Since ethereum will have all kinds of facilities for hedging/currencyexchange/arbitrage, why not just have 1000 separate ethereum blockchains, all structurally identical?
For some of the ether chains, the nominal currency value would be higher and therefore more mining would be done. Others would have a smaller nominal currency value, and therefore would allow for contracts with lower fees. Most likely, the value of each currency will be decided by the utility of the contracts that happen to be on that specific chain (and the feeds that happen to be embedded into that chain.)
In this way, people could decide whether they prefer security vs. cost for their contracts, by choosing a busy or less busy blockchain. If a person needs to switch blockchains, there would be contracts available for performing the currency exchange, making it easy to switch to another ether variant.
One could also emagine that some of the blockchains would be chocked full of feed data, so that contracts in those blockchains would have immense amounts of external data available, but contracts in those blockchain would have very high fees, given the limited space remaining for contracts.
This means "full" clients would only need to download the blockchains for those ether variants the user cares about, eliminating the blockchain bloat issue almost entirely.
I'm sure this idea has already been discussed previously- It's pretty obvious... I'm just surprised I haven't read about it yet though, given the perfect fit for the design of ethereum. Of course, this concept is fully compatible with the current fundraising plans, since you could just give people 1 ether each of 1000 types instead of 1000 ether of only one type.
Can someone who knows the technical details better than me point out the PROS/CONS of this design? I'd love to hear them.