Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Could all currencies re-set tomorrow?


Recommended Posts

One World Currency – Not Just Coming…Already Here
 
 

 

http://www.globalwealthprotection.com/one-world-currency-not-just-coming-already-here/



IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde Calls for Action Now to Secure Global Recovery

Press Release No.12/358

September 24, 2012

Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, today urged policymakers to use the window of opportunity offered by recent policy decisions—and to take the actions needed to achieve a decisive turn in the global crisis.

“This time, we need a sustained rebound, not a bounce. If this time is to be different, we need certainty, not uncertainty. We need decision makers to be real action takers. We need delivery,” she said in a speech at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

She described recent initiatives by major central banks as “big policy signals in the right direction”—the European Central Bank’s OMT bond-purchasing program, QE3 by the U.S. Federal Reserve, and the Bank of Japan’s expanded Asset Purchase Program. At the same time, Ms. Lagarde warned that the global economy is still fraught with risks and policy uncertainty is weighing growth down. The IMF continues to project a gradual recovery, but global growth will likely be a bit weaker than anticipated even in July, she said.

Speaking ahead of the joint Annual Meetings of the IMF and World Bank Boards of Governors in Tokyo, Ms. Lagarde focused on three key sets of policy challenges: the unfinished agenda for Europe and the United States; increased pressures in the rest of the world; and commitments on which the IMF also must deliver.

“Europe obviously remains the epicenter of the crisis and where the most urgent action is needed,” she said, calling on European policymakers to deliver on their commitments—including by establishing a single supervisory banking mechanism and enabling the direct recapitalization of banks. Other actions include implementing the European financial firewall—notably the European Stability Mechanism; the agreed plan for fiscal union; and, at the country level, the reforms that are essential for growth, jobs, and competitiveness.

Ms. Lagarde said that another major risk to the global economy is in the United States, where “current law implies a dramatic tightening of the deficit by about 4 per cent of GDP next year… Failure to reach a deal on raising the debt ceiling could also force a dramatic tightening.” She called for action to avoid this so-called “fiscal cliff” and a concrete plan “to bring down debt gradually over the medium term.”

Ms. Lagarde also noted how, after leading the global economy in the current recovery, the major emerging markets are now slowing; she urged them to focus on countering vulnerabilities, whether domestic or external. She added that she is pushing hard to ensure adequate financing for low-income countries, including through the IMF’s concessional lending via the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT). She also called for increased support from the international community so that successful transformation in the Middle East can be based on a “foundation of inclusive growth and employment.”

Finally, Ms. Lagarde said that the IMF is striving to be even more effective by improving its economic analysis and strengthening the global financial safety. The Fund is also making good progress in reaching final agreement on “the most significant governance changes in IMF history.” She said that the IMF was pushing to pass these reforms, aimed at giving greater representation to emerging market and developing economies, “if not by October, then as soon as possible thereafter.”

http://www.imf.org/e...012/pr12358.htm


10-14-12
 
Bernanke: Emerging Markets Should Let Currencies Rise
 
The Wall Street Journal:
 
Bernanke Calls for Emerging Market Currency Appreciation. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke encouraged policy makers in developing economies to let their currencies appreciate, delivering a strongly worded counterargument to their own critiques of the Fed. Many central bankers in developing economies have complained that the Fed's easy money policies are hurting U.S. trading partners around the world. One common refrain is that when the Fed prints money, it causes investors to search for other places to put their money, causing a potentially destabilizing rush of funds into less developed economies. The critics say this fuels inflation and asset bubbles in their countries, and threatens to push their currencies higher to levels that would curb their exports. Mr. Bernanke, in remarks prepared for a panel discussion at International Monetary Fund meetings in Tokyo, said policy makers in these countries could slow this rush of capital and some of its negative effects by allowing their own currencies to appreciate. Instead, he argued, they were doing just the opposite. "In some emerging markets, policy makers have chosen to systematically resist currency appreciation as a means of promoting exports and domestic growth," he argued. "However, the perceived benefits of currency management inevitably come with costs, including reduced monetary independence and the consequent susceptibility to imported inflation." Capital surges and inflation in these markets, in other words, are problems that policy makers in these markets could address themselves if they chose to, he argued.
 

http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443749204578055600111447318.html?mod=djkeyword&mg=reno64-wsj



FROM A PREVIOUS BLOG...INTERESTING...

