Forums | MacLife

So now it's the Presidents responsibility to get the word out?

What happened to Mr. Beck, Mr. O'Riley, and Mr. Limbaugh? Are they not loud enough to be heard?

I think the US would make their point very clearly simply by nuking UN HQ.

JakeTheTall wrote:

radarman wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.e272eaa74dccc30f21c6ff7638b0f37b.461&show_article=1

The United Nations called on Tuesday for a new global reserve currency to end dollar supremacy which has allowed the United States the "privilege" of building a huge trade deficit.

"Important progress in managing imbalances can be made by reducing the reserve currency country?s 'privilege' to run external deficits in order to provide international liquidity," UN undersecretary-general for economic and social affairs, Sha Zukang, said.

Speaking at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Istanbul, he said: "It is timely to emphasise that such a system also creates a more equitable method of sharing the seigniorage derived from providing global liquidity."

He said: "Greater use of a truly global reserve currency, such as the IMF?s special drawing rights (SDRs), enables the seigniorage gained to be deployed for development purposes," he said.

This is seriously not looking good. While I could care less what the UN thinks, and frankly believe the whold sick joke should be dismantled, it points in a dark direction. Should these smurfs get what they want, we could see the formation of the worlds largest, nuclear armed, third world nation overnight. Seriously, even if the dollar was in that basket of currencies, its value would drop so fast that we would be in a position to catch up to Zimbabwe in terms of inflation.

Frankly, if it does happen, I would support going to war over it. It is about as close to a true Casus belli as you can get short of actually coming to arms. I'm a bit surprised more Americans aren't getting slightly militant over all this talk.

Casus belli if 3rd parties quit using our currency ?  How's that ?

Is this a joke ?

Take a few economics classes, please.

Look between the lines. This is primarily the Chinese, with a bit of Russian enthusiasm. There are state actors behind this push.

EDIT: By the way, in case you were wondering about the UN official quoted:

http://www.un.org/esa/desa/ousg/

A career diplomat, Mr. Sha Zukang became the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs on 1 July, 2007. As such, he heads the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, which is responsible for the follow-up to the major United Nations Summits and Conferences, and services the Economic and Social Council and the Second and Third Committees of the General Assembly. He also chairs the United Nations Executive Committee on Economic and Social Affairs. He is a graduate of Nanjing University, China.

Last edited by radarman (2009-10-06 2:21 pm)

DukeofNuke wrote:

So now it's the Presidents responsibility to get the word out?

What happened to Mr. Beck, Mr. O'Riley, and Mr. Limbaugh? Are they not loud enough to be heard?

None of the aforementioned "entertainers" represent the official policies of the nation. At best, they represent the nuttiness of the extremes.

I doubt this will gain much traction, but it is a strong incentive for us to get our fiscal house in order. We do need to come to grips with the fact that US dominance on the world stage is over. We've had a good run, now it's time to step back a bit. The US does need to step up and force the UN to recognize this reality and adjust our dues accordingly. The whole peacekeeping nonsense needs to go bye-bye - the US is expected to shoulder most of that burden as well, no more. I think the US should just step back a bit. Let other nations deal with Iran for example. Keep our noses out of other nations' business for a while and focus on our own internal problems. We shouldn't stop trading, but we should stop intervening - especially with the military - in other nations. We should have a goal to withdraw all troops stationed on foreign soil and close all military bases on foreign soil within a decade or two. That will save a lot of money. There's no need to keep NATO around anymore.

Perhaps some time without US dominance will either make other countries step up and we won't have to shoulder so much, or they'll realize we weren't so bad and quit complaining.

I agree the UN is a joke, but it's all we have.

robco wrote:

I doubt this will gain much traction, but it is a strong incentive for us to get our fiscal house in order. We do need to come to grips with the fact that US dominance on the world stage is over. We've had a good run, now it's time to step back a bit. The US does need to step up and force the UN to recognize this reality and adjust our dues accordingly. The whole peacekeeping nonsense needs to go bye-bye - the US is expected to shoulder most of that burden as well, no more. I think the US should just step back a bit. Let other nations deal with Iran for example. Keep our noses out of other nations' business for a while and focus on our own internal problems. We shouldn't stop trading, but we should stop intervening - especially with the military - in other nations. We should have a goal to withdraw all troops stationed on foreign soil and close all military bases on foreign soil within a decade or two. That will save a lot of money. There's no need to keep NATO around anymore.

Perhaps some time without US dominance will either make other countries step up and we won't have to shoulder so much, or they'll realize we weren't so bad and quit complaining.

I agree the UN is a joke, but it's all we have.

On this, I agree completely. I think we need to give up our defacto empire. We aren't very good at running it, and it's sapping our economy.

I think we need to pull back troops from many places where they aren't wanted or needed. Sure, maintain good relations with the locals, maybe keep agreements for key bases, but pull the bulk of the military back home.

I also think it would ultimately be good for the US if the dollar wasn't the reserve currency, but it needs to be unwound slowly enough to allow our economy time to readjust. It would give business strong reasons to think about keeping production at home, rather than abroad - and not through arbitrary measures like taxes or laws.
That's going to take time, though. In some industries, nearly two entire generations have grown up since we outsourced all of the work. We would have to train people practically from scratch on how to build, maintain, and operate some of the factories that are required to produce these goods. Semiconductor fabs, for example, are expensive, complex, and take years to build. (http://www.10stripe.com/featured/map/se … r-fabs.php)

Real production is the key to returning to a stable, sustainable economy; and I believe the US still has the gumption to go there, but we have lost much ground.

