Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by angrydude
dudes, the dollar is going to get destroyed if/when the Fed starts indiscriminately buying back treasury bonds like they announced they were going to ...
Probably not.
It wouldn't call it so much of a "game" as an inevitability. Not in my lifetime, but it will happen eventually.
It would make things waaaay more economically efficient and transparent.
Originally Posted by angrydude
dudes, the dollar is going to get destroyed if/when the Fed starts indiscriminately buying back treasury bonds like they announced they were going to ...
Probably not.
It has always been a possibility, but still remains little more than a vaguely formed idea, claims from conspiracy nuts like Hal Turner notwithstanding.
There is no political will for this at all, and it will not happen, barring a near total catastrophe that would make our present problems pale in comparison.
Some thing this catastrophe is in the offing, and a few think it is being actively orchestrated as we speak, by "them" (cue dramatic music here, DUN DUN DUN)
It will be resisted by both ends of the political spectrum, and definitely by the evangelicals that run the GOP. It smacks of the stuff talked about in the book of revelations (anti-christ, etc), and a good chunk of the evangelical leadership is always on the alert for stuff like that, don't doubt that for a second.
I think there will continue to be regional economic blocs, and that trend will likely continue, but anyone who thinks that such a radical acceleration of a very very very slow process is in the cards is betting on a rather narrow range of potential outcomes that is fairly improbable.
Possible, certainly, but as the guy mentions, just barely.
Thanks for the link.
By Sept. 18-19 it was clear the whole goddam financial system was bankrupt. Now we're just arguing about how to remain in denial.
Currency collapse would appear to be a dark cloud on the horizon. Not upon us yet, but just visible.
I think we should put banks in default. Declare the goddam defaults, take over the banks. Promise to cover the deposits. Pull them apart, put together moneymakers and denationalize them later. That's what Stiglitz is telling England to do. Is that so childish?
Stiglitz inveighs against the "bad bank" idea:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...CX0&refer=home
Last edited by Winehole23; 02-03-2009 at 01:50 PM.
Maybe not so vaguely formed, anymore.
I'm not ready to put on the sandwich board yet, but we do live in interesting times, wouldn't you say?There is no political will for this at all, and it will not happen, barring a near total catastrophe that would make our present problems pale in comparison.
Like national default? Our megabanks are insolvent. That's our starting point. Where does the graph go from there?
Also,
"It is probable that many things should happen contrary to probability." --Aristotle, Poetics
Global economic steering?
Oddly enough time this is echoed in our understanding of quantum physics.
Given enough time, the probability of ANYTHING happening reaches 1.
It is possible that you could be walking down the street, then could suddenly vanish, appear on mars for a split second, and then reappear on the other side of the street.
Douglas Adams, in his wonderful Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, which I would recommend to ANYBODY with a sense of humor/fun, said that the fastest ship in the universe was powered by an ultimate improbability drive that made things that were really really improbable happen, such as faster than light travel.
But that is off topic. I think we were flinging poo at each other about something political or other.
Not necessarily, but not having to deal with currency fluctuations would introduce a certain amount of transparency to international transactions.
But you lose the feedback about local conditions that a variety of currencies will give you. Don't you?
Maybe... Probably, but how far into the future. For that matter, it's logical to think that someday we will have a world government. As for a North American currency... I doubt it in my lifetime.
I don't think it's a conspiracy. The Euro wasn't a conspiracy; people had been writing about it for decades by the time it was introduced. Still, I'm sure that at one time there were people in France, Germany, Italy, and so on who said to people, "hey, I read an article the other day about a single European currency in the future."
"It will never happen."
"Conspiracy theory."
"Politically Impossible."
Just sayin'. The reason I posted this article was because the guy's reasons for the possibility are similar to what I've been saying about the subject.
And I still say that people won't care that much. Is anybody taking out any bankers these days? Nope. People's civil rights are violated all the time, but nobody really cares THAT much. As long as the standard of living of the middle class stays at least close to what it is, most people won't care what their money looks like, or who creates it... just like today.
And as far as people screaming about Revelations, the Anti-Christ and one world government: of course that will happen. It goes on today with the United Nations and other things. It will have about as much success in stopping an NA currency has it has had in getting the US out of the UN.
I had to look up Hal Turner. I thought RG was talking about that guy at World Net Daily who always thinks the world is about to end (Hal Lindsay).
That's the problem with the Euro. People I've known from Europe have all had two things in common:
1.) None of them like the EU itself. Their feelings range from indifference to hatred.
2.) They all love the convenience of the Euro, because Europeans travel all over the continent. They don't like that they've lost national control of monetary policy, but not nearly as much as they like the convenience factor.
That last part could really change if economic conditions ever got really bad.
As far as North America goes, the convenience of travel part doesn't factor in nearly as much as in Europe. But I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to control the problems of unified monetary system in North America than it is in Europe.
The funny thing is, I actually think that an NA currency would benefit all 3 nations quite a bit, given the likely economic conditions in the future. I'm only against it because of the sovereignty issues. But that's kind of a joke because we don't exactly have sovereign control over our money today, do we?
Not exactly.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
