Is the Amero Real?

By J.D. Seagraves, on July 31st, 2008

Conspiracy theorists have long been on guard against the “New World Order” – particularly ever since then-President George H.W. Bush uttered the phrase during his 1991 State of the Union address – but lately, talk of a “North American Union” merger between the United States, Mexico, and Canada has made the leap from late-night talk radio and the blogosphere fringe and into respectable media. Is there anything to all this?

There are three components to the conspiracy:

  • The North American Union (NAU)
  • The NAFTA Superhighway
  • The “amero” – a unified currency for the U.S., Mexico, and Canada

Each component has a varying degree of truth.

For starters, the NAU has long been many an internationalist’s dream, especially since the European Union (EU) came into being. There is something called the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and conspiracy theorists say it’s the forerunner to the NAU. At least one Canadian political party takes the issue very seriously, and in general, the theoretical merger has been given more attention in Canada than in either the U.S. or Mexico. And finally, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) – another conspiracy theorist bugaboo – has issued a white paper advocating the establishment of a common North American security perimeter, the development of biometric North American border passes, and the adoption of a common North American tariff.

So is the NAU for real? There is some circumstantial evidence to suggest it may be but certainly not enough to convict “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Next up, the NAFTA Superhighway: This component does appear to be real – at least in large part. Of course, the name “NAFTA Superhighway” is a creation of its opponents, but there are real proposals for the system conspiracy theorists allude to, and some of these new roads are actually being built as we speak.

Finally, the “amero” – a shared currency for the three nations. This component is the least likely of the three, as there is no reliable evidence that a unitary continental currency is on the horizon. However, a savvy conspiracy theorist might suggest that the NAFTA Superhighway is Step 1, the NAU Step 2, and the amero the third and final step of tri-national merger. Thus, why should there be much evidence for the amero’s existence at this point?

The term “amero” was coined (no pun intended) in 1999 by Canadian economist Herbert Grubel. Grubel did manage to interest then-Mexican President Vicente Fox in the idea but could get no traction in the U.S. or especially in his native Canada [source]. Thus, the amero is strictly theoretical… Well, mostly.

In an effort to “publicize” the pending merger of the three nations, private minters have taken to making gold, silver, and copper amero coins. In typical fashion, conspiracy nuts who got their hands on these coins thought they were secretly made by the NAU.

Well, gee. If the NAU means the abolition of the Federal Reserve and a return to gold and silver coinage, I have only one question: Where can I sign up?



One comment   Monetary Policy   , , , ,  

What a Human Being Really Is: Why Economics Has Gone So Wrong

By James Ratcliff, on July 31st, 2008

The twentieth century taught us everything we need to know about human nature. For every grisly lesson learned on one end of the scale (the niche that belongs to Hitler, Stalin and the Khmer Rouge), we witnessed a remarkable example of sacrificial love for others at the opposite end (Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa and Albert Schweitzer).

A glance at the most noticeable trouble spots around the globe in 2008 (suicidal bombers in Iraq; genocidal warriors in Africa; military despots in Myanmar) reminds us that even the most gruesome lessons in history are soon forgotten. What lessons did the last century teach us about the laws of economics? Will they, like other lessons of history, be wasted on future generations?

Here, in no particular order, are my Top Four Lessons of twentieth-century economic history:

  • Planned economies (the ex-Soviet Union and the continuing disaster called Cuba) don’t work and can’t make people happy.
  • Societies that suppress freedom of religion don’t work and can’t last (same as above: Fidel doesn’t have enough relatives to freeze a nation in time forever).
  • Economic growth does not in itself eliminate poverty or make people happy (as the overloaded welfare system in the United States proves).
  • Modern economic science has absolutely no answer for the question, what makes life worth living?

People can pretend to ignore one or more of these four lessons of recent economic history; indeed, every trouble spot in the world today is the result of someone insisting that one of these four things isn’t so.

A Wrong Image of Man and His Reality

There is good news on the horizon: an increasing number of economists are fed up with the limitations that mainstream economic theory imposes on the search for solutions to the world’s most pressing problems. You haven’t seen their names in the press; they probably won’t be nominated for the Nobel Prize anytime soon. But if you listen, you can hear their voices in the wilderness.

