I’m amazed at how far out of touch the left is with regards to the possibility of a one-world currency. It’s a concern Michelle Bachman has become known for voicing. Yet, the left has littered the internet with commentary about how crazy Bachman is for believing that there is a movement for a one-world currency. I find myself both amused and frightened by their myopic and baseless need to denigrate someone over an issue that is absolutely true. Regardless of whether you think Michelle Bachman is a crackpot, there are very real, very serious, and very plausible movements in the world to bring about a one-world currency.
If you are out there on the left, you may want to stop reading right now and turn on MSNBC. What I’m about to tell you is very disturbing and likely to damage your mantra of hope and change. Honestly, the opinion of the world is that the US monetary/fiscal/banking system caused the recent economic downturn. Everyone on the left says, “That’s common knowledge. America is to blame for all problems in the world.” Here is where the lefties jump off the train; Obama’s Spend Big, Spend Often, and Spend Irresponsible fiscal policies solidified this perception and now there are governments in the world seeking to diminish the role of the dollar in the world and implement a diversified one-world currency.
This is very true. Bloomberg reports:
“Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has repeatedly called for creating a mix of regional reserve currencies as part of the drive to address the global financial crisis, while questioning the dollar’s future as a global reserve currency. Russia’s proposals for the Group of 20 major developed and developing nations summit in London in April included the creation of a supranational currency.”
The key here is to connect the terms “one-world currency” and “currency diversification. The popular thought for a one-world currency is to create a currency that is based and "pegged" to a large basket of world currencies.
A little economic history lesson for you:
The world does not do business with a hodgepodge of currencies, but with the dollar. Either by literally trading in US dollars or by foreign currencies “pegged” (when a government has a store of dollars to give their currency value) to the dollar. With recent out of control spending by Obama, governments of the world are beginning to question the US’ solvency and ability to pay its debts.
The Bloomberg article I linked to above shows that India is getting on board with the idea. Russia, China and Brazil are already on board. Today, Geithner is in Saudi Arabia trying to stem the one-world currency train. Laughably, Geithner is arguing the stability of the dollar even as the administration he represents is talking about more stimulus.
So, while you on the left were busy making fun of Michelle Bachman for bringing the “one-world currency” development to the forefront of debate, the rest of the world was busy laughing at you and trying to find a better way to protect their nations from your destructive and narcissistic economic policies.
22 comments
I have blogged about this also (well, more about my thoughts on a universal currency, and less on the various other current opinions and politics), link here. I don't think most of the proposals being considered have much value though, since they usually involve some sort of currency "basket", which still allows countries which inflate their currency supply to artificially manipulate trade valuations, which is the primary problem a universal currency could solve. However, I do see the efforts to push for a non-dollar trade currency as an obvious response to the US's apparent willingness to effectively ignore their debt obligations, and I think a change would be beneficial for long-term global economic stability (regardless of the negative impact for Americans).
July 13, 2009 at 4:37 PMC-Gen: Please tell me I'm not reading that first comment right!
July 13, 2009 at 5:02 PMA one-world currency is NOT what we need, Nick! We, as Americans, have not "ignored...debt obligations" until "Kool & the Gang" showed up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We have ALWAYS marched to our own drummer as a country (name one other country that uses our measurement system), and that is what has made us the greatest country on the planet (which is not warming up; if it was, humans wouldn't be responsible!).
And how DARE you even suggest that globalism is the way to go??? WE ARE AMERICANS; still free and DAMNED proud of it! This country has not enjoyed all this freedom by crawling into the sack with the rest of the world, rolling over, and taking it.
Your one-world currency idea has impact beyond anything you may have imagined. Do you want a central "bank" to tell us how much money this country can have? Do you want China and Zimbabwe to be able to tax you? Do you truly believe that it would be everything you think it's cracked up to be?
PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD (and that is a whole other aspect of the "one-world currency" story), THINK!!!
Sorry, C-Gen. Didn't mean to rant. Think a Xanax is in order...
This is within the realm of the subject I am discussing called "Bankrupt America". As crazy as it sounds, I don't think the dollar will survive for much longer. We may have to go to another currency. Tell me what you think of this. I have 2 posts already, an intro and part one(the Fed) I will be happy to send you a copy of "the book" after I am finished using it for the blog. The D.C. insiders behind this want it to be spread around and they risked their careers and possibly their lives producing it. My plan is when we go to D.C., I intend to bring hundreds or thousands to pass out so the Federal Government can't squash it again.