What we are seeing, however; is an apparent, and immediate, attack on the dollar that could result in a serious destabilization of the US economy. Should oil, for example, be sold in a currency other than the dollar, it would almost be expected to cost more in dollars - which would cripple our economy. Look how bad things got when it hit $150/bbl - an event which I believe triggered the current recession. Now, imagine the scene at $300/bbl or higher. We could see mass rioting in the summer, and thousands freezing to death in the winter.

Thus, this could potentially be a direct threat to our nation - and yes, I'm serious when I say it would be cause for war.

What we seriously need to do is hammer into the thick skulls in DC that the time for screwing off is over. The time to start planning ahead is now, because the end is near for running huge deficits and funding basic government functions with foreign bonds. We, as a nation, need to start taking a hard look at the situation, and making some tough choices. The whining and bitching need to be stopped, or at least ignored, long enough to plan for a post-Imperial America.

Frankly, I'm not hopeful. We have just seen the biggest crisis in 80 years strike, and I'm not enthusiastic about how it went down. Sure, we didn't get wiped off the planet, but we didn't exactly emerge victorious either.

Just say No.

radarman wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.e272eaa74dccc30f21c6ff7638b0f37b.461&show_article=1

The United Nations called on Tuesday for a new global reserve currency to end dollar supremacy which has allowed the United States the "privilege" of building a huge trade deficit.

"Important progress in managing imbalances can be made by reducing the reserve currency country?s 'privilege' to run external deficits in order to provide international liquidity," UN undersecretary-general for economic and social affairs, Sha Zukang, said.

Speaking at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Istanbul, he said: "It is timely to emphasise that such a system also creates a more equitable method of sharing the seigniorage derived from providing global liquidity."

He said: "Greater use of a truly global reserve currency, such as the IMF?s special drawing rights (SDRs), enables the seigniorage gained to be deployed for development purposes," he said.

This is seriously not looking good. While I could care less what the UN thinks, and frankly believe the whold sick joke should be dismantled, it points in a dark direction. Should these smurfs get what they want, we could see the formation of the worlds largest, nuclear armed, third world nation overnight. Seriously, even if the dollar was in that basket of currencies, its value would drop so fast that we would be in a position to catch up to Zimbabwe in terms of inflation.

Frankly, if it does happen, I would support going to war over it. It is about as close to a true Casus belli as you can get short of actually coming to arms. I'm a bit surprised more Americans aren't getting slightly militant over all this talk.

Unfortunately, we have a milquetoast president who isn't getting the word out that this would be a bad idea at the moment.

I wish you could understand that the dollar is losing its value. It's something that's happening.

If China and company were to try propping it up instead of planning for its collapse, it wouldn't help.

test wrote:

radarman wrote:

sturner wrote:

Well it would end that problem called New York City.

A nuke would be a problem, but a bunker buster dropped from above could do the job with minimal external casualties.

Which would send pretty much the opposite message to that intended - ie, "Don't mess with us, we're desperate and feel a moral obligation to drag everyone down with us."

Um, I wasn't exactly being serious with that post...

This out come has been coming ever since Reagan declared that everything is free.

radarman wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

radarman wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.e272eaa74dccc30f21c6ff7638b0f37b.461&show_article=1


This is seriously not looking good. While I could care less what the UN thinks, and frankly believe the whold sick joke should be dismantled, it points in a dark direction. Should these smurfs get what they want, we could see the formation of the worlds largest, nuclear armed, third world nation overnight. Seriously, even if the dollar was in that basket of currencies, its value would drop so fast that we would be in a position to catch up to Zimbabwe in terms of inflation.

Frankly, if it does happen, I would support going to war over it. It is about as close to a true Casus belli as you can get short of actually coming to arms. I'm a bit surprised more Americans aren't getting slightly militant over all this talk.

Unfortunately, we have a milquetoast president who isn't getting the word out that this would be a bad idea at the moment.

I wish you could understand that the dollar is losing its value. It's something that's happening.

If China and company were to try propping it up instead of planning for its collapse, it wouldn't help.

Planning for a collapse is one thing. I think everyone agrees that the current situation can't last forever. However, these recent moves are potentially destabilizing, and at least in the short term, unnecessary. We are still in the midst of a severe recession, and these moves could pull the rug out from under what little recovery we have seen.

What we need is a long term plan to wean the world off of the dollar standard rthat avoids creating massive instability, and turning prosperous nations into third-world outhouses. It's not like everyone is going to forget about this issue once the recession is over.

It's the timing and pace that are the problem, not the inevitability of it. If some aggressive diplomacy is required to make sure no one tries to pull a fast one, then so be it.

Yes, a plan is necessary. Absolutely. It needs to be a high priority in Washington.

But news flash: it's not.

Since the US Government is pretending there isn't a problem, or perhaps more accurately the US Government is paralyzed by its insanely partisan deathgrip on the status quo, an orderly transition doesn't seem to be in the cards.

You're right that other countries should be undertaking this in an orderly, well-planned fashion. But guess what, they are. I'm sure everyone would be thrilled if Washington was part of the process, but Uncle Sam isn't even at the table. Uncle Sam has left the frickin' building.

the US Government is paralyzed by its insanely partisan deathgrip on the status quo,

Isn't this what happened to the ancient Athenians?