>How so? It certainly wouldn't work as a substitute for widely-used
>currencies, that's obvious. But as for developing a smaller, more
>contained economy to keep trade in the neighborhood, it doesn't
>strike me as a bad or nostalgic idea. (Hard to see "nostalgia" in
>the scheme, since I can't recall any time when local currencies
>actually existed.) What's the argument against it?
What would it accomplish? Local currencies could only be used on a very small scale, for the provision of mundane services. Sorry to quote myself, but it would be: haircuts yes, scissors maybe, steel never. It couldn't at all affect the arrangement of complex manufacturing or services. And why is keeping trade in the neighborhood so desirable, anyway? That sounds cramped, xenophobic, and suffocating.
Doug