Topic: a world currency | |
---|---|
"Paving the Way: How Our Credit Reliance Will Bring the Downfall of the US Dollar"
Hello, I am the United States, and I have an addiction. The federal government and the American people as a whole have an addiction to credit. No money? No problem! Just buy now and pay later! We have become a society that lives beyond our means at all levels. Fortunately for us, we are experiencing somewhat of an economic crisis - what you call a crisis, I call marketplace reforms. We as a people have realized our money is not endless. We have cut back spending dramatically - particularly in new durable goods, instead relying on our existing assets and simply fixing that 3 year old F-150 instead of trading up for the new one. The credit crunch that has ensued has forced us to live within our means and it is changing the landscape of the market. Major retailers have been forced to lay off workers due to the falling demand. Manufacturing has suffered. While painful now, the good that comes from this will far outweigh the bad if we can stay the course. That is assuming, however, that the goldfish minds of the people do not forget this in another five years. Currently every segment of the economy is suffering. Every segment, except one - government. We have always had an act now, pay later mentality that is very evident in the national debt history. Not a single dollar has been paid down in over a century. We persist in adding to the pile that will ultimately result in our submission to another. Our last leader's administration succeeded in doubling the national debt in just eight short years. Our current administration will succeed in adding the same amount in far less time - likely before the first term is up. This reckless spending has required us to borrow from some not-so-friendly nations like China. And China has realized the dangerous road we are taking and is not exactly poised to stop us. They do realize the dangers of inflation on their holdings but they realize the silver lining: complete takeover as the world economic power. You see, China has been calling for a few weeks now for a world currency. They know much of the strength of the U.S. economy is based on the power the USD holds in the world marketplace. They know that GDP is just number and that power is the real key to taking the number one position on top of that market. So they feed us the credit fix we so desperately desire, knowing that once our national debt crosses the threshold where we are barely able to afford the interest, they can pull the rope on the noose we have placed around our own necks. As the world begins to doubt the security of the USD, China will have the full capability to forge the world currency they so desire by force. All that will have to be done is get a few major nations in on it and declare the new currency. If the US refuses? Fine. The USD is no longer accepted for payment on debt or manufactured goods. The only real allies that China will need in this venture are nations far from friendly to us - namely the oil producing nations of the world that feed our other addiction. Once they control the oil supply and the cheap manufacturing we use China for, the USD will quickly become extinct. The solution? well, we are far from a total quick-fix and a real answer is decades away in practice. The public debt was not created in a day, after all. It should start with the same crunch that has been brought upon the consumer. We need fiscal responsibility. There is always the option of raising taxes but that is more likely to harm the economy more than create stability. The first step would be to stabilize the currency. Remove the power to create it from those that benefit most from it's creation. Follow that by balancing a budget and we will be on our way. The truth is, while appearances are important to many, actions speak louder than words. The world seems to have an affection for the new leader but I think it's about time to stop trying to make everyone happy and show what a leader is meant to be. There is a real opportunity here to reform the entire system that is being wasted and the world is watching it, every step of the way. |
|
|
|
Obama said this is not a concern. There will be no world currency.
|
|
|
|
Obama said this is not a concern. There will be no world currency. And the word of one man means what? apparently you didn't read the post (judging by the 2 minute response time, it's very likely). If our current practices ensue, we will not have a choice. |
|
|
|
It is not quite so simple, my friend.
One world currency in the manner laid out involves a disassociation from the US that China cannot afford. We are responsible(citizen spending) for some 40% or better of China's economy. The sky is not falling just yet! |
|
|
|
It is not quite so simple, my friend. One world currency in the manner laid out involves a disassociation from the US that China cannot afford. We are responsible(citizen spending) for some 40% or better of China's economy. The sky is not falling just yet! I am not saying the sky is falling right now. I know this would still be a decade off at least. The fact of the matter is, once we reach the point we realize something like this is happening, we would be too far in to stop it. While China depends on us, we also rely on China. we cannot afford to cut out the manufacturing that comes from that nation. It would not be China cutting us off entirely, only taking advantage our our position and forcing us to trade in a different currency. We can kick and scream all we want, but when the debt to GDP ratio gets too high, we will not have any say in the matter. |
|
|
|
Good read as usual my friend...