I have become disenchanted with everything I read, research, or otherwise spend my off time trying to decipher. I decided to try something different. I have been doing some research on the job market, and the need for qualified professionals in the field of Global Currency Exchange. So, for your entertainment, or edification which ever you prefer, here are the current job opportunities in the above mentioned field. Hmmm, 4760 current job postings...now that's interesting, and factual. :twocents:

global currency exchange company jobs
Viewing 1 - 10 of 4,760 jobs




http://jobs.business...xchange+company

 

 

 

http://jobs.businessweek.com/a/all-jobs/list/q-global+currency+exchange+company

 

 

 



Elites Promote Pure Fiat Currencies – Mutual and Social Credit – for Traceability?

 

http://www.thedailybell.com/4294/Elites-Promote-Pure-Fiat-Currencies-Mutual-and-Social-Credit-for-Traceability

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in a currency war. The only thing we will see is the US dollar fall in value to the lowest levels ever.

 

That is all guru Bullsh*t about the global reset.

 

Here is what is really going on, brace yourself for the truth.

 

http://w3.newsmax.com/a/currency-wars/video_uwr.cfm?p=n&promo_code=12374-1&gclid=CLv9jJa9yrYCFQgHnQod0DQA7g

 

 

 

What he states is his purely hypothetical opinion.  according to a statement he made in a news article.

Plus he has another book to sell.  Know what I mean coolbean

 

 

Rickards, never an optimist, maintains that the most plausible scenario moving forward is a chaotic debasement of the dollar, characterized by a gradual loss in investor confidence and created "like an avalanche brought about by the layering of one last financial snowflake on an unstable mountainside of debt."

This hypothetical scenario, he admits, is not inevitable. A gradual move away from the dollar as the dominant global reserve currency has the potential to bring about a softer landing, as does the growth in use of the Special Drawing Rights, an existing medium of exchange between nations issued by the International Monetary Fund. Still, the best way to ensure financial stability, he argues, would be the adoption of a "flexible gold standard," in which major currencies are linked to the price of gold, as they were in past periods of global economic calm: prior to World War I and in the two decades following World War II.

Like his radical dollar pessimism, Rickards' nostalgia for gold places him well outside the mainstream of contemporary economics. On the whole, his provocative ideas are sure to find critics on both sides of the political aisle.

While generally in support of low taxation and government spending, he is as critical of theories of free-market ideologue Milton Friedman as he is of the traditional spending-centered Keynesian response to recessions, generally embraced by liberals, including Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

Edited by Markinsa
Repaired Quote Box
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why People Are Investing In Foreign And Even Exotic Currencies

Diversity is important to any investor and although foreign to some, currency investment is a concept that has grown in popularity since the economic downturn of 2008. The strength of a country’s currency is linked to the size of its deficit and rate of inflation, and as we have watched the U.S. dollar fall and the deficit rise over the last few years, investors are looking to spread their funds into other markets in a move to diversify and decrease risk.
Most of us do not have time to research specific companies or stocks in other countries, but when considering investing in a country’s currency, an investor can study the country as a whole; what do they export? What is the unemployment rate? What is the inflation rate? Does the country hold potential for growth? The information provided below is just that, information. It is not to be construed as investment advice. You should always contact a financial adviser before making any investment and create a strategy that fits your financial objectives.

From a previous blogger.....

 

Thought this might be an indication we are all getting a little closer to what we've been waiting for.......

“We’ve looked at many scenarios, including where one or more countries decides to redenominate,” said Roger Griffith, who oversees global settlement and customer risk for MasterCard. “We have defined operating steps and communications steps to take.” He added: “Practically, we could make a change in a day or two and be prepared in terms of our systems.”

In a statement, Visa said that it too would also be able to make “a swift transition to a new currency with the minimum possible disruption to consumers and retailers.”

http://www.msnbc.msn...ss-us_business/

Another link for an interesting article is:

http://moneymorning....e-death-spiral/

the video in this link is rather long...........but pretty clearly indicates why we are headed for the cliff economically, world wide.....

China Launching Gold Backed Worldwide Currency - Now the Americans will have to find a reason to go to war against China !!

http://www.indiavision.com/news/article/business/339477/china-launching-gold-backed-worldwide-currency--now-the-americans-will-have-to-find-a-reason-to-go-to-war-against-china-/#ixzz259aNv0vs

 

 

Why Currencies Should Be Allowed to Compete - We need to break the federal money monopoly... By Ron Paul

RECENTLY I held a hearing in my congressional subcommittee on the subject of competing currencies, writes Congressman Ron Paul.

