So would now be a good time to get into some fixed rate debt and buy some Euros? If inflation hits, I can use the Euros to payoff the debt I hold in US dollars.

Also, does anyone know how inflation effects housing prices. If wages increase along with the decline of the dollar, do houses become more affordable or does the value of the house climb along with wage increases? Does anyone know what happened in the 70's inflation?

Not the euro, but gold (and possibly silver as well).

Eurozone countries will also be tempted to inflate away their debts.  Take a look at their

• public debt/GDP ratios,
  
• budget deficit/GDP ratios,
  
• prospective dependency ratios (retired vs working folks).

They are as screwed up as the US is, and maybe more, because the US budget deficit was brought about by tax cuts that can just end, and by a war that can also just end (not during this Administration, obviously).  But their budget deficits cannot be pinpointed to similar specific and easily reversable (mis)policies: they have not cut taxes or entered any war recently.  Rather they are structural, and so more difficult to solve.  The difference is that the US debt has been financed mainly by foreigners, so the net gain from inflating it away is greater for the US citizens.

By the above measures, Japan is just a very bad joke.  So, forget the yen.

OK, what about the Swiss franc?  I don't know really what those parameters are for the Swiss economy, and actually don't care, because the case can be dismissed on grounds of volume: if a significant amount of currency reserves are switched to CHFs, that would cause such a CHF overvaluation that would enable the lowest-wage-earning Swiss folks to vacation in five-star resorts anywhere!  Which brings the point: using any currency as reserve currency amounts to giving the issuing country a free lunch.  They give paper and receive goods.

So we are left with precious metals.  BTW, the Bretton Woods system (1944-1971) was a gold standard: the USD was pegged at 35 USD/ounce.  And while it worked the US was a net creditor to the rest of the world.

Interestingly, this viewpoint is not just the realm of gold bugs and pseudo-analysts on the fringes.  It has just been proposed by one of Morgan Stanley economists, Stephen L Jen.  See:
http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/20051007-fri.html

"We argue gold is a good hedge, or, more precisely a `neutraliser', against currency risk.

This favours central banks holding more gold in their reserves to dilute their exposure to foreign currencies.  First, the USD could falter and thus erode the USD value of the Asian central banks' foreign reserve holdings.  Second, the Asian currencies could appreciate leading to a valuation loss on official reserves.  Gold holdings could partly `neutralise' or dilute the first risk but can do little about the latter, especially if the country in question has low gold holdings. For the same reasons, petrodollar holders should also consider buying gold."

Interestingly too, the same issue of MS Global Economic Forum features a comment by another of their economists, Robert Alan Feldman, about the prospect of peak oil.  It is good to see that not all economists are of the flat-earth variety:

"For policymakers, the oil market presents a classic case of decision under uncertainty. There are two axes to consider. First, either the optimists are right or wrong. Second, either the world invests in technology/exploration, or it does not. So there are four combinations. (1) Optimists right/Few investments:  Civilization is safe, with little waste. (2) Optimists right/Big investments:  Civilization is safe, but has wasted some resources. (3) Optimists wrong/Few investments:  Civilization is NOT safe. (4) Optimists wrong/Big investments:  Civilization safe, but not as rich as if oil were unlimited. For a policymaker, it is better to spur the investments, because the worst possible outcome is a bit of waste. This waste can likely be absorbed by economic growth."

I wouldn't be so certain that the Euro is a strong currency in face of a total worldwide collapse.  It, like almost all of the currecy out there, is a fiat currency, and under a massive economic collapse, all fiat currencies will likely collapse, especially since alot of it is intrisically tied to the dollar and we're going to probably crash first, pulling everyone with us.

Others argue gold, and while I'm also a goldbug, if you have anything close to a decent amount of investment monies it just doesn't make sense.  Where are YOU going to keep $200,000 of gold without making yourself a target?  It's better for low investors like myself who have a couple of thousand invested, can carry their money in gold easily, and really are less interested in making that money grow as much as just having a safe investment, although that can be argued with gold.

The best money-making, value-secure investment would be in goods.  It is obviously a large-scale investment, as it requires investment in warehouses and hard security, but post-collapse, the price of necessities like water and tools will skyrocket, and there will be demand.  Further, if you're shrewd, you can always barter for goods that are in low demand in the short-term (construction utilities) but will be heavy demand once we gain our footing again (if we do).  Also, goods are extremely cheap right now, with outsourced production.  Of course, there's alot of ethical delimas in there, including profiting on life necessities and sending more dollars out of the country.

But, overall, that's where the money will be post-collapse.  Just remember, during the gold rushes, it was the merchandisers that struck it rich, not the speculators.