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
I personally feel that if we 'lost' the ability to purchase goods manufactured from within any other nation it would be the necessary element required to be self-sufficient... once again!
Every dime spent on goods manufactured in China is spent financially supporting Communism and slave labor, the latter of which has paralyzed the manufacturing sector which constituted most of our middle class. Outsourcing benefits company owners and other countries... Not a good policy for the average citizen. |
|
|
|
I personally feel that if we 'lost' the ability to purchase goods manufactured from within any other nation it would be the necessary element required to be self-sufficient... once again! Every dime spent on goods manufactured in China is spent financially supporting Communism and slave labor, the latter of which has paralyzed the manufacturing sector which constituted most of our middle class. Outsourcing benefits company owners and other countries... Not a good policy for the average citizen. capitalism is about efficiency. The market environment has forced many of these nations overseas. While China cutting us off would force more self-dependency, we do not have the available workforce to perform all the manufacturing done by China. Our unemployment would be next to zero and that leads to very, very dangerous cost-push inflation that is impossible to remove at that unemployment level without severe government wage ceilings. |
|
|
|
capitalism is about efficiency. The market environment has forced many of these nations overseas. While China cutting us off would force more self-dependency, we do not have the available workforce to perform all the manufacturing done by China. Our unemployment would be next to zero and that leads to very, very dangerous cost-push inflation that is impossible to remove at that unemployment level without severe government wage ceilings.
Capitalism being used to support the bottom line alone is about efficiency, and it's use in that way has proved to be detrimental to the the average citizen regarding the pursuit of happiness. It has weakened our country and caused the dependancy that you fear in your post. It is hypocritical on a fundamental level. To provide the means for another country to do what is forbidden in this country, while simultaneuosly putting American workers on an unemployment line... For what? The fear that unemployment being close to zero would be negative? I do not buy it. |
|
|
|
Edited by
AndrewAV
on
Sat 04/04/09 10:22 PM
|
|
capitalism is about efficiency. The market environment has forced many of these nations overseas. While China cutting us off would force more self-dependency, we do not have the available workforce to perform all the manufacturing done by China. Our unemployment would be next to zero and that leads to very, very dangerous cost-push inflation that is impossible to remove at that unemployment level without severe government wage ceilings.
Capitalism being used to support the bottom line alone is about efficiency, and it's use in that way has proved to be detrimental to the the average citizen regarding the pursuit of happiness. It has weakened our country and caused the dependancy that you fear in your post. It is hypocritical on a fundamental level. To provide the means for another country to do what is forbidden in this country, while simultaneuosly putting American workers on an unemployment line... For what? The fear that unemployment being close to zero would be negative? I do not buy it. There is a reason 5% unemployment is considered full employment. Quickie Macro 101 lesson: Unemployment is a sample. Being a sample it is not the full rate in every area at every time in every industry. 5% is considered perfect because past that, you have a surplus of jobs in various areas/industries while a shortage in others offsets the number. Look at is this way: there are 100 workers applying for 120 jobs. it is no longer the worker competing for a job, it's the business competing for a workforce. That means the businesses are forced to increase wages and benefits in order to lure in workers. While this sounds great to the working person, that means the bottom line just dropped the same amount as the costs of the additional wages and benefits. Now the goods have to be sold at a higher price. As this happens in many different market segments, inflation follows. This is why it's hard to eliminate this form of inflation. It can only be removed by reducing the power the worker has over the employer. It's much more complicated than that but if we brought every manufacturing job back to america, our economy would potentially implode. As for efficiency, it's not always about the bottom line - it's about who can do the job the best for the price. It's about specialization. By selecting certain industries we do ourselves, and allow others to perform work in other industries that they do more efficiently than us, we can increase everyone's benefit. |
|
|
|
Is there a precedent in American history which supports this unemployment claim?