July 13, 2009 at 5:54 PMActually, Nick is wrong about one thing, We have not "ignored" our debt obligations. We have a really nice arrangement with the FED where when we pay back what we owe OUR DEBT INCREASES!!!!!!!!!
July 13, 2009 at 6:16 PM@ Nick - I realized I've never added your blog to my blog list. I've since added it.
July 13, 2009 at 9:09 PMNick, it's been a long time since I've studied or done anything with currency. So I'm hoping that I'm not missing anything here. However, I'm 100% against global currency. I think those in business and economics tend to find one world currency atractive, because in business we look to mitigate loss and to make things more simplistic and efficient. However, I'm against a single currency on principle. We have one of the strongest most atractive economies because we have less corruption (if you can believe it, but it's true), more visible, and most efficient business practices.
Now, I know our currency is the currency of the world because we were the only major economy left standing after WWII and the gold standard. However, even if this were not true, we would have favorable trade on our currency due to our business practices. I think that is good. If our country has the most stable and honest business practices in the world, leading to foreigners believing our currency is actractive, I think we should be able to benefit. It encourages others to follow suit.
I do not trust a government body controling world currency. I think it would create a situation where people begin to use economic warefare. I believe countries will collude in order to make the system work to their advantage. That's what goes on now with world government bodies such as the UN.
@ blankandgoldfan - I'm fairly certain that a one world currency would certainly mean inflation beyond our wildest dreams.
@ Andrew - I'll have to check out your posts. Thanks for your offer, but I think I've got a good idea where bureaucrats want to take us as far as economics and monetary system goes and it's scary. Besides, books on the economy put me to sleep.
Not take us, have taken us. I think this will surprise you especially as it gets deeper into the puzzle. It's reposted on LCR's blog too now. That is why I am rewriting it. This is not just economy, economy is one piece of the puzzle. This is a whole range of issues all tied together to make one big picture. C-GEn, you don't understand, when you get a dollar, it is 100% debt. When you pay taxes it ADDS to the national debt. It is crazy.
July 13, 2009 at 10:32 PMC-Gen, darling...typo or intentional in your reply to my comment above? lmao!!!
July 13, 2009 at 11:29 PMgreat piece..thank u!:)
July 13, 2009 at 11:45 PMFirst off, Michelle Bachman is an idiot, who brings back eerie memorys of McCarthyism. Thus, it is hard to take any of her ranting and raving seriously.
July 14, 2009 at 12:51 AMThat said, are you surprised? We are the leaders of the free world, and the global economy, and we royally screwed everyone over. Our own people and the world. Blame the people who took out bad mortgages and bit off more than they could chew all you want... even tho they are partly responsbible, it was a greedy selfish few who brought the world to its knees. And their "F you" reaction to the US should be expected (and proably warranted).
Will this succeed? probably not. Our economy is in the toilet, but it will not remain like this forever. And when we recover, a strong dollar will toss their global currency fears aside (probably becase we'll strong arm them into not doing it lol).
But the truth of the matter is, the economy is becoming more global. The area I study is the technology news, and the barriers of distance have long been broken down. The idea of America playing a more cooperative role than a leadership role is already happening in the computer industry. I wouldn't surprised if some of that spirit spilled over into other industries.
Finally, i recently read a report that suggests the Euro may be phased out in the next few years because it isn't doing well with weaker French and German economies. If a continental currency doesn't work, there's little reason to think that a global one would work. Economics aside, there is a degree of nationalism here. Americans love their green back. The french love their francs, the british, their pounds. The talk of a global currency is mainly coming from countries who investeda lot in the US and also have crappy national currencies.
I'm not terribly worried about this at all.
The reality of the one world currency, with it not being the US Dollar, is not far fetched, and while not just around the corner it is obviously in the future.
July 14, 2009 at 9:54 AMWe have ignored our debt problem for alot longer than just the time that the current administration has been in office. We have ignored it forever and we are continuing to ignore it.
