The question itself has good value for the site and the way it has been asked has been edited so that it is no longer "off-topic."

What does everyone think about reopening Why isn't there an "ideal value" for a given currency?

Also, please state WHY it is a good/bad question. Don't simply say "It is a bad question." Elaborate and give SPECIFIC reasons as to why you think it is a bad question.


3 Answers 3


My point of view is that questions that clearly come from "interested outsiders" rather than from research level economists, or even economics students, cannot be subjected to a single rule. I mean, from the 200 questions of the main site, there are many-many such questions (half?)

So one should judge per case. The problems I see with this question are the following:

1) It makes a "claim with a question-mark" without offering anything in terms of argument, however naive or non-economic: why there should be an "ideal" middle ground? Just because? The OP offers no clue as to the thought process that led him to such an impression, he just writes

it seems like there ought to be...

Why does the OP thinks that "there ought to be"? OPs have a duty to offer something at this point of their question. In other words, there is "no research effort", not even as a simple "plain-logic" argument.

2) He also writes

The economists I've encountered seem to insist that this isn't the case,...

He doesn't share with us what these economists told him, and why he was not convinced. He doesn't share previous input he had on his question, and what his thoughts were on it. Again "lack of effort", and lack of clarity.

Then, the question is good only as a springboard to teach economics (but then again, any question can perform this function, however stupid, naive, or badly formed). Since we want this site to go beyond "teaching the economics basics to the people on-line", but not to totally ignore this educational aspect, it follows that questions that essentially require from us to teach the fundamentals, should somehow earn this by showing involvement, rather than looking like a casual question that came to mind and was thrown into the site hoping for a catch.

  • $\begingroup$ I did some more edits to remedy your concerns. $\endgroup$ Dec 16, 2014 at 2:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mathematician I have contributed also to the edit (you may want to have a look), and voted to re-open. $\endgroup$ Dec 16, 2014 at 2:35

Leave Closed

I don't see any benefit in reopening that question. It has several answers already. Are we hoping that it will get better answers? While it's not as bad as the original question, it is still a basic question with little benefit. By closing it we do two things:

  1. Indicate that we want a better quality of question.
  2. Keep this question from getting additional answers.

Do we want to indicate that that question is itself of acceptable quality? Or get more answers? If no, then there's no point to reopening it in my opinion.

Questions should be clear, useful, and show research effort. It's still not quite clear, as we don't have a definition of an "ideal value" for a currency. I'm not sure how useful it can be, although it does have two answers that have community support. And in terms of research effort, it shows no signs of describing how one might calculate an ideal value of money. Any question where all the answers basically start, 'that is not how it works,' is a question that is a bit problematic.

Why do national governments not rent money from central banks directly? at least still has the possibility of a good answer to a weak question. The community could still close it (and might), but there remains some benefit to having it open. If it is closed, I kind of hope Ubiquitous posts a better version along the lines discussed in the comment.

  • $\begingroup$ WHY is it still a "basic question with little benefit"? HOW can we improve the quality of the question? WHY don't we want this question to get additional answers? WHY do we prefer to close the question rather than improve it and benefit the site as a whole? This question IS "clear, useful," and DOES "show research effort." What makes you think that it does not? If "research effort" is determined by whether the OP explicitly states that he has looked for a solution, then most of the questions on this site are in danger of not showing "research effort." Please explain. $\endgroup$ Dec 11, 2014 at 1:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Mathematician "It's still not quite clear, as we don't have a definition of an "ideal value" for a currency." If you're not going to read what I wrote, why reply? $\endgroup$
    – Brythan
    Dec 11, 2014 at 3:34
  • $\begingroup$ With all due respect, I did read your question, but I don't know how that line is relevant. Did you want him to define "ideal value"? Is there even an actual definition for "ideal value"? Maybe, maybe not. Either way, the OP still explains what he is looking for. $\endgroup$ Dec 11, 2014 at 21:09
  • $\begingroup$ I did some more edits to remedy your concerns. $\endgroup$ Dec 16, 2014 at 2:28

I think it still reads as a naive and basic question. Given the way that the voting has been going at What level are we aiming for, now we are in public beta? , I don't see much community interest in handling naive and basic questions.

It seems to me that this: Why do national governments not rent money from central banks directly? is also in the same category.

  • $\begingroup$ Please explain. How is it still "a naive and basic question"? $\endgroup$ Dec 10, 2014 at 23:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .