Fred Foldvary <ffoldvar@jfku.jfku.edu> wrote:

Is there a name for a dual or split currency, in which there is one currency for domestic use and another, different appearing, currency for foreign usage?

Does anyone know of any country which has had such a split currency?

Many third world nations employed this system, one currency for internal use only, and one currency for international transactions. The international currency was sometimes denominated in hard currency, and reasonably convertible into it. This strategy was frequently associated with police state tactics, lawless imprisonment, and swift execution, for vaguely defined economic crimes. It has become substantially less common in the nineties. The external currency tended to spread into the internal economy, despite police state measures to prevent this from happening, and the internal currency tended to become worthless and could only be spent while holding a gun to the head of the person accepting it. In countries employing this system, women, and often children of both sexes, are often cheaply available for sexual purposes if you have foreign currency. I speculate that this is because people find that they *must* obtain foreign currency, the internal currency being unspendable, and any method available to them for obtaining foreign currency is a criminal offense. A retreat from this system, usually by allowing the international currency to freely penetrate the internal economy, tends to be associated with a substantial reduction in the availability of young girls, as for example in Cuba recently.

This scenario is not entirely hypothetical. I have read that Senator Patrick Leahy introduced Senate Bill #307 to create such a split currency.

Why am I not surprised that it was Senator Patrick Leahy of crypto bill fame? --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com