[PREV - THE_GREAT_CITY] [TOP]
CURRENCY_EVENTS
June 26, 2006
We speak often of
Jane Jacobs first work. THE_GREAT_CITY
This is a line of argument
from another one:
"The Economy of Cities" (1969)
Here she makes the case that:
(1) The natural unit of economic activity
is not the nation, but the city.
(2) Currencies act as information transmission
mediums, sending signals about when to
increase production or when to retrench.
She argues that the end result of having national
currencies is that large cities tend to get even
bigger, and smaller ones tend to stay small.
The idea is that the biggest city dominates what's
going on with the currency, so it receives signals
that are more or less correct for it's own conditions.
The other cities, however, receive the wrong signals,
so their economies are always oddly faltering. They
never get a chance to really thrive.
This line or argument seems simple, and persuasive --
as is so often the case with Jane Jacobs, you wonder
why you haven't heard it from somewhere else.
Perhaps there's some
counter-argument that's obvious
to currency experts, but not to
the rest to us.
If this is correct, Since the issue is never
there are some discussed publicly it's
obvious conclusions difficult to say.
that apply to the
present state of the
world:
(1) The Euro may turn out to be a very bad idea.
Fifty years hence, Berlin will be hugely successful,
but the rest of Europe will be stumbling. It will
be hard to believe that Germany lost the two world
wars.
(2) The United States may need more than one medium
of exchange... it could be that the New York
tri-state area has been dominating the exchange
rate, making it difficult for any other region to
get started.
And perhaps in recent decades, Silicon Valley has
been subtly interfering with other regions attempts
at imitating it's success?
--------
[NEXT - MEGAPOLISOMANCY]