Euros Accepted In NY
02.07.08Just another step toward globalization. The world is a smaller place, which means the enemy is always that much closer.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - In the latest example that the U.S. dollar just ain’t what it used to be, some shops in New York City have begun accepting euros and other foreign currency as payment for merchandise.
“We had decided that money is money and we’ll take it and just do the exchange whenever we can with our bank,” Robert Chu, owner of East Village Wines, told Reuters television.The increasingly weak U.S. dollar, once considered the king among currencies, has brought waves of European tourists to New York with money to burn and looking to take advantage of hugely favorable exchange rates.
Yeah, it sucks that the wizards (fiscal conservatives haha) running the country for the last 7 years have completely screwed everything up so badly that even the damn Canadian dollar is worth more than ours, but that’s hardly the fault of “some shops in New York City.”
It’s not globalization, it’s capitalism. The point of business is to make a profit. If shops can profit more by accepting other (stronger) currencies, why shouldn’t they? And doesn’t more money coming in help the economy?
I don’t understand the “enemy” comment—what are you even talking about?
# February 7th, 2008 at 11:30 amGuav, globalization and profit are not always at odds. In fact, the primary point of globalization is to boost profit and benefit a capital economy like ours (Rajesh Kumar answers Dell’s phone calls a lot cheaper than Henry Jones does, and old ladies in Mexico will assemble your Macbook for a much lower cost than here).
I can’t blame the shop owners in NYC for doing this - they’re capitalists, and they know that a weak dollar means lots of “shopping tourism” from European nations. Appealing to Euro-toting furriners by rolling out a welcome mat like this makes good business sense from their perspective.
I think what Chad was driving at is the notion that good fences make good neighbors, and as we continue to dilute our culture by eroding borders, currency, and other emblems of our identity it becomes ever easier for someone with malicious intent to penetrate our defenses or “blend in”.
The Bible predicts that during the End Times, there will be a one world government. No nations, just a global culture, a global economy, a global currency all presided over by one leader who will eventually emerge as the Antichrist. Already we have a 24-hour global news cycle that did not exist just a few years ago, we have massive “border-free zones” expanding throughout Europe (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7153490.stm)and (depending on who you ask) the concept is beginning to gain traction even in America, and now the single currency notion is expanding from the contiguous European “states” into America. None of these things are bad in and of themselves (well, the border one is) but when viewed together they mark a trend that is alarming to some.
Personally, I think we’ve got a long way to go before our culture is as diluted as Europe (thankfully). But I’m concerned that we’re heading that way, and that the pace will increase starting in 2009. Mitt Romney nailed it right on the head this morning at CPAC, when he warned that we could “become the France of the 21st century” if we don’t change course quickly.
# February 7th, 2008 at 2:16 pmsteadyrock
Why do we always have to come back to this whole “end of time” business? Please correct me if I’m wrong but from what I’ve seen the idea that the Bible “predicted” the apocalypse would happen under the circumstances you speak of is based almost entirely on Revelations, the interpretation of which is the subject of some controversy.
Now I’m not ruling out any possibilities - perhaps a meteor will strike out of nowhere or there will be nuclear war tomorrow, thus rendering God’s judgment on the human race, but you are not the first to see the “End of Times” looming (in this case, behind every shop in New York that accepts Euros), but some how the human race perseveres. That’s partly because “trends” like the one you point out don’t just continue indefinitely - the consolidation of the EU, etc. was a reaction to the inefficiency and violence caused by the disunity of the European Countries, but there are plenty of downsides to the “european state”, and eventually there will be a similar reaction against the consolidation, causing the EU to split. it’s swings and roundabouts… i’m not trying to put any words in your mouth or anything, but that’s my feeling about a lot of these supposedly damning trends (islamic fundamentalism as well) - nothing can go on forever, least of all trends.
# February 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pmNailed it.
Simple Simon - Once again, you read too deep into things.
And the reason we come back to scripture, is because it is the basis of our lives. Not that we can stop or alter the prophesies we believe, but we like to point out when they are unfolding.
# February 7th, 2008 at 5:29 pmReally, this is so absurd. Accepting Euros isn’t “eroding the currency”—why does it matter if a shopper converts their Euros to Dollars before they purchase an item or if the shopkeeper converts the Euros to Dollars after the sale? It doesn’t—it’s the same thing either way.
Look, there are legitimate things to complain about as far as multiculturalism, globalization and immigration go—whether or not a handful of small boutiques in the East Village of NYC accept payment in Euros really, really is simply not one of them.
# February 7th, 2008 at 9:50 pmIt’s all just another step toward the world government. You cannot deny the obvious advances that have come of it.
# February 7th, 2008 at 11:22 pmI do not for a minute deny that there have been advances towards a global government. I deny that this is in any way a part of that—you have to allow tourists to convert their currency. What difference does it make if the conversion happens before or after the sale?
I’ve been to other countries where merchants accepted US Dollars (back when they were worth something). They did it merely for practical reasons—it was good for them financially. It’s got absolutely nothing to do with a One World Government.
# February 8th, 2008 at 12:45 pmIt’s a small step. But it isn’t as big as the upcoming Amero, and the North American Union between us, canadia, and mexico.
# February 8th, 2008 at 12:48 pmNo. It’s not a small step at all. It’s absolutely nothing.
Implementation of the Amero would indeed be a significant issue, but it’s not “upcoming,” it’s theoretical. A North American Union, something I would certainly oppose, is not a foregone conclusion, especially since there’s a significant push to rescind NAFTA.
Yes, we should be worried about plans to form a NAU—to the extent that those plans are real, rather than paranoia—but we should not be worried about a handful of stores the East Village accepting Euros.
# February 9th, 2008 at 10:08 ameverything is a small step. its called time. you sassy little man. yer just like my wife!
# February 9th, 2008 at 11:11 amok it’s the lifting of a foot before an extremely small step.
# February 13th, 2008 at 8:35 pm