-
ZEMEN
- Member
- Posts: 2491
- Joined: 27 Jun 2011, 14:37
Guaranteed for the next 20 years.
If Abiy can bury TPLF, then he will earn free pass for the next 20 years to lead Ethiopia. There was a reason why TPLF implemented the prime minster system over the presidential one. I am not sure but i think only Ethiopia in Africa who has prime minster system. So, all you have to do it, make sure your party wins. I think it is good for Ethiopia, election, democracy is all BS. what Africa needs is a strong leader, corruption free, Aid free and just, that is it. I already see the bright future. Ethiopia lightning Eritrea cost to cost and Eritrea letting Ethiopia use the ports and any financial transaction it will be in Birr and Nakfa, that way cut out the power of dollar and cut out the evil world bank, IMF and the USA. Ethiopia all needs is Eritrea, I believe in that.
-
sarcasm
- Senior Member
- Posts: 10186
- Joined: 23 Feb 2013, 20:08
Re: Guaranteed for the next 20 years.
1.
"Of course there is at least one "objective" element in the conflict: the monetary question. After Eritrea's independence in 1993, the new country went on using the old Ethiopian currency, the birr. Birrs circulated freely but were issued only by Ethiopia's Central Bank. This situation was in fact advantageous for Eritrea. Traditionally Ethiopia has had a very conservative monetary policy, whether at the time of the Empire or during the communist regime. For a very long time the birr/dollar parity was around two to one. Given the war effort of the 1980s it was therefore a tribute to the prudence of the Ethiopian Central Bank that when the currency was floated freely after the fall of the Mengistu regime the new parity established itself at seven to one, a rate realistic enough to prevent the rise of a black currency market. Inflation was kept at such a low level as to be almost non-existent and all the border trade between Eritrea and Ethiopia was carried out in birrs. Then in 1996 Eritrea decided to create its own currency, the nakfa, which was effectively introduced the following year. The new currency immediately created problems between the two countries.[25][25] To understand this we only need to remember the basics of monetary theory: a fiduciary currency is nothing other than a certificate giving its bearer the right to acquire a (very small) share of the issuing country's Gross National Product (GNP), i.e. the monetarized total of the goods and services produced by that country. Given the fact that we had on one side a country of approximately three million people (Eritrea) against on the other side a country of about sixty million (Ethiopia) and that both had somewhat similar peasant-based economies, it was obvious that one nakfa represented a much smaller value than one birr. Yet the Asmara government insisted on a one for one parity. Soon the economic reality reasserted itself and the value of the nakfa dropped. Addis-Ababa then asked that all Ethio-Eritrean commercial transactions (including the large commercial operations in Assab) be carried out in US dollars. Asmara had very small foreign currency reserves and was not about to squander them on agricultural imports from Ethiopia. The tone of the discussions of currency problems became increasingly bitter and this added irritant was definitely an element in the rash Eritrean military reaction of May 1998."
https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6a6b74.html
"Ethiopia: One Birr Reported Worth 5 Nakfa
9 JANUARY 1998
Addis Tribune (Addis Ababa)
By our Economics Correspondent
Addis Ababa — The Birr/Nakfa exchange rate is still in the process of format ion and accurate data on it is limited. However, several newspaper and verbal reports indicate that domestic prices in Eritrea are fast rising owing to the shortage of real goods which used to be supplied in Birr from Ethiopia, and from the rest of the world, the latter owing to the apparent scarcity of foreign exchange. Prices of products such as fruits and vegetables, eggs, sorghum, and "teff" which Eritrea used to import from Ethiopia in Birr under the now dismantled common currency arrangement, are said to be rising sharply on the Eritrean market.
Rising prices in Eritrea are a preliminary indication that the stock of Nakfa, the new Eritrean currency, is large relative to the stock of goods and services and foreign exchange now available in the Eritrean economy. Hence, Eritrean consumers are willing to pay more in terms of Nakfa for good s and services than they were in terms of Birr, and producers, suppliers and traders are only too eager to adjust price upwards as market forces dictate. Prices in Ethiopia and Eritrea are made equivalent through the rate of exchange between the Birr and Nakfa. In other words, if a pair of Eritrea n shoes which cost 60 Birr under the erstwhile Ethio-Eritrean common currency arrangement now sells for 120 Nakfa instead of 60 Nakfa, which would be the case according to the one-to-one conversion rate at the time the Nakfa was introduced in Eritrea, then the rate of exchange between the Birr and . . .
Continue reading https://allafrica.com/stories/199801090044.html
"
2.
You are giving away the real reason why Isaias is waging war against TPLF. He wants to Eritreanize Ethiopia first. Then, he thinks he will get to exchange Birr and Nakfa in parity. How could he trust Abiy will not say "No" as TPLF did in 1998? If Abiy is not blackmailed or coerced, and is concerned primarily with Ethiopia's interests first, then he will say "No". Then what? Do we fight Abiy and try to remove him then? When will this cycle end?
