As the NZD approaches parity with the AUD, thoughts naturally turn to currency denationalisation and the formation of a currency union spanning Australia, New Zealand and Tasmania. Debate around kitchen tables and internet forums tend to focus on the legitimacy of neoliberal theories of global capitalism embedded within the denationalisation of currencies, and the contradictions between capital accumulation, social stability and political legitimation in a world where nation states no longer have economic authority and where labour is subordinated to the imperative of a common ideology that promotes the primacy of capital.* However, I'd like to turn attention to the important issue of the design of the so called ANZAC buck (the ZUCK as they are known colloquially). I am concerned that the proposed 100 dollar bill, the "Poida", has an entirely unrealistic wind-powered mega trawler off the coast of New Zealand. Was this added to placate the Greens? Its ridiculous. * DOLLARISATION, CURRENCY UNION & THE ANZAC DOLLAR: EMBEDDED NEOLIBERALISM AND THE RISKS OF IMPLOSION
Wouldn't it be easier to just make Australia "West Island" and call the whole place Zealander with Prince Harry as King?
BTW In terms of the title/opening post and that article you linked SP, dollarisation and denationalisation of currency are vastly different things. Dollarisation and currency union are ideas of illiberal socialists and technocrats while denationalisation is the opposite (ie Laissez-Faire and individual liberty). The article does discuss this and does highlight the differences but it is quite jumbled and confused.
CG should be VB. No leave out Tas, they only use AUD because of all the excess gst money we throw at them. Let them return to 'the spud'. Or maybe they should introduce 'the Bruce'. Dr Felmingham wanted an international currency hub anyway.
Theyve been talking about this for YEARS. Momentum built up about 15 years back but it fell apart when New Zealand realised that Australia was offering to let NZ adopt the aussie (possibly with a nominal name change) and not a new currency with other trade deals and cooperation bundled in.