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."

9 of 480 comments (clear)

  1. Outraged! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Printing currency is a fundamental human right! Next thing you know, they be telling you and me that we can't print currency anymore either.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. Re:Self-stabilizing system by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the huge unnatural, external force in question is depending upon other nations, nations known to be hostile to your ideology, for essential services like printing money

    what i am saying is the narrative of blame the west is fake and contrived. blame the iranians for the fruits of their own choices

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  4. 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
  5. 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.

  6. Re:Self-stabilizing system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My point is exactly that the people should be deciding what money is

    Yes, yes, and now I have to spend 30 minutes on every transaction making sure that the gold coin I've been given is a) really gold b) hasn't had any shaved off c) etc etc etc. Works fine for everyone with scales and a water bath to whip out at the grocery store checkout as everyone in line behind you groans (and you thought the person with 200 coupons was bad!)

    Using cheap metals for coins was the fix for Gresham's law. All money is "bad" money, so scraping a little off each coin won't get you much more than metal splinters.

  7. This is immoral by elloGov · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those who don't listen to us will feel our wrath. Example Iran. This may seem off topic but I think it's relevant to the underpinning factors of this piece of foreign policy. I'm going to be pragmatic and honest rather than ideal here.
    It's my opinion that land and its resources belongs those who conquer it. Who ever gave anyone ownership of oil and/or land? No one, you conquer it then you defend it. I don't care if your God gave/promised it to you, or that you have been there for centuries/millenia. History has shown this time and time with European colonization of Africa and Americas, the mongol conquest of central Asia, the Islamic conquest of Northern Africa and Europe, the Israeli settlement of Palestine. In this regard, Palestine, Saudi oil, etc. all are up for grabs if you ask me, if you wish to take up the conquest.
    As an American, I have no problem supporting a questionable foreign policy as long as it serves OUR national interest. I don't have a problem with double-standards, forcing our will, nor do I care whether it is fair, just, and righteous. What does bother me is the masses eating up the propaganda fed to them by our gov't and media and regurgitating it as the noble path. What we are doing to Iran is immoral, unfair and an act of war. Save me the BS of "spreading democracy", "doing the right thing", or speaking of this "world's/international community's" which is only made up of a minority group of nations.
    Patriotism/nationalism is irrational, ideological and dangerous and it's running wild in the USA more than ever. The whole society/political spectrum has shifted to the right, xenophobia, intolerance and attacks on secularism are on the rise. Combine this with our hostile approach and disregard to just about any country save a few, we are perpetuating our own decline.
    This choke hold on Iran to me, is doing the bidding of our ally Israel based on fickle evidence that is at best propaganda. In addition, we are also doing the bidding of the Saudis and other satellite Saudi kingdoms . I see this as the USA outsourcing its might. I don't believe this serves our national interest. The damages of our hostile actions will hurt us economically, politically and make us less safe. We are walking a tight rope over stagflation should the oil prices rise not to mention of sending more Americans in harms way.

  8. 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