"Of course there is at least one "objective" element in the conflict: the monetary question. After Eritrea's independence in 1993, the new country went on using the old Ethiopian currency, the birr. Birrs circulated freely but were issued only by Ethiopia's Central Bank. This situation was in fact advantageous for Eritrea. Traditionally Ethiopia has had a very conservative monetary policy, whether at the time of the Empire or during the communist regime. For a very long time the birr/dollar parity was around two to one. Given the war effort of the 1980s it was therefore a tribute to the prudence of the Ethiopian Central Bank that when the currency was floated freely after the fall of the Mengistu regime the new parity established itself at seven to one, a rate realistic enough to prevent the rise of a black currency market. Inflation was kept at such a low level as to be almost non-existent and all the border trade between Eritrea and Ethiopia was carried out in birrs. Then in 1996 Eritrea decided to create its own currency, the nakfa, which was effectively introduced the following year. The new currency immediately created problems between the two countries.[25][25] To understand this we only need to remember the basics of monetary theory: a fiduciary currency is nothing other than a certificate giving its bearer the right to acquire a (very small) share of the issuing country's Gross National Product (GNP), i.e. the monetarized total of the goods and services produced by that country. Given the fact that we had on one side a country of approximately three million people (Eritrea) against on the other side a country of about sixty million (Ethiopia) and that both had somewhat similar peasant-based economies, it was obvious that one nakfa represented a much smaller value than one birr. Yet the Asmara government insisted on a one for one parity. Soon the economic reality reasserted itself and the value of the nakfa dropped. Addis-Ababa then asked that all Ethio-Eritrean commercial transactions (including the large commercial operations in Assab) be carried out in US dollars. Asmara had very small foreign currency reserves and was not about to squander them on agricultural imports from Ethiopia. The tone of the discussions of currency problems became increasingly bitter and this added irritant was definitely an element in the rash Eritrean military reaction of May 1998."
https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6a6b74.html
"Ethiopia: One Birr Reported Worth 5 Nakfa
9 JANUARY 1998
Addis Tribune (Addis Ababa)
By our Economics Correspondent
Addis Ababa — The Birr/Nakfa exchange rate is still in the process of format ion and accurate data on it is limited. However, several newspaper and verbal reports indicate that domestic prices in Eritrea are fast rising owing to the shortage of real goods which used to be supplied in Birr from Ethiopia, and from the rest of the world, the latter owing to the apparent scarcity of foreign exchange. Prices of products such as fruits and vegetables, eggs, sorghum, and "teff" which Eritrea used to import from Ethiopia in Birr under the now dismantled common currency arrangement, are said to be rising sharply on the Eritrean market.
Rising prices in Eritrea are a preliminary indication that the stock of Nakfa, the new Eritrean currency, is large relative to the stock of goods and services and foreign exchange now available in the Eritrean economy. Hence, Eritrean consumers are willing to pay more in terms of Nakfa for good s and services than they were in terms of Birr, and producers, suppliers and traders are only too eager to adjust price upwards as market forces dictate. Prices in Ethiopia and Eritrea are made equivalent through the rate of exchange between the Birr and Nakfa. In other words, if a pair of Eritrea n shoes which cost 60 Birr under the erstwhile Ethio-Eritrean common currency arrangement now sells for 120 Nakfa instead of 60 Nakfa, which would be the case according to the one-to-one conversion rate at the time the Nakfa was introduced in Eritrea, then the rate of exchange between the Birr and . . .
Continue reading https://allafrica.com/stories/199801090044.html
"
-
ZEMEN
- Member
- Posts: 2491
- Joined: 27 Jun 2011, 14:37
Re: Guaranteed for the next 20 years.
It all about interest and economical advantage. Back in 1998 TPLF said no to 1 to 1 exchange between Birr and Nakfa because back then Birr was more than Nakfa as you mentioned it but know Nakfa is in a good shape and once the GRED is finished, Ethiopia currency should pull itself up. If not just work it out the exchange at the market value. even i suggest make it one currency between the two countries. it is a win win situation. Although i know Eritreans will never go for that.sarcasm wrote: ↑02 Dec 2021, 19:191.2.You are giving away the real reason why Isaias is waging war against TPLF. He wants to Eritreanize Ethiopia first. Then, he thinks he will get to exchange Birr and Nakfa in parity. How could he trust Abiy will not say "No" as TPLF did in 1998? If Abiy is not blackmailed or coerced, and is concerned primarily with Ethiopia's interests first, then he will say "No". Then what? Do we fight Abiy and try to remove him then? When will this cycle end?
