Dollar to Be 'Discarded' by World: China Rating Agency

reply to post by silent thunder


I am trying to find anything which expands upon the statement of Guan Jianzhong about the dollar being discarded by the world. It seems that the news article grabbed onto that one line, but then the article only goes on to discuss the US loss in credit rating.

In comments emailed to CNBC, Guan Jianzhong, chairman of Dagong Global Credit Rating, said the currency is “gradually discarded by the world,” and the “process will be irreversible.”

I am not sure that I understand what this statement means. How will the dollar be discarded by the world, when will this happen, and what will be the fallout exactly.

People say this is rhetoric coming out of China. However, at the end of the 1800's no one in the British Empire thought it was possible in the slightest that the world would move away from the Pound Sterling as the reserve currency.

The result? The Dollar became the reserve currency and the pound lost over 90% of its value, and never, ever recovered.

Chinese are right, the USA is looking like a worse and worse financial bet all the time.

As S&P stated, until they can start coming to some agreements in Washington, they will be seen to have an ineffective Government.

Also I might add as I am sure most here already know, that Putin called the US a world economic parasite, I don't recall where I read this but is was on more than one news site.
I tend to lean that way as well.
Screw the bankers the Brokers and especially the military machine.
Regards, Iwinder

Originally posted by yellowbeard

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

China needs to shut their mouth or it will be shut for them.

How ? You can't afford another war, your forces are overstretched and you've just about used up all the goodwill other countries held towards you.

You people have got to stop believing all the jingoistic rubbish Hollywood pumps out

If there was a war between the USA and China, USA would be crushed in about the first 2-4 hours after the markets opened, and China wouldn't even fire a shot.

Any war between the two nations would be cyber and economic, not militarilistic.

China would crush the USA like an annoying bug, only way USA would win a war with China would be if it were to go nuclear immediately, and China would still take a good measure out of the USA.

Originally posted by babybunnies
People say this is rhetoric coming out of China. However, at the end of the 1800's no one in the British Empire thought it was possible in the slightest that the world would move away from the Pound Sterling as the reserve currency.

The result? The Dollar became the reserve currency and the pound lost over 90% of its value, and never, ever recovered.

This information from you, paired with the excerpt below from one of the articles which silentthunder linked, answered my question. Thank you.

The euro, normally mentioned as a possible replacement, is in a shape that makes the dollar situation look pretty good right now,” Wolff stated. “So, clearly, that doesn’t look likely. But you may see regional currencies emerge, with euros, and rubles, and renminbi, and yen, and even the Brazilian real taking up some of the positions that the dollar historically had in their respective world regions.”
Eventually, Wolff concluded, a basket of currencies, along with some gold, may become a temporary substitute for the position occupied by the US dollar since World War II.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
When will the world realize that the USA has been defeated by an enemy that never needed military supremacy, and never needed to fire a single weapon?

Once the USA is isolated in its decline China will execute their plans to destroy any possibility of recovery for the new FORMER global leader and super-power.

If you set aside your opinions on China for a moment, you have to admire the pure brilliance in their decades long plan to destroy the USA and China's rise to be the new supreme global economic power.

They can talk bold all they want, there isn't a damned thing the USA can, or will do about it now.

It's all over but the crying, someone start passing around the tissues now.

edit on 7-8-2011 by Fractured.Facade because: (no reason given)

The sad truth is that there IS something the U.S. government can do about bold talk. We still possess a military force projection well beyond China's capabilities. I'm not implying we should use it, but given how touchy the military industrial complex gets when competing powers try to cripple them...there is plenty militarily that could be done. Let's hope it never comes to that, I'm confident it won't.

reply to post by idunno12


My understanding based on context and general macroeconomic assumptions would be that the dollar will lose its privilaged place as the world's reserve currency. To be replaced with a system of "currency baskets" (multiple curriencies tied together) and/or commodities, perhaps. For the US this will mean credit will be much harder to come by, inflation seems a near certainty, soaring gasoline prices, slashing of services, general impoverishment of the masses, civil unrest...you know, that sort of thing.

reply to post by silent thunder

From the information between you and babybunniess, I have a better understanding of it now. Thank you.

Originally posted by silent thunder
reply to post by idunno12

 

My understanding based on context and general macroeconomic assumptions would be that the dollar will lose its privilaged place as the world's reserve currency. To be replaced with a system of "currency baskets" (multiple curriencies tied together) and/or commodities, perhaps. For the US this will mean credit will be much harder to come by, inflation seems a near certainty, soaring gasoline prices, slashing of services, general impoverishment of the masses, civil unrest...you know, that sort of thing.

Back to the Fema camps which don't exist I guess.
If it really does brown the fan there in the US we can put up a family of four, not comfy but we got food and and roof.
If you live near Port Huron Michigan my offer stands.
They will probably shut the boarders if it gets bad though.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by idunno12


Actually they didnt jsut grab onto it. If you go back a few years tyou will see where China has called for a new currency to replace the dollar. Where China has announced they will no longer conduct trades with Russia using the US dollar, pushing for the Euro to replace the dollar as a reserve currency, and pushing for oil trades to be done in the Euro or anoyher currency instead of the dollar.