I always find it a little ironic when the consumer cost of a product is used in support of outsourcing... It is often claimed that the cost of employing American workers drive the retail prices up, and that is why it has been necessary to outsource. If one follows that logic, then why, when the labor costs are cut by nearly 90% do the prices not reflect it? If the reason given for outsourcing is that the retail costs were too high and this resulted in the labor being outsourced, then why have the prices not fallen accordingly? Americans without jobs, or those who have been forced to take lesser paying jobs are basically being forced to support the slave labor because the decrease in income limits the ability to purchase anything else. This country was not intended to use capitalism to bankrupt it's society, while bolstering Communism and elitism. Greed... not capitalism as it was intended, is THE problem which underlies the current state of our nation's economy and it's dependency upon countries which hold it's people as we would hold prisoners. |
|
|
|
Is there a precedent in American history which supports this unemployment claim? I always find it a little ironic when the consumer cost of a product is used in support of outsourcing... It is often claimed that the cost of employing American workers drive the retail prices up, and that is why it has been necessary to outsource. If one follows that logic, then why, when the labor costs are cut by nearly 90% do the prices not reflect it? If the reason given for outsourcing is that the retail costs were too high and this resulted in the labor being outsourced, then why have the prices not fallen accordingly? Americans without jobs, or those who have been forced to take lesser paying jobs are basically being forced to support the slave labor because the decrease in income limits the ability to purchase anything else. This country was not intended to use capitalism to bankrupt it's society, while bolstering Communism and elitism. Greed... not capitalism as it was intended, is THE problem which underlies the current state of our nation's economy and it's dependency upon countries which hold it's people as we would hold prisoners. consumer costs are the same as price. I'm talking about business costs. Those always drive prices up as they rise. There is no precedent, it's economics. prices are determined by many things. if 90% of the labor cost is cut by outsourcing, what about the increase in shipping costs? |
|
|
|
consumer costs are the same as price. I'm talking about business costs. Those always drive prices up as they rise. There is no precedent, it's economics. prices are determined by many things. if 90% of the labor cost is cut by outsourcing, what about the increase in shipping costs?
There is no precedent because it would not happen. What about additional shipping costs? They are more than offset by the savings in labor. If one cost is simply evenly exchanged for the other, then there is no benefit, and therefore no viable reason for a company's owner(s) to outsource the manufacturing of it's product(s). The possibility of profit increase caused outsourcing, nothing else. It is the bottom line, my friend, that drives outsourcing and is at the root of the current global crisis. Greed. Money. |
|
|
|
Well, Obama can say whatever he wants, but the fun little goof, Geithner took only about 24 hours to change his position on the topic. Telling Congress that there's no chance of World Currency and then telling the Council on Foriegn Relations the exact opposite.
|
|
|
|
When are people going to get it through their heads, our Presidents are no longer the last seat of power in this country. They are spokesmen for Globalist banking interests now.
