De-dollarization possibly about to snowball
The article below presents thoughts that seem overly simplistic to me, being not based much in facts such as the recent awareness that Iran is now selling its oil in Euros: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/iran-dumps-petrodollar-wants-euros-all... (Oh dear, sorry Saddam Hussein, you just weren't a big enough fish, and you were put in place by the CIA, so you should have been a little cleverer, or waited 20 years, to sell your oil in Euros.) and Rupees: http://russia-insider.com/en/its-happening-iran-india-dump-petrodollar-settl... and the consequent rise (last two/three weeks) in the price of gold by about $150 an ounce - here in Australia, gold normally changes price inversely to our currency's price wrt USDollar - but last Thursday, our dollar went UP one cent, and gold ALSO went up (instead of down), in the order of $100. This is rare. Yes, when the game shifts, there is a run away from fiat currency into precious metals, in particular gold. We've seen this historically too (great depression). Just because there's not enough gold don't mean a bee's dick of nothing - that just means that the final fall back currency (gold and silver) have a run on them and the price skyrockets. Let's see if the gold price march continues this week and next - if so, it's likely to skyrocket IMHO ... Of course we already know that Russia is settling with China in Yuan/Renminbi, although I don't recall the price of gold going up when that happened - probably because the USA has had so much pressure on Russia (Ukraine, sanctions, Syria, media disinfo), but now with India, and now Iran, and the whole Saudi/shale-oil (and against rest of the world) price war, well perhaps it's starting to get real enough that the hedge funds are starting to say "oh shit!" Viva la change! ---- http://russia-insider.com/en/no-virginia-trading-oil-other-currencies-wont-k... " No, Virginia, Trading Oil in Other Currencies Won't Kill the Dollar America doesn’t care what color electrons you use Jacob Dreizin Subscribe to Jacob Dreizin 5 hours ago | 801 Comments Donate! This is the only way to really "kill the dollar." Don't try this at home There are good reasons for doing certain cross-border trade in your own currency, or that of your trade partner. Consider that all digital dollar transactions across borders, anywhere on this planet, have to go through one or more U.S. banks. And if Uncle Sam doesn't like you, well, he can just cut you off from that. No more foreign trade for you! It happened to Iran in 2012, forcing the country to survive on a bizarre gas-for-gold scheme with Turkey, complete with a "gold express" on passenger flights from Dubai to Tehran. Russia was also threatened with something roughly along these lines in 2014. Thus, the main benefit of using non-dollar currencies in your foreign trade: You're not as vulnerable to the whims of Uncle Sam. And for countries on the outs with the Uncle, that's very important. But that's it. Folks who claim that “de-dollarization” in the oil trade—or any other trade—will “kill the dollar” (or something like that), don't ever explain how. Sure, it sounds good, but what is the mechanism of action? Answer: There is none. Because, today, demand for the dollar isn’t based simply on the convenience of using it to settle accounts across borders. Or more precisely, that’s part of it, but by no means the root of it. The dollar is convenient because every country and major bank has some. In other words, demand for the dollar is based on its status as the global reserve currency. And its status as the global reserve currency is due to the massive, highly-liquid market for U.S. Treasury bonds. And the massive, highly-liquid market for U.S. Treasury bonds owes its existence to: (1) The USA's unique position of running perpetual, large, unrestrained budget deficits, while (2) maintaining its ability to pay off the debt issued to cover those deficits by issuing more debt perpetually, while (3) the world needs somewhere to stuff its trillions in cash (to include trillions of dollars earned by running large, perpetual trade surpluses with the USA.) Because, after all, a foreign central bank holding cash dollars wouldn't be able to pay itself a return, and as for potential large depositors, your national deposit insurance scheme only guarantees accounts up to some trivial amount. Whereas the USA can print dollars and thus, guarantees all of its bonds. Does this sound like a confidence scheme? Hell yeah! But what are you going to do about it? That is, if (hypothetically) everyone suddenly lost confidence in the USA's ability to pay its debts without inordinately debasing its currency... ...Where else could they put their money? You can't dump those trillions and trillions in your local non-U.S. bank. No one would guarantee it! Beyond some token amount, no state can guarantee deposits in a currency that it can't print itself. Nor is anyone yet prepared to guarantee the hypothetical equivalent of those dollars in local currency terms. Not to mention, the nature of double-entry accounting means banks would have to immediately loan that money out or put it on deposit with their Central Bank—which creates its own set of problems. So all those folks who chant “there will be a run from the dollar” should think about what they're saying. Moreover, they should ask themselves: A "run" into what, exactly? What would the nations and banks of the world convert their dollar reserves into? It can't be “rubles” or “yuan”, because that available volume of rubles or yuan (not debt instruments, but actual bank money to play around with) doesn't exist. The authorities would