Talk:Hard currency

message: "Hardness" or "Softness" in currency is not as subjective a matter as the article suggests.
Hard currencies either are themselves commodity goods, or are Redeemable tokens for such goods.
Soft currencies then come in many gradations of irredeemability: being merely "backed" by commodity reserves,
by financial assets of varying quality, or by sheer legal force. Hard currencies circulate spontaneously, being the first major improvement beyond barter. Legal force/protection of varying kind is needed to make softer currencies circulate. GJaxon (talk) 16:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bogus Definition? 

message: "Before its replacement with the Euro the Deutschmark was considered perhaps the best hard currency."  
I would like to see the reference to where fact came from. I believe that before the euro, Germany's currency was simply called the Mark or the German Mark (ie Japanese Yen), not by its German name of Deutchmark.
:I usually heard it as Deutschmark or Mark.  Rarely "German Mark" Nik42 08:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Deutschmark was by far the most common in the UK, followed by either Mark or German Mark depending on whether the speaker had been talking about Germany or not. Nicholas 12:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question of fact and terminology 

message: There is some fear that commodities quoted in USD, such as oil, may be under undue pressure to increase in price rapidly if the value of the USD plummets and is no longer seen as a safe store of value. In time however, commodity prices should stabilize as their pricing is switched to more stable currencies.
No references given for this statement which implies that the USD may not be a hard currency, while previously showing it's by far the primary reserve currency of the world and is used heavily throughout the world.  This quote gives no solid justification for its claim but may show preference in the author's choice of currencies.  Editing to be less presumptive.
Anton.hung (talk) 04:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading? 

message: The article on soft currency is untenable in its current state, as all it does is explain hard currency and then say how soft currency differs. I believe it should be merged into this article, which should either remain here (my preference), or be moved to something like Currency hardness or Hardness of currency. Nicholas 12:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with Soft Currency 

message: The article claimed that Hard currency can also be used to simply describe the physical banknotes and coins that are the currency., but I'd like to see a reputable source for this. Jpatokal 09:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physically hard? 

message: Sound money redirects here but the article doesn't explain what the term means. It's used in the Peter Schiff article Nil Einne (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: hard currency is money not likely to suddenly decrease in value. Fiat money derives it's valuation from government. $ound money can be redeemed in tangible goods or has intrinsic value itself, like a shiny metal or sparkly rock. Most hard currency is fiat, no sound money is fiat. Darkstar1st (talk) 08:52, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound money

message: It is absolutely wrong to say that "more chits redeemable for gold in circulation than actual gold reserved, thereby devaluing the physical metalmore chits redeemable for gold in circulation than actual gold reserved, thereby devaluing the physical metal" and again "create more chits for gold, again devaluing the gold".
If anything, creating more "chits" makes the physical metal more valuable.
Also, "1/10 is a popular reserve ratio around the world that has largely supported the financial relevance of banks under national regulation" is materially false. The fractional reserve requirement is substantially below 10% in many countries: No requirement U.K., 2% Eurozone, 2.5% Switzerland, for instance.
The author doesn't seem to have a sound knowledge of the topic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.243.171.39 (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paper Gold 

message: I've tagged this article to bring attention to the other issues of its content. The page makes several significant claims and suggestions yet only has two references (and they're not particularly legitimate ones at that). (NBMATT (talk) 21:25, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, Mr. and Mrs. Currency had no child that they named "Hard", so there's no BLP issue here.  I removed that tag. Guy Harris (talk) 22:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New maintenance tags 

message: Is it just me or does the purposed list of causes for hard currency seem like a bunch of nonsense? It is literally just a list of reasons to blame developing countries for their poverty written by residents of countries that have hard currencies. It doesn't take much to put two and two together and see that the list of nations with hard currencies is more or less simply a list of the most powerful core countries with the largest economies. The only real exception is the Swiss Franc, which is backed by massive amounts of hard currency from big nations due to all the rich people from those nations dumping money into its bank accounts to dodge taxes in their home countries that the poor have to pay instead. So we can introduce another cause of hard currency, being backed by other hard currencies in large amounts.
The list is shockingly non-realistic and just is nations with hard currencies giving themselves a big pat on the back. While the elements may play a certain role, it is increasingly clear that the Yuan is becoming a hard currency in its own right, and China violates almost every single one of the proposed rules that "guarantee" hard currency success. What does it have? A. A gigantic powerful economy that can push others around B. Massive stores of hard currency. Is this seriously not obvious to anyone else? Liberalism is blindness!2601:140:8900:61D0:88A2:FAE0:DEBE:8293 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Causes of Hard Currency 

message: Someone already said this...Hard Currency may be defined by economists as Strong Currency, but hard currency historically is supposed to be Coin and things like Gold and Silver or Copper, not paper money like the US dollar. 99.137.55.69 (talk) 15:52, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Hard Currency