This map is somewhay misleading, some countries use currency without decimals, making their currency worth effectively less. Take for example the euro, a cent (a one hundredth of an euro) is cerntainly worth less than a robux while an euro isn't. The same comparison with the japanese yen (efectively a cent) shows that robux is more valuable. The map should be how many robux can you buy with the minimum wage for example.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Because the EU doesn't use the cent, they use the Euro. A cent is a fraction of a euro.

The Yen is like that because they had hyperinflation for a while.

This comment really doesn't make sense.

[–] smollittlefrog@lemdro.id 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The point of the comment is to point out the common misconception that the value of one [token of a currency] has anything to do with the strength of a currency. As described in the comment, the value of a singular token of a currency can be chosen arbitrarily.

This, of course, doesn't mean the map is factually incorrect.

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

But the value of a unit of currency being unrelated to the currency's strength had nothing to do with whether that currency has cents or not. That comment just used the wrong explanation to make a correct point.

Also the map isn't entirely useless, because what it does illustrate is currencies which likely suffered from high or hyper-inflation in the past (or are very old). Obviously, no government first issues a currency and says "... and so one loaf of bread is 10000 schmeckles". That's just impractical.

Of course this doesn't mean that then Japanese Yen is a bad currency, but it does make for an interesting historical point.

[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

This, I don't think the map is incorrect, for me it would be more interesting to compare people's wealth than the arbitrary value of a token

load more comments (8 replies)