One of the reasons we have always been the central currency and the largest economic system is because we were self sustaining and we carried a positive balance of trade. Now with our dependency on foreign oil, our refusal to seek out alternative energy sources, our appetite for cheap consumer goods, and our inability to deal with national issues such as infrastructure and health care we are bankrupting ourselves, squandering our national advantage, and paving the way for the Chinese to become the economic powerhouse of the the 21st century.
This is as much a leftist, liberal, and or democratic issue as it is a rightist, conservative and or republican issue...neither party has ever had a sound economic policy (sorry, supply side economics was NOT a sound economic policy).
We turned our country into a short term investment opportunity for the wealthy of the world, a get rich quick opportunity rather than an economic powerhouse for the citizens and future generations of this country.
Between our trade imbalance, our debt and our underfunded liabilities this country has been bankrupt long before Obama came into the picture and realistically he is probably too little too late....
...oh, and no matter what...
July 14, 2009 at 9:57 AMMichelle Bachman is still an idiot who just so happens to talk enough to stumble across words that she somehow slings together to hit upon things of interest....
TAO, your one world world currency is far closer than you ever imagined. Check out the Bankrupt America posts on KOOK's blog. WE didn't turn the country into a junk bond, The private bank known as the Fed aka the Federal Reserve did that.
July 14, 2009 at 12:36 PMI think, my "Bankrupt America" will dig into global currency tomorrow. There is alot of usable info in that source, and I am picking out little pieces to post on. There will be plenty left for everyone else when we distribute it.
July 14, 2009 at 1:21 PMAndrew,
July 14, 2009 at 2:45 PMI can follow your argument about the Federal Reserve and the IRS, but when you jump to the United Nations, Council on Foreign Affairs, and the Trilateral Commission you lost me and you lost all evidence...it was a jump in logic that I could not make.
Yes, we on the left made fun of Ms Bachmann for her unrepentant ignorance, but it wasn't because we were frightened by her brilliance. In fact, I've done it myself, but I didn't stop with this particular piece of horrifying unreason: I listed numerous points where Ms Bachmann stopped finding any major contact with reality and went drifting off into Cloud-Cuckoo Land.
July 14, 2009 at 4:11 PMThe only way to arrive at this conclusion is to combine a complete misunderstanding of the global economy (and, incidentally, there is no one, single global economy, it's a mix of each country's individual systems interacting with each other to various extents), a Bachmann-like affinity to the New-World-Order school of conspiracy theory, and a complete misrepresentation of why we on the left began laughing so hard at this particular wide-eyed lunatic.
We go back to the source material, and we find that what Ms Bachmann said was:
The President may not enter into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.
Which is not even related to what anybody said or tried to do.
A few other countries wanted to stop pegging their money to the dollar, because our economy is in the toilet, thanks to the "conservative" mismanagement of the past decade. Which is why the international community wants to create a more stable form of reserve currency in which they can invest.
It doesn't mean dollars will cease being bought by other nations -- if our economy rebounds to its former strength, the dollar will remain a favorite form of reserve currency.
But it will still have no effect on the American use of the American dollar. Ms Bachmann will still be able to use pictures of American presidents to buy more tinfoil to block the alien mind rays.
@ blackandgoldfan - oops, the typo was unintentional
July 14, 2009 at 5:16 PM@HonorThyself - Thanks for your kind words
@tL - Great Points as always. They have been talking about the EU breaking apart haven't they? So, it may be likely EU won't buy in, but then again Asia is the new star on the block, if they surpass the US, we may not have much of a choice.
@ Tao - Also good point on not paying attention to our currency. We've been very flippant. Especially, the current administration. However, I'd say up until Obama's stimulus balance of trade was maybe 1% of the concern. I'm on the whole, it's a larger concern now.
@ tL, Tao and NC - I believe I have been extremely honest on Bush's involvement in the current economic mess and with him out of office it's pretty much a moot point, unless he is up for some kind of office. Bush brought us up the mountain and Obama pushed us off. The Chinese were concerned under Bush, they became enfuriated under Obama. No one was seriously pushing new currency until Obama's stimulus and budget were released.
Quote Asian Times:
"Reminiscent of Paulson's approach, Obama has put out an urgent $1 trillion plan economic recovery aimed at creating 3.5 million new jobs. Like Paulson's TARP, the plan has as of now little detail and asks for immediate and unconditional approval by Congress, claiming, as Paulson previously did, that without this plan the sky would fall and the US economy would stand to loose another 4.5 million jobs.