have to print mountains more rubles or yuan on the spot, crashing their value (and thus, paradoxically, supporting the dollar.) But more to the point in our debt-money system, that volume of ruble or yuan sovereign debt does not exist. Hence, saying “there will be a run from the dollar into (blank)”, ignores the fact that there's not enough (blank.) Not by a long shot. Not even if the dollar crashed 50 percent overnight against every other currency. But even if there was enough, your money-changer or bond dealer would have to take those dollars you're handing him, and put them somewhere! After all, he won't just throw them away. He has to eat, too. So where would they go? Into U.S. bonds! Thus reinforcing the dollar's status as the global reserve currency! So as you can see, a cataclysmic “run on the dollar” is impossible under the current system. Uncle Sam has this one locked down tight. As I explained here, it would take a total collapse of global finance to even begin to get the ball rolling away from dollar hegemony. And as I also explained here, the pain of such a collapse would be borne primarily by emerging markets like Russia, China, etc. And that's the last thing those countries want. So as long as the dollar remains the world's reserve currency, “de-dollarization” of the oil trade means nothing to the dollar. It's certainly a good idea for the countries involved. But America could care less. "
Uncle Sam has this one locked down tight.
As I explained here, it would take a total collapse of global finance to even begin to get the ball rolling away from dollar hegemony.
And as I also explained here, the pain of such a collapse would be borne primarily by emerging markets like Russia, China, etc.
And that's the last thing those countries want.
So as long as the dollar remains the world's reserve currency, “de-dollarization” of the oil trade means nothing to the dollar.
It's certainly a good idea for the countries involved.
But America could care less. "
Well, American exporters would be quite happy if the flight from the petro-dollar devalued the currency a bit. We could maybe sell some stuff then. The banksters are probably starting to figure out that student-loan debt-servitude is going to end quite badly unless we have a little real-world goods and wage inflation while the suckers who bought bonds are getting less than 1%. The rest of the world is paying the fed to hold their money, and thankfully we've now got Bitcoin to keep anti-inflation quacks occupied with something shinier and easier to track than gold. Besides, what's the point of trading in oil when we have mountains of corn to make into ethanol and a battery megafactory getting built to run a bunch of luxury self-driving cars?
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:06:33 -0600 Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org> wrote:
Well, American exporters would be quite happy if the flight from the petro-dollar devalued the currency a bit. We could maybe sell some stuff then.
Are you saying that subsidizing american firms by robbing people who hold dollars is good? Well, of course it's good for the thieving assholes who get the subsidy...
The banksters are probably starting to figure out that student-loan debt-servitude is going to end quite badly unless we have a little real-world goods and wage inflation while the suckers who bought bonds are getting less than 1%.
Wage inflation? So you want people who work for a wage to earn less? And stuff to be more expensive?
The rest of the world is paying the fed to hold their money,
What?
and thankfully we've now got Bitcoin to keep anti-inflation quacks
So what are you? You sound like a pro inflation quack. Well quack is not best word. Though of course inflationists are poster children for economic bullshit, and their 'theories' are laughable nonsense. But calling them "quacks" kinda misses the point...
occupied with something shinier and easier to track than gold.
Besides, what's the point of trading in oil when we have mountains of corn to make into ethanol and a battery megafactory getting built to run a bunch of luxury self-driving cars?
On 2/15/16, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
and thankfully we've now got Bitcoin to keep anti-inflation quacks
So what are you? You sound like a pro inflation quack. Well quack is not best word. Though of course inflationists are poster children for economic bullshit, and their 'theories' are laughable nonsense. But calling them "quacks" kinda misses the point...
"pro inflation quack" - I like it, very apt. Let's rewrite "anti inflation quack" to "pro stable money proponent", or perhaps more likely: - "pro gold backed currency conspiracy theorist" - "anti fiat currency revolutionaries" - "government financial accountability quacks" - "pro constitution subversives" or, as we've probably all heard - "pro constitution terrorists/ extremists" A phrase many years ago from a friend of mine: "Inflation is the precise measure of the transfer of wealth from the people to the banks, for the unit of time for which inflation is being measured." This applies when the following are true: 1) Fiat currency is the legislated currency. 2) The banks are privatised and not owned by the government/ people (which situation is unconstitutional/ unlawful/ treasonous, as per current USA and Australian constitutions respectively)
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:35:58AM +0000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
A phrase many years ago from a friend of mine: "Inflation is the precise measure of the transfer of wealth from the people to the banks, for the unit of time for which inflation is being measured."