This is an issue of enormous importance, but unfortunately few Americans understand how the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department impose a strict monopoly on money in America.

This monopoly is maintained using federal counterfeiting laws, which is a bit rich. If any organization is guilty of counterfeiting Dollars, it is our own Treasury. But those who dare to challenge federal legal tender laws by circulating competing currencies – at least physical currencies – risk going to prison.

Like all government created monopolies, the federal monopoly on money results in substandard product in the form of our ever-depreciating Dollars.

Yet governments have always sought to monopolize the issuance of money, either directly or through the creation of central banks. The expanding role of the Federal Reserve in the 20th century enabled our federal government to grow wildly larger than would have been possible otherwise. Our Fed, like all central banks, encourages deficits by effectively monetizing Treasury debt. But the price we pay is the terrible and ongoing debasement of our money.

Allowing individuals and business to use alternate currencies, especially currencies backed by gold and silver, would expose the whole rotten system because the marketplace would prefer such alternate currencies unless and until the Fed suddenly imposed radical discipline on its Dollar inflation.

Sadly, Americans are far less free than many others around the world when it comes to protecting themselves against the rapidly depreciating US Dollar. Mexican workers can set up accounts denominated in ounces of silver and take tax-free delivery of that silver whenever they want. In Singapore and other Asian countries, individuals can set up bank accounts denominated in gold and silver. Debit cards can be linked to gold and silver accounts so that customers can use gold and silver to make point of sale transactions, a service which is only available to non-Americans.

The obvious solution is to legalize monetary freedom and allow the circulation of parallel and competing currencies. There is no reason why Americans should not be able to transact, save, and invest using the currency of their choosing. They should be free to use gold, silver, or other currencies with no legal restrictions or punitive taxation standing in the way. Restoring the monetary system envisioned by the Constitution is the only way to ensure the economic security of the American people.

After all, if our monetary system is fundamentally sound – and the Federal Reserve indeed stabilizes the Dollar as its apologists claim – then why fear competition? Why do we accept that centralized, monopoly control over our money is compatible with a supposedly free-market economy? In a free market, the government's fiat Dollar should compete with alternate currencies for the benefit of American consumers, savers, and investors.

As Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises explained, sound money is an instrument that protects our civil liberties against despotic government. Our current monetary system is indeed despotic, and the surest way to correct things simply is to legalize competing currencies.

Competing Currencies and Ron Paul – Mismatch or Monetary Heaven?