London Telegraph Admits Plan For Bank Of The World, Global Currency International Business Editor says “Conspiracy theorists will love it” Steve Watson Infowars.net Saturday, April 4, 2009 The international business editor of the London Telegraph has today penned a piece admitting that the fallout of the G20 summit sets the stage for a global central bank and a global fiat currency. After yesterday’s widespread announcement of a “new world order” by the world’s media, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the Telegraph writes “The world is a step closer to a global currency, backed by a global central bank, running monetary policy for all humanity.” The economic analyst points to a clause in Point 19 of the communiqué issued by the G20 leaders, saying it “amounts to revolution in the global financial order.” “We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250bn (£170bn) into the world economy and increase global liquidity,” The clause states. SDRs are Special Drawing Rights, a synthetic paper currency issued by the International Monetary Fund that has lain dormant for half a century. “In effect, the G20 leaders have activated the IMF’s power to create money and begin global ‘quantitative easing’. In doing so, they are putting a de facto world currency into play. It is outside the control of any sovereign body. Conspiracy theorists will love it.” Evans-Pritchard comments. Read the Entire Telegraph article here. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/5096524/The-G20-moves-the-world-a-step-closer-to-a-global-currency.html Even though Evans-Pritchard directly admits the political agenda to diminish the power of sovereign states in favor of a move towards global governance, he still couches it under the term “conspiracy theory”, suggesting it is some sort of paranoid delusion. It is time to face this agenda head on, expose it for what it really is and stop engaging in cognitive dissonance and blind ignorance. Furthermore, why would we “love” to see unfold before our eyes the very diabolical strategy that we have consistently warned will eventually strip us of all our freedoms? As we have exhaustively documented, the new world order has nothing to do with saving the world and everything to do with centralizing power and control into the hands of a gaggle of criminal globalists who are concerned about nothing other than increasing their domination over the planet - at the expense of the rest of the population. The new world order is totalitarian by its very nature - shifting power away from sovereign countries to global institutions which have no accountability to the general public whatsoever, and through which the public has no voice or influence. That cannot be defined as anything else but undemocratic. There is no such thing as a “benign” new world order. It’s about time the establishment media stopped parroting the words of globalists, stopped dismissing as trite their clear and outright agenda to seize power, and actually started exposing what is really happening in this world with purpose. |
|
|
|
Edited by
AndrewAV
on
Sun 04/05/09 09:57 AM
|
|
consumer costs are the same as price. I'm talking about business costs. Those always drive prices up as they rise. There is no precedent, it's economics. prices are determined by many things. if 90% of the labor cost is cut by outsourcing, what about the increase in shipping costs?
There is no precedent because it would not happen. What about additional shipping costs? They are more than offset by the savings in labor. If one cost is simply evenly exchanged for the other, then there is no benefit, and therefore no viable reason for a company's owner(s) to outsource the manufacturing of it's product(s). The possibility of profit increase caused outsourcing, nothing else. It is the bottom line, my friend, that drives outsourcing and is at the root of the current global crisis. Greed. Money. There is also no precedent to prove it will not happen. If you don't understand the principles behind economics, you will not understand where I am coming from. A too-low unemployment rate is one of the hardest 101 concepts to comprehend and understand for someone not thoroughly interested in the subject. There are many reasons for a company to move overseas and the market environment over the last few decades is the #1 reason. I'd also like to point out that the savings from outsourcing are enjoyed daily by the American public. Bring jobs back here and the price of everything will rise. |
|
|
|
It is not quite so simple, my friend. One world currency in the manner laid out involves a disassociation from the US that China cannot afford. We are responsible(citizen spending) for some 40% or better of China's economy. The sky is not falling just yet! Yeah, we will dictate to China, threatening to stop buying and just die off. |
|
|
|
I personally feel that if we 'lost' the ability to purchase goods manufactured from within any other nation it would be the necessary element required to be self-sufficient... once again! Incorrect, insofar as you place your hope of US economic revival with inability to purchase from abroad. To be clear, while an inability to import will make it easier, something else has to change, and that is lazy American ignoramus has to get off his as*, and start working for a smaller real wage. Smaller real wage is the key. |
|
|
|
Every dime spent on goods manufactured in China is spent financially supporting Communism and slave labor, the latter of which has paralyzed the manufacturing sector which constituted most of our middle class. Outsourcing benefits company owners and other countries... Not a good policy for the average citizen. Please, support your assertion of "slave labor". |
|
|
|
Capitalism being used to support the bottom line alone is about efficiency, and it's use in that way has proved to be detrimental to the the average citizen regarding the pursuit of happiness. It has weakened our country and caused the dependancy that you fear in your post. It is hypocritical on a fundamental level. To provide the means for another country to do what is forbidden in this country, while simultaneuosly putting American workers on an unemployment line... For what? The fear that unemployment being close to zero would be negative? I do not buy it. Detrimental to the lazy and the ignorant, to be exact. |
|
|