Slashdot Mirror


Iran Running Out of Physical Currency, Satellite Broadcasts Dropped in Europe

iONiUM writes "In an interesting problem with physical currency, Iran is now running out of hard currency, due to a combination of inflation, and 'Koenig & Bauer AG of Würzburg, Germany, also says it has not responded to an Iranian request for bids to make the presses to print new rials.' Perhaps they should switch to BitCoin." In addition to not printing money for them, the European currency presses won't sell Iran the equipment needed to print their currency domestically (not unexpected with the embargo). pigrabbitbear adds: "Eutelsat Communications, one of the largest satellite providers in Europe, has just nixed its contract with IRIB, the Iranian state broadcasting company. While IRIB's programming is still mostly up and running in Iran, the decision means that 19 IRIB TV and radio channels have now been axed from Europe and much of the Middle East."

5 of 480 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Self-stabilizing system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, because cash is digital; the paper tokens are just for convenience when you're not using a card or whatever. You're mistaking the symbol for the thing symbolized.

  2. Re:Big surprise by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Informative

    this is what happens when you don't cooperate with the Americans, the Europeans, the Turks, the Saudis, the Israelis, the Russians, the Chinese, etc...

    there is a price to pay for forging a path that is hostile and has animosity to rest of the world. framing the situation as a country not blindly following just the USA is complete bullshit

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  3. Re:Desperation breeds war. by Xest · · Score: 5, Informative

    "It is pretty douchy that Israel didn't have to sign the NPT but gets weapons and reactors."

    No one has to sign it, it's entirely option. Note that Pakistan, India, and North Korea all have weapons and reactors but are not signatories either.

    The treaty is based on the idea that if you sign up, then if you don't have nuclear weapons, then you don't seek to acquire them, and if you do have nuclear weapons, then you agree to reduce stockpiles with the aim of eventually disarming. In return for agreeing to this, you get access to global nuclear technology and information sharing agreements for peaceful nuclear power generation. The problem with Iran is that it wants access to this information, and the nuclear components market, but it's not fulfilling it's legal obligations to prove that it's not seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.

    I hope this clarifies the difference between Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea vs. Iran. The former 4 have basically made the calculation that they'd rather have nuclear weapons and worry about sourcing nuclear enrichment and power technologies outside of international frameworks, or alternatively, simply developing it themselves internally. In contrast, Iran is basically saying they want all the benefits of the NPT, whilst fulfilling none of the obligations. You can't do that, you either sign up to all, or nothing.

    One final point I'll make though is that action to prevent states becoming nuclear capable can happen whether the NPT is involved or not, so you shouldn't assume the NPT is a tool used to simply beat nations with, it's not. The reason I say this is because the pressure against North Korea (a non-NPT signatory) is as strong as against Iran (an NPT signatory). As you can see, rhetoric, proposed action, or actual action against a nation is simply to do with global politics as much as it is NPT compliance - in other words it doesn't matter if India/Pakistan/Israel are NPT signatories or not, any action against them will happen, or not happen, regardless of their NPT signatory status so Israel signing up to the NPT, or Iran dropping out of the NPT, would have absolutely no bearing on the pressure (or in Israel's case, lack of) against them.

  4. Re:Self-stabilizing system by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bank collapse is not a bad thing. Honestly they should have let the banks collapse here in the USA.

    Yeah, it went pretty well for Iceland.

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/top-economists-iceland-did-it-right-everyone-else-is-doing-it-wrong.html

    People just don't seem to get that when you see a sharp horse trader who is the richest man in town, you know he's going to screw you in any business dealings you have with him because that's how he got to be the richest man in town. So, when he tells you "I refuse to do business with you", the correct response is "Thank you".

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  5. Re:Outraged! by timeOday · · Score: 5, Informative

    Iran's inflation isn't caused by an abundance of currency, but by a shortage of goods. This is intentional, in fact we are the ones causing it.