Just an interesting side note to this that when I tried to give out my exams at the U 
of A, I was forced by the Dean to change back from XX $ format to $ XX!  :-S  At least 
I explained to him why I was doing it and he at least was gracious enough to see my 
point...  (a future 'drop' maybe?...  Oh, how I hate this term...  :-S)

Marcus

On Sat, 26 Jan 2002 05:10:07  
 John Woelflein wrote:
>
> Pat,
>Thank you for answering my question!
>  Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear John and All,
>
>I attach some thoughts (below) on currency issues.
>
>on 2002/01/23 23.31, John Woelflein at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Money and SI
>
>The bankers and other regular handlers of money are remarkably conservative.
>Recently (2001), the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) changed from using
>'pieces of eight' to using decimal currency, dollars and cents, in quoting
>stock prices. This change took the NYSE 208 years from the introduction of
>decimal currency in the USA in 1793.
>
>In 1792, it was common practice, in writing cheques and contracts, to place
>the pound sign (B#) before the number from fear that a crook might add a
>digit or two at the left-hand end of the number. This led to our peculiar
>practice of writing one thing and saying another.
>
>We don't say $50 as 'dollars forty'; we say 'fifty dollars.' Putting the
>dollar sign before the number is clearly inconsistent with how we say the
>amount. And, just as clearly, we have not yet recovered from the use of the
>pound sign (B#) placed before the number in 1792.
>
>Even within Australia, we are not consistent. We put the dollar symbol
>first, as in $12.34, but when we are using cents, we put the number first,
>as in 34c. Some other nations do the same as us, and others are more
>rational.
>
>(For the moment I am ignoring the issue of writing $12.34 and saying 'twelve
>dollars thirty-four' with the $ sign on the left of the written number and
>the word 'dollar' placed in the middle of the spoken number!)
>
>Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland, the UK, and the
>USA place their currency symbols before the number, and Finland, France,
>Germany, Norway, Spain, and Sweden place their currency symbols after the
>number.
>
>I am not aware of any official policy with the introduction of the Euro;
>there seems to be no set way to place its symbol, b,. I suppose people will
>stick with their current practices and write 1000 b, in Finnish, French
>Belgian, French, German, Norwegian, Spanish, and Swedish, and b, 1000 in
>Brazilian, Danish, Dutch, English, Flemish Belgian, Italian, and Swiss.
>However, they will all continue to say the words with the Euro after the
>number.
>
>The Australian practice of placing the currency symbol before the number
>leads to some odd results when we choose to combine the dollar sign with
>other symbols. For example, at the greengrocers we see might see a sign that
>says $2 kg and we would read this as two dollars per kilogram. It would be
>more logical to write it as 2 $/kg, so that the reading and the saying could
>be the same. It also makes more sense to write two thousand dollars per
>annum as 2000 $/a rather than the clumsy looking, and difficult to read,
>$2000/a. It reads better and looks less cluttered if you keep the units
>symbols together.
>
>We also get extremely odd results when journalists have to write large
>numbers. Consider $1000m/a and $2000bi/y, which I think were supposed to
>mean 'one thousand million dollars per annum' and 'two thousand billion
>dollars per annum' respectively.
>
>With inflation, over many years, the large numbers needed for such things as
>market capitalisation of major companies or any number as part of a set of
>national accounts is now largely meaningless to all but a specialist few. We
>cannot come to terms with these numbers because inflation has gradually made
>our numerical language insufficient.
>
>For a time we tried words like billions, trillions, quadrillions, but
>because of their diverse histories and their undefined meaninglessness, we
>never comprehended or accepted them fully.
>
>Fortunately we have available a set of well-established words that can solve
>this linguistic problem for us. These words are the prefixes from the system
>of international units (SI). These are not only readily available but they
>have used successfully in many varied places.
>
>Australians have used the idea of kilodollars for years. This is not in the
>sense of 'My aunty died and left me three kilodollars', but in the form of
>'Salary package b


Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably
Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail.
Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com

Reply via email to