China has been pushing that agenda for sometime now, all in a concerted effort to bring about the fall of the dollar so they can step in and fill the void.

The world got what they wanted... have fun with the Chinese.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by idunno12

 

Actually they didnt jsut grab onto it. If you go back a few years tyou will see where China has called for a new currency to replace the dollar. Where China has announced they will no longer conduct trades with Russia using the US dollar, pushing for the Euro to replace the dollar as a reserve currency, and pushing for oil trades to be done in the Euro or anoyher currency instead of the dollar.

China has been pushing that agenda for sometime now, all in a concerted effort to bring about the fall of the dollar so they can step in and fill the void.

The world got what they wanted... have fun with the Chinese.

You can throw in Venezuela, Iran, Russia, Iraq" till they got invaded" and some more who stopped trading in US dollars for oil........it's been on the horizon for years boys, open those peepers and shut that ####### ing boob tube off and learn.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by burdman30ott6

Well then, the answer here is painfully obvious. Monday morning, enact the largest tarriffs on Chinese produced goods entering the US ever seen. I'm talking about hundreds of percetage points worth of import tarrifs. We'll see how Big Red feels about the US dollar when they're suddenly seeing scarcely any of them feeding their country anymore...

YES YES YES!!!
That is what I have been trying to get through the thick skulls of a lot of people.
Tax the heck out of imports (excise tax) and bring our jobs back HOME!

TRADE DOLLARS and JOBS GOING OUT of COUNTRY

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e419473c7f7b.png[/atsimg]

INCREASE in INDIVIDUAL tax to Offset DECREASE inExcise & Corporate tax

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7a762eced0ec.gif[/atsimg]

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Well then, the answer here is painfully obvious. Monday morning, enact the largest tarriffs on Chinese produced goods entering the US ever seen. I'm talking about hundreds of percetage points worth of import tarrifs. We'll see how Big Red feels about the US dollar when they're suddenly seeing scarcely any of them feeding their country anymore...

YES YES YES!!!
That is what I have been trying to get through the thick skulls of a lot of people.
Tax the heck out of imports (excise tax) and bring our jobs back HOME!

TRADE DOLLARS and JOBS GOING OUT of COUNTRY

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e419473c7f7b.png[/atsimg]

INCREASE in INDIVIDUAL tax to Offset DECREASE inExcise & Corporate tax

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7a762eced0ec.gif[/atsimg]

That won't work till you bring your corporations back home from over-seas.
If you can't get Intel or IBM to come home then your eggs are over-seas and no taxes will bring them back.
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Then maybe we should create a business tax that is placed on items sold by companies who are not headquartered in the US.

If we cant tax their profits directly, then tax their products sold in the US to make up the difference.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Then maybe we should create a business tax that is placed on items sold by companies who are not headquartered in the US.

If we cant tax their profits directly, then tax their products sold in the US to make up the difference.

good point but would that not make say" an intel chip" out of reach financially for most Americans?
I don't know for sure just throwing that out there........either way good food for thought.
Regards, iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Again, you're thinking within the confines of an engineered global economy rather than recognizing that we are talking about national protectionism. Let's say that China is the only nation in the world which makes widgets. (This is purely because China makes widgets for $.10 a unit, not due to any material source restrictions.) The US government goes to the Flying Eagle Corporation in the USA and asks them to produce documents showing how much it would cost, per unit, to produce widgets stateside. The company offers a unit price of $1.10 per unit. Congress slaps an instant taxation of 1200% on all imported widgets from China PLUS implements an import VAT tax on all domestic products that use imported materials. The Flying Eagle Corporation now has not only encouragement but financial motivation to open widget factories in the USA. The overall cost of items using widgets does increase to American consumers... but by and large, the price would remain pretty close to the same. Currently, most of the international conglomerates obviously have fat profit margins, as evidenced by their weekly 25-50% off sales (NO company sells non-perishable merchandise at a loss.)

The easiest and quickest way out of this mess is to flat out eliminate global free trade. There is no way in hell these companies would abandon the 3rd most populous, #1 economy on the planet. They would figure out how to work within the new (old) system of actually protecting America's interests first.

reply to post by Iwinder


One of the main arguments business gives for moving operations overseas is because of the competitive edge. Cheaper labor makes the product cheaper to make, resulting in saving for the purchaser.

So the theory goes anyways....

One of our issues here in the states (and im not completely laying blame on the group either) are unions (to an extent). Collective bargaining allows them to negotiate better wages, health care etc. Those costs go to the company, and they have to cover those costs somewhow.

Just as Us cities give incentives in the form of tax breaks to attract businesses, other countries do the same in the form of non unions / cheap labor (China).

