Skip to main content

A dollar gets you 69




What does that mean?  I refer to the arcane world of currency conversion.  Today an American Dollar can be exchanged at a bank for a princely sum of 69 Indian Rupees.  This within a short 10 year span where the Rupee saw itself drop like a stone against the American fiat.   Never mind India had its share of Fiats (but they were from Italy and not very good).

Frankly it is all made up.  If you turned the clock way back to the spring of 1792 you would have found that an American Dollar was worth 24 grams of pure silver.  Now why someone would care to carry around pure silver is worth debating but back then people killed each other for that metal.

In today's terms where silver trades for around $15 per 24 grams one would be correct to say that the inherent value of the USD has depreciated itself by 15 x.

How and why this happens is very confusing and the rules and regs that govern all this are set by very powerful people who get to decide how the world should operate.  Much has to (in theory) to do with the gross domestic product or GDP of a given region.  GDP is defined as the sum total of all the value produced by a country.

Which takes us into a whole new realm of defining what value is.  The dictionaries define it as 'usefulness of something.'  By that measure the whole system we have setup is debatable.

Here is my simple explanation.  For a given set of conditions if one has a choice to buy something and if that something were American vs. Indian the former has 69 times more demand than the Indian version.  Everything else is just smoke and mirrors.  Both of which might cost you a lot of dollars or rupees depending on what you want to do with them.  Just ask the Mexicans.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

But What If We're Wrong?

I attempted to read this book by author Chuck Klosterman backward to forward but it started hurting my brain so I decided to stop and do it like any other publication in the English language.  Start from page 1 and move to the right. Witty, caustic and thought provoking this is a book you want to read if you believe that the status quo might, just might be wrong. At times bordering on being contrarian about most things around us it tries to zero in on the notion of what makes anything believable and certain in our minds.  The fact that there is a fact itself is ironic.  Something analogous to the idea that you can never predict the future because there is no future. Many books and movies have tried to play on this concept - best that I recollect (I think I am) was 'The Truman Show'.  This book by Klosterman attempts to provoke the reader to at least contemplate that what they think they know may be wrong. He uses examples like concept of gravity, and how it ...
2 comments
Read more

You are important to us

Followed by piano music.   Followed by 'we are experiencing heavier than usual call volume'.  Sounds macabre like bleeding during menstruation or after a ghastly attack with a weapon on a hemophiliac.  Sorry Mrs. Johnson but it appears little Gertrude here has been bleeding heavier than usual what with her night time activities competing with the woodchucks in your neighborhood. Some services even go as far as to pick a random day to say - 'if you were to call us during the Chinese lunar month when the moon is axiomatically hugging the polar star with Jupiter intravenous when call volume is light'.  Well I will be damned.  I thought  I had checked with my astrologer before I placed this well focused call but  I guess this is what you get for listening to a quack. Umph! I am not sure which marketing genius came up with this personal touch concept of informing the caller that you are really a jackass for actually calling the customer serv...
Post a Comment
Read more

Of Jims and Johns

Here is another essay on the subject of first names. As in birth names. Or names provided to an offspring at birth. While the developed world tends to shy away from the exotic like Refrigerator or Coca Cola for their new production there is a plethora of Jims and Johns and Bobs or Robs. Speaking of which I do not think there is a categoric decision point at the time of birth if a child will be hereafter called as Bob. I mean have not yet met a toddler called Bob or Rob for that matter. At some point though the parental instinct to mouth out multiple syllables runs out and they switch from calling the crawler Robert to simply Robbie to Rob. Now speaking of - it is strange that the name sounds like something you would not want Rob to do - i.e. Rob anyone. Then why call someone that? After all Rob Peter to Pay Paul is not exactly a maxim to live a young life? Is it? Perhaps Peter or Paul might want to have a say in it? Then there is this matter of going to the John. Why degrad...
2 comments
Read more