Obama' message is his desire to put the jobless quickly back to work. The catchwords are infrastructure and tax rebate. In spite of its laudable objective, the authors of the vague plan, mostly Harvard economic professors, have failed to provide a diagnosis of the US economy and the underlying factors that brought it to this recessionary state. Without this diagnosis, policy recommendations have no foundation.
They failed to analyze why earlier massive stimulus programs combined with unorthodox monetary policy and negative real interest rates have not yet delivered the long-promised turnaround, or what makes their plan different from others. The most difficult aspect of the plan is the financing of a record-shattering fiscal deficit exceeding $2.2 trillion in 2009. Have Obama's big-name experts explored the alternative of reviving the US economy through curtailing the fiscal deficit instead of exacerbating it?
A much lower deficit could lead to faster economic recovery than monstrous unsustainable deficits. Without truly understanding John Maynard Keynes, much of the media and academics have called Obama's plan a triumph of Keynesians economics.
While a diagnosis and sectoral analysis of the US economy are either scanty or totally missing in the present rush to action, it behooves us to address some of the most pressing macroeconomic questions: could the US economy sustain any further a combination of unseen expansionary monetary and fiscal policies? How could a projected fiscal deficit, exceeding $2.2 trillion, or 16% of GDP, be financed? Could the US economy grow out of recession with the federal funds rate zero-bound? Are demand-led policies still valid for the US economy?
Empirically, no economy has been able to sustain an overburdening fiscal deficit without ending with unmanageable public debt, a depressed economy and financial disorder. Economic history is replete with examples of the disastrous consequences of excessive expansionary fiscal policies, which resulted in high or hyperinflation, falling real output and rising unemployment."
By the way, Obama heavily back the Paulson plan as well.
@ NC - So Bachman is crazy over one-world currency, because she drafted a bill preventing the President from changing to a world currency when there are several other countries seriously calling for and trying to establish a world currency? Oh and one of these countries is the second largest economy in the world. Isn't that called prudence?
Actually, OPEC has been pushing for oil to be 'detached' from the dollar for sometime...
July 14, 2009 at 7:56 PMLong before the current Administration took office....
ConGen: Well, I suppose you could determine that "several other countries seriously calling for and trying to establish a world currency." If, that is, you had absolutely no idea what "reserve currency" means.
July 14, 2009 at 8:32 PMI mean, let's go to that same Bloomberg article you linked to.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has repeatedly called for creating a mix of regional reserve currencies as part of the drive to address the global financial crisis, while questioning the dollar’s future as a global reserve currency.
See, what that means is, he isn't calling for making a Unified World Currency: he "called for creating a mix of regional reserve currencies." He's diversifying his portfolio instead of investing everything in USA Corp.
A "reserve currency" isn't the money you spend, it's the currency held by a central bank on a permanent basis as a store of international liquidity. They don't want to hold dollars because dollars aren't worth as much now.
So calm down. We aren't facing the One World Government you've been storing canned goods and ammo in order to fight against.
@ Tao - Did it happen to say why? Just curious?
July 14, 2009 at 11:30 PM@ NC - LOL!!!!!!
Do you start and end all of your arguments with condescension and accusations? The offer to reply in-kind is tempting, but pointless.
The part of the quote you left out was:
“Russia’s proposals for the Group of 20 major developed and developing nations summit in London in April included the creation of a supranational currency.”
It’s fairly easy to remove the line of the quote talking about one-world currency and then say, “hey, ignoramus, they’re not talking about one-world currency.”
While I have a very good understanding of reserve currency and have taught college classes about it, you seem to be a little clueless of the term “supranational currency.” It is not the same as reserve currency.
Go look it up! If you are going to drop insults, know what you are talking about.
Oh, yes. Look, here we are, all concerned. Dmitry Medvedev has recommended that we create "a supranational reserve currency"!! Oh, god! It's a...
July 15, 2009 at 12:04 AM...it's a reserve currency not tied to the dollar. Like I said.
Jesus, you're a schmuck. (Oh, sorry. I probably shouldn't use Hebrew insults. You'll assume I'm part of the Worldwide Jewish Conspiracy...)
You've taught college classes about it? Then why don't you seem to know anything on the subject?
I'm just curious.
Post a Comment