Talk:Currency union

Singapore and Brunei

The map, althoug it shows Singapore and Brunei (unlike Cape Verde), doesn't show their currency union. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salvadorcases (talk • contribs) 17:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unititled

I sorted most of the organizations to the applicable lists (Economic union, Customs and monetary union, Economic and monetary union, etc.) - eg. listing each only once, at its "highest" level, as the lower levels have a note about what higher levels contain the respective arrangement (eg. on single-market-list is written that EMUs also have single markets). I haven't checked yet the lowest levels (FTA and customs union lists), and there are some minor things to correct on EMU and MU lists, but will do this soon. Alinor (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jordanian dinar - Palestine

Is this really the case of PNA policy or just some Palestinian businesses/people use Jordanian dinars - just as some UK/Danish shops accept Euros? Alinor (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's my understanding that both both new Israeli sheqalim and Jordanian dinars circulate widely, but this isn't really a currency union.Hariboa (talk)

Yes, maybe the USD or EUR also circulate - but unofficially. The question is what is the "official" currency? For example does the PNA government accept payments of local taxes in Jordanian dinar/USD/EUR/etc. or only in Israeli shekes? Alinor (talk) 18:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should dollarized countries be here?

Looking at the list, no distinction is made between currency unions, monetary unions, and dollarized countries (i.e., countries unilaterally using the currency of another country). The "informal" categories should be removed, as they're all in the dollarization entry. Hariboa (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

A distiction is made, that's why I added the 3 types descriptions - to make it clear that there are different types (previously the distinction was recognizable only by the formal/informal notes.

I wouldn't go as far as removing them - but maybe split them in separate "informal"/"dollarization" table? Alinor (talk) 18:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CFA franc

There is no mention of the CFA franc in this article. Do these not count as "currency unions" for some reason? They are included on the map and mentioned in the "proposed future currency unions" but it was my understanding that many (most?) of the former french colonies in africa use the CFA franc as their official currency in a currency union, however I'm no expert and don't want to add it if there's a reason it's not included. -- InspectorTiger (talk) 16:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong dollar in Macau

Does Hong Kong/Macau qualify? The Hong Kong dollar, which is at par with the Macanese pataca, circulates in Macau at a 1-1 basis. Because money exchange charges a significant fee tourists rarely bother to exchange the two, (or so I was told by my hotel's concierge) and every place I went took them (note, I'm not talking the casinos, but Macau proper). I'm pretty sure it's asymmetrical--the coins are different sizes and I doubt you can use Macanese money in Hong Kong, but that makes it no different from other dollarized countries. --Quintucket (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UK, Norway, and other pseudo currency unions

Should these countries really be listed here? I don't call these currency unions at all. They are a single country with various political subdivisions, some of which have greater autonomy than others, but from what I understand, they are still using the currency of their home country. This can't be compared to the Euro, or even to the Australian dollar, which have been adopted by a few sovereign states. --Danbob999 (talk) 18:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Danbob999, these really aren't examples of currency unions.

Another issues I wish to pick upon in this article is the "German-Dutch-Austrian-Nordic breakaway currency union." The sources for this are clutching at threads. Indeed it reads like a concept conceived by a 13 year old who has been playing one too many global simulation games, in my opinion.

Apologies if I am doing this incorrectly, I am still fairly new to making edits on Wikipedia. I hope this is correct. --Marsden4 (talk) 11:08, 28 November 2011 (GMT)

A national currency in a large, heterogeneous country with many centres of production and different regional economies is to all intents and purposes a currency union in economic terms. This includes the currencies of the United States, Canada, and others. These currency unions are often the most successful, because the national or federal government has powers of economic harmonisation, transfer payments, promoting labor mobility, etc.

But where do you draw the line? According to Jane Jacobs (Cities and the Wealth of Nations, 1984), as soon as you have two city-regions in a nation-state, you have a monetary union with all the consequences (positive and negative) it entails. It may not be practical for the sake of discussion to use such a definition, as that would make all major currencies into monetary unions. But there is no clear, non-arbitrary separation between a currency that brings together rich and poor regions in a single nation-state and one that brings together rich and poor countries in a single economic union.

-- Justinbb (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

US Dollar

Wouldn't the US dollar be arguably part of another (past?) currency union within the United States itself; specifically when it was adopted to replace previous colonial currencies? Of course the US alone is not a "currency union"... but was it when the Feds adopted the dollar? Or is there some kind of technicality that I'm not taking into account? — Nick15 (talk) 20:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Population of eurozone

Somebody should check the figure because of recent joining of three Baltic countries. 80.77.36.140 (talk) 05:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Currency union. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:59, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Currency union. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081218230932/http://www.case.com.pl/upload/publikacja_plik/3460035_058e.pdf to http://www.case.com.pl/upload/publikacja_plik/3460035_058e.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:19, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet Union Currency 19

Dorian is cool Dorian paki is the goat omg yes he is the best student  Circusjeffy (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Irish pound

The Irish pound wasn't actually the same currency as Sterling. Though it was pegged 1:1 to Sterling, it wasn't possible to spend Irish pounds in the UK. Is that really a currency union? Maybe it's an interesting marginal case. Seems similar to the pegging of the Argentinian peso to the dollar from 1991 to 2002.

Also the Republic of Ireland didn't exist before the late 40s.

GDP (nominal $)

I removed the "GDP (nominal $)" column from the table for the following reasons:

Only 4 of the 17 currency unions even had an entry in the column at all.
None of the entries were sourced.
The entry for the Turkish lira was blatantly wrong -- a GDP of $734,043. That was off by a factor of a million or so -- it should have been somewhere in the neighborhood of $734 billion.
The other entries were given in scientific notation (3.6438×10¹⁰, 3.16936×10¹¹, 6.8443×10¹¹), which is difficult for many readers to understand at a glance. It would be better to use, say, "$36 billion", "$317 billion", and "$684 billion" for these numbers.

If anyone wants to re-add the GDP column, but with accurate, sourced values displayed in an easier to read format, they should feel free to do so. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]