"Of course there is at least one "objective" element in the conflict: the monetary question. After Eritrea's independence in 1993, the new country went on using the old Ethiopian currency, the birr. Birrs circulated freely but were issued only by Ethiopia's Central Bank. This situation was in fact advantageous for Eritrea. Traditionally Ethiopia has had a very conservative monetary policy, whether at the time of the Empire or during the communist regime. For a very long time the birr/dollar parity was around two to one. Given the war effort of the 1980s it was therefore a tribute to the prudence of the Ethiopian Central Bank that when the currency was floated freely after the fall of the Mengistu regime the new parity established itself at seven to one, a rate realistic enough to prevent the rise of a black currency market. Inflation was kept at such a low level as to be almost non-existent and all the border trade between Eritrea and Ethiopia was carried out in birrs. Then in 1996 Eritrea decided to create its own currency, the nakfa, which was effectively introduced the following year. The new currency immediately created problems between the two countries.[25][25] To understand this we only need to remember the basics of monetary theory: a fiduciary currency is nothing other than a certificate giving its bearer the right to acquire a (very small) share of the issuing country's Gross National Product (GNP), i.e. the monetarized total of the goods and services produced by that country. Given the fact that we had on one side a country of approximately three million people (Eritrea) against on the other side a country of about sixty million (Ethiopia) and that both had somewhat similar peasant-based economies, it was obvious that one nakfa represented a much smaller value than one birr. Yet the Asmara government insisted on a one for one parity. Soon the economic reality reasserted itself and the value of the nakfa dropped. Addis-Ababa then asked that all Ethio-Eritrean commercial transactions (including the large commercial operations in Assab) be carried out in US dollars. Asmara had very small foreign currency reserves and was not about to squander them on agricultural imports from Ethiopia. The tone of the discussions of currency problems became increasingly bitter and this added irritant was definitely an element in the rash Eritrean military reaction of May 1998."
https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6a6b74.html
"Ethiopia: One Birr Reported Worth 5 Nakfa
9 JANUARY 1998
Addis Tribune (Addis Ababa)
By our Economics Correspondent
Addis Ababa — The Birr/Nakfa exchange rate is still in the process of format ion and accurate data on it is limited. However, several newspaper and verbal reports indicate that domestic prices in Eritrea are fast rising owing to the shortage of real goods which used to be supplied in Birr from Ethiopia, and from the rest of the world, the latter owing to the apparent scarcity of foreign exchange. Prices of products such as fruits and vegetables, eggs, sorghum, and "teff" which Eritrea used to import from Ethiopia in Birr under the now dismantled common currency arrangement, are said to be rising sharply on the Eritrean market.
Rising prices in Eritrea are a preliminary indication that the stock of Nakfa, the new Eritrean currency, is large relative to the stock of goods and services and foreign exchange now available in the Eritrean economy. Hence, Eritrean consumers are willing to pay more in terms of Nakfa for good s and services than they were in terms of Birr, and producers, suppliers and traders are only too eager to adjust price upwards as market forces dictate. Prices in Ethiopia and Eritrea are made equivalent through the rate of exchange between the Birr and Nakfa. In other words, if a pair of Eritrea n shoes which cost 60 Birr under the erstwhile Ethio-Eritrean common currency arrangement now sells for 120 Nakfa instead of 60 Nakfa, which would be the case according to the one-to-one conversion rate at the time the Nakfa was introduced in Eritrea, then the rate of exchange between the Birr and . . .
Continue reading https://allafrica.com/stories/199801090044.html
"
-
sarcasm
- Senior Member
- Posts: 10186
- Joined: 23 Feb 2013, 20:08
Re: Guaranteed for the next 20 years.
I asked the same thing a couple years ago, " Abiy will say 'No'. Then what? Do we fight Abiy and try to remove him then? When will this cycle end??sarcasm wrote: ↑02 Dec 2021, 19:191.2.You are giving away the real reason why Isaias is waging war against TPLF. He wants to Eritreanize Ethiopia first. Then, he thinks he will get to exchange Birr and Nakfa in parity. How could he trust Abiy will not say "No" as TPLF did in 1998? If Abiy is not blackmailed or coerced, and is concerned primarily with Ethiopia's interests first, then he will say "No". Then what? Do we fight Abiy and try to remove him then? When will this cycle end?
eden wrote: ↑19 Aug 2023, 12:21Abiy is not the first to betray Isayas.
Isayas has, is and will keep allying with those that betray him.
He allied with TPLF against DERG. Then TPLF dumped him.
He allied with OPDO against TPLF. Then OPDO dumped him.
He allies with FANO against OPDO. Then FANO will dump him.
He will ally with EZEMA against FANO. Then EZEMA will dump him.
When will Isayas rethink and figure out his policies are permanently destroying Eritrea people? Why not follow a neutral policy where Ethiopian issues are left to Ethiopians so Eritreans are not sacrificed decade after decade?