John P. Mullen wrote:
> Rykk wrote:
>
>>
>> "John P. Mullen" <jomullen@zianet.com> wrote in message
>> news:41a3eea0@nntp.zianet.com...
>>
>>
>> Tut Tut.  Apparently you didn't do your research.  That link does not
>> even cover most currencies.  It also doesn't provide year by year
>> comparisons to clarify whether a currency is pegged or not.
>>
>> see http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/020603.asp.  Even pegged
>> currencies can vary a bit.
>>
>
> Well, this link you supplied states, at the end:
>
> "Although the peg has worked in creating global trade and monetary
> stability, it was used only at a time when all the major economies
> were a part of it. And while a floating regime is not without its flaws, 
> it
> has proven to be a more efficient means of determining the long term
> value of a currency and creating equilibrium in the international
> market."
> I take "was used" to mean currencies are no longer pegged.

All world currencies USED to be pegged to the USD.  Now most are not.

>
> :-)
>
>> This link is much better
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_historical_exchange_rates
>> Just look for the lines where the exchange rate vs the US dollar does
>> not change year by year.  Just to name the top five from the list, the 
>> East Caribbean Dollar, the Argentine peso, the Aruban Florin, the
>> Bahamian Dollar, the Barbadian Dollar.  Note that the list in
>> alphabetical order, not in order of importance.  Then there are the
>> countries that didn't even bother to have thier own currency.  They
>> just use the US dollar.
>>
>
> Er, this is 1997 data.  Care to move it up a decade?

Er.  Says 2004 at the bottom.  The left column is 2003.  Moving it up a 
decade (2013) would be difficult.  But let me know when you do.

>
>
>> To name a few currencies that are pegged to the USD that you may have
>> heard of before include the: Chinese Yuan 8.2xxx, Hong Kong Dollar
>> 7.7xxx, Iranian Rial 7,900, Malaysia Ringgit 3.8, Netherlands
>> Antillian Guilder 1.79, United Arab Emirates Emirati dirham 3.6725.
>>
>
> You got something less than ten years old to support that?

Read the headers more carefully.

Rykk