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by Iwinder

 

Again, you're thinking within the confines of an engineered global economy rather than recognizing that we are talking about national protectionism. Let's say that China is the only nation in the world which makes widgets. (This is purely because China makes widgets for $.10 a unit, not due to any material source restrictions.) The US government goes to the Flying Eagle Corporation in the USA and asks them to produce documents showing how much it would cost, per unit, to produce widgets stateside. The company offers a unit price of $1.10 per unit. Congress slaps an instant taxation of 1200% on all imported widgets from China PLUS implements an import VAT tax on all domestic products that use imported materials. The Flying Eagle Corporation now has not only encouragement but financial motivation to open widget factories in the USA. The overall cost of items using widgets does increase to American consumers... but by and large, the price would remain pretty close to the same. Currently, most of the international conglomerates obviously have fat profit margins, as evidenced by their weekly 25-50% off sales (NO company sells non-perishable merchandise at a loss.)

The easiest and quickest way out of this mess is to flat out eliminate global free trade. There is no way in hell these companies would abandon the 3rd most populous, #1 economy on the planet. They would figure out how to work within the new (old) system of actually protecting America's interests first.

Excellent post and it really got me thinking here, I really agree with the "Free Trade" deal was a bad deal for all here in North America.
If we didn't have "Free Trade" I believe that gas here in Canada would be about 50 cents a gallon, but no sir bob, it does not work that way and never will.
My wife works for EXXON/Mobile here in Canada which used to be just Imperial Oil till free trade sold our oldest oil company in Canada out to the Americans.
Now because of all this bullcrap going on it is a good possibility that she is out of a job and I have to cut back on my beer drinking.....

No offense intended here but I can't really see the States being able to actually maintain the purchasing power they once had with a negative job growth and 53 million people on food stamps.
Set all the tariffs you like, but you need working people to buy products made in the USA.
You folks have more people on food stamps than our whole population here In Canada doubled ! and then some.
I really feel for you guys and I will not be surprised if we go next.
I don't know whats in store for us but I am watching that new thread on the Eastern Stock Markets "which just opened" and it is not looking good folks.
Regards, Iwinder

Umm... Americans buy more Chinese crap than anyone. It amounts to about 20% of China's total exports. You really think China want the US to crumble?? I don't think so.

Originally posted by idunno12

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by idunno12

 

You're looking at it wrong. What I'm talking about is full blown US protectionism. That ship hasn't sailed. It would cause some pain, but ultimately the situation we are now facing will cause far more pain. Either the feds tax the hell out of imports and, in doing so, rebuild the demand for a domestic production base... or they continue status quo with foreigners manufacturing all of our goods and tax the hell out of an unemployed nation of workers domestically.

I see, now, what you are saying.

I totally agree. It will be an extremely painful change and I agree that the only way it will start to happen is if the companies and consumers are forced to change the way they play.

Your view is a long term view rather than a short sighted "every man for himself" view, and one which I wish our leaders and our businessmen would adopt.

As a side note...I wonder if we could ever go back to, or support, more self-sufficiency and community based barter and trade.

Congress is bound and determined to collapse the USA. They do not want us to go back to self-sufficiency and community based barter and trade. That is why a very pro "Free Trade" advocate, General Electric CEO Jeffery Immelt, was tapped to lead a newly created Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. You might as well have tapped Hu Jintao to lead that Council. He probably is more por-American!

There is a darn good reason that Congress, The TRAITORS, rushed through the Food "Safety" Modernization Act during the lame duck session. It will prevent any possibility of "Victory Gardens" in the future.

If you think they care whether or not people starve read this post where I document the intentional starvation of people.

It is this section that turns US Agriculture over to the World Trade Organization and you can bet your booties that Monsanto, Dupont, Dow, Cargill, ADM, Bunge, Andre (formerly) and Louis Dreyfus, the group who wrote the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, do not want their customer base growing their own or trading among themselves!

SEC. 404. COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.
www.fda.gov...

The original bill, HR875 had ""in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST." and I expect a similar one liner to appear as an amendment to the new food law within a decade or less.

These words of a lawyer who specializes in interstate commerce clause cases is something we all need to understand because the "Commerce Clause" does not just effect food.

Ignorance about the law’s broad reach (and how it will be construed by the courts) has thwarted opposition to the bill, which will likely pass Congress. For example, a newspaper claims the bill “doesn’t regulate home gardens.” The newspaper probably assumed that was true because the bill, like most federal laws, only purports to reach activities that affect “interstate commerce.” To an uninformed layperson or journalist, that “sounds as if it might not reach local and mom-and-pop operators at all.” (The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, has sought to forestall opposition to her bill by falsely claiming that that “the Constitution’s commerce clause prevents the federal government from regulating commerce that doesn’t cross state lines.”)

But lawyers familiar with our capricious legal system know better. The Supreme Court ruled in Wickard v. Filburn (1942) that even home gardens (in that case, a farmer’s growing wheat for his own consumption) are subject to federal laws that regulate interstate commerce.

Economists and scholars have criticized this decision, but it continues to be cited and followed in Supreme Court rulings, such as those applying federal anti-drug laws to consumption of even home-grown medical marijuana. Indeed, many court decisions allow Congress to define as “interstate commerce” even non-commercial conduct that doesn’t cross state lines — something directly at odds with Rep. DeLauro’s claims. www.examiner.com...

THAT is the stick we can be beaten with if we try to defy the drive towards "Global Governance"