreement or lack of it as to the amount of currency generation which will be permitted in each of the nations participating. Since this is one of the least understood and most essential aspects of national sovereignty, it is no wonder that no Finance Minister would like his power shared over a noisy table with dozens and maybe hundreds of counterparts. This impossible task is indeed the Gordian knot.consider that if the currencies in the pool all have the same value once converted, which is an obvious fact, then the amounts of them will vary in each national system, thereby preserving the relative Gordian preceding the unification. In order to join the pool, a nation must normalize its currency to the value of the Euro nd then reset it's systems. Normalization means that a currencies value is related to a base value by means of a formula or a program. In our world, it is feasible to apply a complex normalization program over a currency at a national, sectorial or local level.

The program involves calculating the sum total of the prices of the goods and services contained in a commonly agreed to basic needs list of the EU. So that for example, milk prices in Germany should be within a few Euro oints of those in Spain, since there are no tariffs on any products, and wages are assumed to be compatible in Euro units then only transportation and other such costs are diffrentiable. The basic needs list is protected against inflation by agreement of the EU.

Such a list can contain hundreds of thousands of products and services, but would never contain such items as works of art, diamonds, gold and others which are not manufacturable or renewable. Thus if the pre-unification total of the basic needs list is equal to a certain entry-value, then the currency must be normalized to the Euro value for the same list at the same time. Entry to the Euro system is thus clean and politically wise.

Now, if a nation wishes to emit further monetary instrument, in whatever form this takes, such as Central Bank discounts or Financial Market speculation, why should this activity be subject to control by the other member nations. If all of the Euro nations are to profit for the speculation in the market or the intervention of one government of the pool, why should this be cause for concern or control? Is not wealth to be desired by all, and is not wealth the increase in the value of the Euro without inflating it? So, the problem with currency unification is not the control of the increase of the currency but rather the control of the inflation which may be caused by the increases in the monetary pool.

Inflation is the loss of value of the currency, not the increase in the amount of it. An increase in the amount of Euros without inflation is simply an increase in wealth. Inflation is a local phenomenon, not a national one. In fact, if money enters the pool via whatever source in a member nation, the inflation it causes may not be local to the entry point but rather found in another location, be it a nation, a sector or a city. Since the Euro is freely transferrable across all borders, there is no way to control the flow of such liquid, nor should it be controlled. If inflation occurs in Germany because of the combination of international factors, of unbelievable and unimportant complexity, then the problem must be attacked in Germany not elsewhere, is this not so? Why should the cause of the problem be sought, when the solution to the problem is at a location other than those of the originating sectors.

To attack inflation, the local Euro system must be normalized again against the global Euro pool, in a way re-inserting the local currency to the global or EU level pool. By way of the same inflation program of original insertion, using the same basis points at the same time.

Normalization however is not a painful tax or otherwise unpopular measure. It is simply the means by which the local system will reset itself to the global one. In our current practice, normalization takes place whenever "zeroes are removed" from the currency and new paper currency is issued., a popular move. If normalization were to take place on a frequent basis, be it daily or at least weekly, the effects of the increase of inflation would never be noted. This is because the normalization process takes the local inflated amount over the basis value and removes it from the system, including removing the excedent from the circulant.

And here lies the crux or the problem, how to emit Euros which can be normalized on a daily basis without having to call in the currency every day? If currency can be made to reside exclusively in Electronic means, be it a computer system at the Bank or a personal Data Card with a file for Euros, normalized on the day they are used, not to the day they were credited, then the problem is solved.

But, if the Data Card requires the use of an on-line terminal for its use, this would defeat the system, since in some locations such as trains, there is no way to communicate to an on-line system.

First of all, the Euro is international and requires no conversion by crossing borders. When the Euro is used, a value is loaded into the transportable receiver devices by way of ROM chips with the local boarding value. In remote villages, the local value is given over by the local system itself, and passed along in a way similar to the TRD used in moving outlets. The village central PC communicates with the pool's normalization program via satellite down load, which is inexpensive and feasible. Lastly, I doubt that any transactions would take place in the dark, and no computer today requires a public electric net to operate.

All problems regarding information can be solved with the use of computer technology. Let us not wait any further to continue in the quest for a better life for all of us based on equality of value, not our present historical inequality.

Atlanta,
February 12, 1996