Sublime Opinions of the Masses (give or take a few)
https://acompletewasteofspace.com/
And what would be the problem exactly?callmeslick wrote:what good would it do for anyone unless it were adopted internationally, universally? Are you suggesting that the US ought to try this marvelous experiment alone? That would seem an odd suggestion for someone who isn't even an American citizen.......
the problem, using the example of the US doing this on their own, is an instant disruption of the world's(by far) largest currency market. When you change the rules that drastically, valuation changes drastically, and for all the people(read:nations) that have been pouring money into long-term US bonds and holding vast amounts of US currency reserves, that disrupts their economies. Further, since the US reaps benefits from all those cash reserves(other nations buy our stuff), such a sudden, radical change in monetary valuation could throw our balance of trade into instant disarray. No thanks, Nic.....go try and talk France into trying the experiment first.nicolas10 wrote:And what would be the problem exactly?callmeslick wrote:what good would it do for anyone unless it were adopted internationally, universally? Are you suggesting that the US ought to try this marvelous experiment alone? That would seem an odd suggestion for someone who isn't even an American citizen.......
Nic
Well if dollar was backed by gold or some form of metal pool, it would tremendously increase trust in the dollar. Making it a currency that one could stock upon.callmeslick wrote:the problem, using the example of the US doing this on their own, is an instant disruption of the world's(by far) largest currency market. When you change the rules that drastically, valuation changes drastically, and for all the people(read:nations) that have been pouring money into long-term US bonds and holding vast amounts of US currency reserves, that disrupts their economies.
Oh yeah members of the FED & wall street benefit. Most of that stuff you sell is weapons, thanks to political power and forcing countries to get USD that they don't know how to use. That's maybe very profitable for the few people who run the US but not much for any other american.Further, since the US reaps benefits from all those cash reserves(other nations buy our stuff), such a sudden, radical change in monetary valuation could throw our balance of trade into instant disarray. No thanks, Nic.....go try and talk France into trying the experiment first.
nicolas10 wrote:Oh boy how I wish we did. However any french politician who would attempt that would get murdered faster than Yul Bryner combs his hair.
Nic
now that, my friends, is an analogy!!! once again, lots of advice for the US with no real backup in facts. Sure, the US does sell weaponry, but also a lot of other things, notably FOOD. And, in a global economy, returning to isolationism would be sheer suicide, economically. Not to mention that given the status quo, we couldn't return to an isolationist foreign policy overnight, either.nicolas10 wrote:Well if dollar was backed by gold or some form of metal pool, it would tremendously increase trust in the dollar. Making it a currency that one could stock upon.callmeslick wrote:the problem, using the example of the US doing this on their own, is an instant disruption of the world's(by far) largest currency market. When you change the rules that drastically, valuation changes drastically, and for all the people(read:nations) that have been pouring money into long-term US bonds and holding vast amounts of US currency reserves, that disrupts their economies.
Countries who stock on dollar bonds now are only the countries run by traitors (sarkozy selling gold reserves to buy dollar bonds is a case of him deserving to be hanged for high treason (by the way an interesting related factoid is that lately, the crime of high treason has been removed from the french law code)). Or contries that don't know WTF they could by with those dollars except US weapons (Gulf states), or because they fear that if they stop stocking on them their biggest customer won't be able to buy fuck all from them (China).
Everyone and their dogs but you know the dollar is going to crash anyway at some point. Monetary creation based on credit is a form of ponzi and it can only lead to drama.
Going voluntarily for a more sound monetary system will be hard to do, but it won't be nearly as dramatic as the crash+world war scenario.
Oh yeah members of the FED & wall street benefit. Most of that stuff you sell is weapons, thanks to political power and forcing countries to get USD that they don't know how to use. That's maybe very profitable for the few people who run the US but not much for any other american.Further, since the US reaps benefits from all those cash reserves(other nations buy our stuff), such a sudden, radical change in monetary valuation could throw our balance of trade into instant disarray. No thanks, Nic.....go try and talk France into trying the experiment first.
Americans would be better served by going back to pre 1913 isolationist policies. Look back at what the most unknown US presidents in history did, and try to do the same.
Nic
This is why I like Nic, he is not stuck in side the box!nicolas10 wrote:"in a global economy"
That is your main mistake. You take for granted that one has to operate in a global economy, while the fact that the economy is globalised is one of the roots of the problems.
Youse guys find it convenient to take that global economy BS for a given. As a dogma. That's dishonest discourse insofar as you don't ever think about whether it's good or bad or whether we should change this.
Nic
I 'take it for granted' because it is inescapable, unless you wish to lose 90% of the potential consumers in the 21st century. Want an example of isolationism in action in 2013? North Korea. They're doing just swell.nicolas10 wrote:"in a global economy"
That is your main mistake. You take for granted that one has to operate in a global economy, while the fact that the economy is globalised is one of the roots of the problems.
change it to what, for the benefit of who?Youse guys find it convenient to take that global economy BS for a given. As a dogma. That's dishonest discourse insofar as you don't ever think about whether it's good or bad or whether we should change this.
Nic
The etymology of the word "consume" should already reveal that consuming is not necessarily a good thing.callmeslick wrote:I 'take it for granted' because it is inescapable, unless you wish to lose 90% of the potential consumers in the 21st century.
And the blocus has nothing to do with it? Any country that tries to be independant goes down. Blockade and if it's not enough you invade it. See Iraq, see Libya, see Syria, and soon Iran. See how the IMF cut Argentina loose too. The only country that managed to give us a finger was Iceland because nobody noticed, and because the US couldn't even fabricate a fake case to invade it.Want an example of isolationism in action in 2013? North Korea. They're doing just swell.
Change it to a real currency with a real value to be used in trade. Not paper currency that only serves as bringing interests to banks when they loan money they create out of thin air.change it to what, for the benefit of who?