As a side effect, hyperinflation might settle the Merica's debt for a few micrograms of gold. My late grandfather lost hist modest savings in the hyperinflation caused by the transition from "advanced socialism" to "advanced capitalism (aka advanced democracy)". His pension was so low, it wasn't enough for his medications.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:35:58AM +0000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On 2/15/16, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
and thankfully we've now got Bitcoin to keep anti-inflation quacks
So what are you? You sound like a pro inflation quack. Well quack is not best word. Though of course inflationists are poster children for economic bullshit, and their 'theories' are laughable nonsense. But calling them "quacks" kinda misses the point...
"pro inflation quack" - I like it, very apt.
Let's rewrite "anti inflation quack" to "pro stable money proponent", or perhaps more likely: - "pro gold backed currency conspiracy theorist" - "anti fiat currency revolutionaries" - "government financial accountability quacks" - "pro constitution subversives"
or, as we've probably all heard - "pro constitution terrorists/ extremists"
A phrase many years ago from a friend of mine: "Inflation is the precise measure of the transfer of wealth from the people to the banks, for the unit of time for which inflation is being measured."
This applies when the following are true: 1) Fiat currency is the legislated currency. 2) The banks are privatised and not owned by the government/ people (which situation is unconstitutional/ unlawful/ treasonous, as per current USA and Australian constitutions respectively)
3) inflation rates exceed the demurrage cost of holding currency. *every* real thing is subject to entropy. If your currency is not subject to entropy, or theoretically magically increases in value over time cause reasons (bitcoin), it's a wealth transfer from the latercomers to early adopters. Hyperinflation is generally massive failure of something, and a wealth transfer from everyone to whomever's printing the money (usually corrupt government officials). Now maybe gold holds it's value, but it's still got a demurrage cost. The gold holders have to pay gun holders to keep the non- holders away from your gold, or you don't have anymore gold. Bitcoin has to pay the miners, or you don't have any more transferrable bitcoin. If you don't understand entropy, and how that impacts money, then we'll never get any sort of consensus on the when inflation goes from necessary evil to wanton corrupt wealth redistribion. This number is far from precise, and has about as many values as there are people that use money. The real cypherpunk question is when are we going to have a blockchain that allows a distributed and coercion-free market to transparently set a consensus demurrage and/or inflation rate to transfer wealth collectively from those that hold money to the cryptographers and coders that collective maintain the blockchain's value.
On 2/17/16, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org> wrote: ...
If you don't understand entropy, and how that impacts money, then we'll never get any sort of consensus on the when inflation goes from necessary evil to wanton corrupt wealth redistribion. This number is far from precise, and has about as many values as there are people that use money.
The real cypherpunk question is when are we going to have a blockchain that allows a distributed and coercion-free market to transparently set a consensus demurrage and/or inflation rate to transfer wealth collectively from those that hold money to the cryptographers and coders that collective maintain the blockchain's value.
Very interesting viewpoint - thanks for sharing.
Over simplistic indeed. Here's some anecdotes re Kissinger and Putin meeting and the self evident collapse of the USD$. I find this quite insightful. http://www.pravdareport.com/society/stories/12-02-2016/133329-kissinger_puti... Henry Kissinger came to Moscow to discuss new financial system with Putin 12.02.2016 And another version: Kissinger Delivered a Plan for a New World Order to Putin http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/02/kissinger-delivered-plan-for-new-world.html Extract: " What did the President of Russia say? I think he said he would think about it for another four years. Through which he will be able to offer Henry Kissinger, or someone else, to make Alaska a "bridge" between Russia and America, and will promise to consider also the interests of Washington and other major powers in Europe. But if they are not satisfied with the American political elite, they will have to wait for the next offer, which is expected in four years. But it seems to me that it will be even worse for them. " Enjoy.
And for those who have yet to read it, Putin's prophetic and I say poignant February 2007 Munich conference speech: The WaPo's transcript: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200... The NYT's analysis and sound bites: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/world/europe/11munich.html?_r=0
Also not to be missed if you find what's happening financially re Iran and petro dollars, to be interesting. Times are changing: http://journal-neo.org/2016/02/10/washington-again-underestimated-the-irania...
participants (4)
-
Georgi Guninski
-
juan
-
Troy Benjegerdes
-
Zenaan Harkness