Dr. Kamran Mofid, an Iranian-born economist and founder of the Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative, is one of those calling for a return to sanity. In Mofid’s opinion, we only need to take a look at the state of the world to reach an obvious conclusion: economics has failed to provide a roadmap for modern society because it has failed to take into account humanity’s deepest need of all—our need of a meaningful spiritual life.

Mofid examines the roots of economics to discover why it has gone so wrong. As Mofid points out, economics was divorced from theology at the end of the eighteenth century; it was freed from political theory in the nineteenth century; finally, in the last several decades of the twentieth century, economics was turned into the abstract science that confounds people today.

Mofid’s mission is to make economics work for the good of all people on earth by reuniting economics and theology. “We need to recreate economic theory based on an understanding of what a human being really is and what makes him happy,” he explains. “As long as economics is based on a partial or wrong image of man and his reality, it will not produce the results we need.”

The First Economist

Kamran Mofid is to the 21st-century what John Ruskin was to the nineteenth. Ruskin opposed the laissez-faire economists whose thoughts provided both philosophical and practical justification for the sprawling slums left in the wake of Britain’s Industrial Revolution.

In Ruskin’s view, society was betrayed by economists like Adam Smith, David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill, who advocated the benefits of enlightened self-interest. As Ruskin told an audience at the Bradford Town Hall in 1864, “Friends, our great Master said not so.” With an ear to Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount, Ruskin concluded, “Indeed, to do the best for others, is finally to do the best for ourselves.”

“Economics must once again find its heart and soul,” says Mofid, echoing the call to sanity voiced by Ruskin in Victorian England and—if we are serious about wanting to get to the root—by King Solomon of Israel. After all, economics is simply about wants being satisfied, and in that sense the author of Ecclesiastes was the first economist.

Since the end of the eighteenth century, economists have written elaborate prescriptions for the regeneration of society. Solomon knew better. “People are always writing books, and too much study will make you tired,” he advised 3,000 years ago. Ruskin suffered incapacitating mental attacks the last twenty years of his life; he spent his last decade as an invalid at his estate in England’s Lake District.

In Small Is Beautiful, E. F. Schumacher wrote, “It is hardly likely that twentieth-century man is called upon to discover truth that has never been discovered before.” Schumacher was right, of course; we won’t discover anything new by opening the pages of a 3,000-year-old book. But it will take us to the real root of economics, and it is there that we can begin to understand what went wrong.

I’ll take a look at King Solomon’s economic theory one week from today. Once we understand the source of the problem, we’ll have an opportunity to be part of the solution.



One comment   Citizen Economists   , ,  

How Telemedicine Can Actually Work

By J.C., on July 31st, 2008

My last post generated an interesting comment from a reader questioning whether telemedicine can actually be used to do a physical exam. The reader brings up some great questions about how telemedicine can actually work. Such questions and resistance to new technology clearly highlight the struggle for technological progress in medicine.

While I agree that telemedicine is not fully developed and only in its early stages, there are many fields which currently lend themselves to key physical examination points though video conference. One such field is cardiology in which a tele-stethoscope is placed on the patient to allow the remote consulting physician to evaluate heart sounds. In this example the patient does not usually place the tele-stethoscope but a technician or nurse does. Similarly, an echocardiogram machine with teleconferencing capabilities can allow a consulting cardiologist to view the technician doing the echocardiogram and the results live. The examples of telemedicine in the field of cardiology are many. Another example of telemedicine is the use of a tele-otoscope for ENT physicians to examine the ears, nose, and throat remotely. Being able to get this data remotely clearly would be more efficient and save time and money.

While all of these are just theoretical examples, there are plenty of real-life examples of telemedicine being used to examine patients. Any physician or non-physician can search the literature and find great examples.

One example is a recent report coming out of Virginia Commonwealth University and the Virginia Department of Corrections. The surgeons in that group conducted 55 telemedicine sessions over a year-long period. With the assistance of a nurse at the correctional facility and tele-stethoscopes and dermascopes, they were able to recommend surgery for 27 patients with the only face-to-face meeting being the day of surgery! Using telemedicine, they were able to provide care for a needy population and reduce significant pre-operative work-up and patient transfer costs.



3 comments   Healthcare   ,