Canadian Currency

Philosophy and Politics, from Aristotle to Trudeau, discussions that cover the gamut from civilizations, societies, how they're run and why we're here.

Moderator: Staff

Post Reply
dox
Prolific
Posts: 18732
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Canadian Currency

Post by dox » Fri Jun 04, 2004 6:53 pm

Amidst chatter on another forum about a Royal Bank (Canadian) software upgrade that went wrong there was the usual "Canadians get paid money?", "Yeah, but it's Canadian money" quips coming from south of the border. An interesting reply came which I am quoting here:

--
That acutally fluctuates from a period to another... right this moment, a looney is actually only 75% of a buck, but it has not always been this way, nor will it be forever.

Here's a little history for y'all. In 1862, the loonie and the buck were worth about the same thing. Two years later, in 1864, the loonie was worth 265% of a buck. That's right, people could buy $2.65 of american money for a single canadian dollar. After the civil war, the buck slowly went back up to match the loonie.

The loonie began to lose value compared to the buck at the beginning of WWI, then slowly restabilized after, then lost value again during WWII. In 1945, right after the war, the loonie and the buck regained their equality.

In 1961, both were worth about the same, and in 1972 the loonie was worth about 5% more than the buck.

At the beginning of 2003, the loonie was worth slightly more than 60% of the buck, since then, it got a big boost and almost hit 80% to be at 75% today...

Notice how all those major fluctuations coincides with wars... Civil war, WWI, WWII, Viet-Nam, Irak... Re-elect Bush and see what happens to your buck...
--

Of course, it's a limited scope; wars aren't the only thing that influence the value of the currency, and at times it's artificially manipulated to favour certain import/export conditions, so it's not the whole picture, but I hadn't seen that argument put in such a light before, anyway, there it is..

Crymson
Prolific
Posts: 3538
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 5:18 pm
Location: Calgary

Post by Crymson » Fri Jun 04, 2004 7:22 pm

There is some consipracy around the 60's loonie though. As it stood, JFK and Diefenbaker did NOT get along, however, JFK and Lester B Pearson did. During the campaing that resulted in Pearson becoming prime minister, there were some "questionalbe" actions preformed by the the President's office. for one, JFK held a "nobel prize winner's ball", with Pearson as his Guest of honour, in order to boost pearson's popularity, also, JFK leant pearson his high powered campaign staff for his Campaign, and, during the end of Diefenbakers term as PM, the dollar plummeted. During the Canadian election, the expremetly low dollar was referred to as the "Diefen-Buck" and has been serious speculation that the weak dollar was engineered by the US to undermine Diefenbaker's popularity.

This was about the time that the US needed canadian soil to install long range, anti-bomber, nulcear warhead equipped (think missle defender for atari) missles in the Canadian far north. Diefenbaker was opposed, (think Avro Arrow), Pearson was Pro american.

Interesting....

Post Reply