posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 08:57 PM
Well, its nice to see Americans coming round to the views I've been expressing since I joined ATS a few months back. Economic war you say, Hotsauce?
"War is politics by other means."
~ Von Clausewitz
What is politics if it is not primarily about the disposition of resources? Therefore we can reasonably say: economics is war by other means. The
truth is that physical conflict, threat, diplomacy & economics are all part of geopolitical strategy & all countries use whichever combination serves
the interests of their rulers best, at any given moment, all the time.
The USA did very well out of WW2: got the proceeds of the British Empire, took over maritime trade, gained financial considerations that effectively
marginalised European currencies, especially the Pound & perhaps best of all, got to see a continued market for newly revitalised US industry.
The decision by OPEC to only trade oil for US$ guaranteed the US$ prefered reserve currency status, giving the USA substantial additional spending
power abroad & when Nixon decoupled the US$ from gold completely, this gave the USA the massive advantage of being able to print money without fear of
inflation, as it could be spent abroad & would remain abroad as currency reserves. Why did Nixon have to take the US$ to a fully fiat currency tho?
The USA had so much in its favour: cheap foreign & domestic raw materials, good transport infrastructure built by the New Deal, well developed
industry & manufacturing base & a well paid booming population as a market.
The problem was that US Corps. had become used to the high profits they were getting from European & Japanese markets, but, by the mid 60s, those
markets were dwindling as the devastation of WW2 was repaired & industries redeveloped. The Viet Nam war kept the US arms industry in gravy for a
while, but with falling tax revenue, the Federal Govt. needed to borrow more than bullion would back. Basically, things have gone from bad to worse
Stay tuned & I'll tell y'all - plus the solution!