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 – by Staff Report
Legalize Competing Currencies ... I recently held a hearing in my congressional subcommittee on the subject of competing currencies. This is an issue of enormous importance but unfortunately few Americans understand how the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department impose a strict monopoly on money in America. This monopoly is maintained using federal counterfeiting laws, which is a bit rich. If any organization is guilty of counterfeiting dollars, it is our own Treasury. But those who dare to challenge federal legal tender laws by circulating competing currencies − at least physical currencies − risk going to prison. Like all government created monopolies, the federal monopoly on money results in substandard product in the form of our ever-depreciating dollars.Ron Paul, August 14th column at The Daily Bell
Dominant Social Theme: Competing currencies are impractical and just a way for the Rothschild-driven free-market movement to dodge the issue of paper money perfection. Money worked better anyway when women solely managed it, as Ellen Brown has pointed out.
Free-Market Analysis: Here comes Congressman Ron Paul pounding the drums for competing currencies. He's been called a dreamer, a schemer and worse but long ago we arrived at a somewhat similar vision.
That doesn't mean your banking system doesn't arrive at a fully capitalized gold standard, only that if it does, market forces propel it there.
Ron Paul is a believer in what Austrians call "honest money" – but he is willing to let the market decide on when and how it arrives at its conclusion. Which seems fairly reasonable to us.
Ron Paul's good friend, Murray Rothbard, was more didactic about the issue. Back in the early 1990s, in fact, quite a battle raged between him and the monetary tag team of George A. Selgin/Lawrence H. White. Selgin and White are very interesting and creative economists.
You can see some Daily Bell interviews with Selgin and White here:
It was Selgin's and White's idea that Scottish fiat money banks, backed by nothing more than five percent gold, functioned fairly well for several hundred years or more. Rothbard didn't like it. In fact, it drove him a little nuts.
He was committed to promoting a full gold standard and even to the point of criminalizing the actions of those who contravened it. (This always struck us as a bit odd, given that Rothbard helped invent modern anarchism.)
Selgin and White, also considered "of" the Austrian school, fired back. The argument came down to whether the Bank of England had been a de facto "lender of last resort" for the Scottish banks that allowed customers to tolerate gold-backing percentages as low as five percent.
We never entirely made up our mind but during the debate we did begin to realize that no matter the rhetorical outcome of the specific debate, the market itself – consumers who made the decisions – ought to be able to choose the kind of money they were comfortable with.
Before Rothbard died, he apparently was willing to entertain this notion as well. Good for him. He was a brilliant man and could even be flexible about his core beliefs later in life.
As for Selgin and White, they've continued to propound the utility of free banking and Ron Paul, also later in life, seems to agree with this position.
Let 100 or a 1,000 currencies bloom, in other words. Many may be comfortable with honest money, fully backed paper, in other words. If they're not and they're willing to try fiat, maybe in a free-market environment they'd be paid more for that via more generous interest rates. Who knows?
Ron Paul wants to try. Of course, there are plenty of naysayers, including what we call the "paper money" crowd that has suddenly descended on the Internet the way Athena blasted out of Zeus's skull, fully grown.
The objections of these folks, so far as we can tell, is that 1) there is no free market and never can be because ... well, Jews won't allow it, and 2) never in history has their been an era of competing currencies; it's not feasible.
To this we might answer that we are not sure 1) Jews infest every corner of the marketplace and since we have not lived forever, we are not sure whether 2) somewhere, at some time, a corner of the world DID support competing currencies.
So far as we know, pre-Civil War America did okay with what historians today call "wildcat" banking. Even despite the tendency of these banks to go out of business it was a time of wild prosperity in the US.
The idea that the Rothschilds controlled all the gold and silver in pre-war America is fairly preposterous. Likewise, the idea that that illustrious family controlled all the country's single branch banks.
They were single branch, of course, because that's how they were chartered. They were prone to going out of business and creating "runs" because many were forced to buy horrid municipal bonds as part of the charter.
Nonetheless, the system flourished (in a sense, anyway, despite its problems) and the US became great. Gold and silver seem to have circulated freely throughout the US, certainly in the West – especially silver, the "people's money."
Paper money, fiat money, regional interest rates – along with regional slumps and rebounds – were all part of a wonderful monetary experiment.
No wonder it had to end! The grumpy New York banks and their European masters couldn't bear it. Using their paid henchmen, Abraham Lincoln along with his opposite, Jefferson Davis, they created a war between the states to stamp out monetary freedom once and for all.
See our article about Jefferson Davis here:
After the war everything changed. The New York Stock Exchange began buying up other NY exchanges and Money Power was finally regnant.
The rest is history, as they say. First "they" killed silver – which they hated – and then they killed gold, which they hated worse. And now the US and the world are grappling with a second great depression.
Ron Paul has an answer: competing currencies. It was apparently foundational to American greatness and can be so again.
Of course, those who are currently propagating pure fiat systems and claiming that gold (for some reason they don't mention silver) is a gateway to several kinds of Hell will have none of it.
And yet, as we've pointed out, there is a strange authoritarian streak to such arguments. Many proponents of pure fiat seem to be affiliated either with "green" eco-projects or have worked directly for the United Nations.
You can see some of our articles on this apparently predictable partnership here:
The reason we use the word "predictable" is because there's something, well ... authoritarian about some of these paper promotions. We're not surprised their backers end up working for the UN or UNESCO.
Silvio Gesell, for instance, wanted to use government to hand out depreciating currency to the masses. Henry George wanted to force everyone to give up property rights while paying a "land tax." Major Douglas was convinced that government ought to pay people money outright using a "perfected" formula of his devising.
So many of these theories seem to count on government force for their installation. Contrast them, then, to Ludwig von Mises and "Human Action." Not for him were paper money schemes demanding massive government intervention and a kind of militarized society to accomplish.
No. Von Mises spent much of his later life promoting the idea that people inevitably pursue their own enlightened self-interest and individual destinies. Government schemes – laws, regulations, economic systems – attempting to predict human nature were bound to fail or at least not perform as predicted.
What could be more generous than this? The nobility of the intellectual gesture is virtually unparalleled in modern economics – in any school of philosophy, as a matter of fact.
Of course, it made von Mises – and modern Austrian economics generally – into a kind of collective pariah. If one adopted Austrian economics, one threw econometrics away. And that made it kind of difficult for sundry bureaucrats and prognosticators to make a living.
Nonetheless, of late, even this most noble of perceptions has come under enthusiastic attack. We are told there is no such thing as "human action" anymore than there is a "free market."
It is explained to us that von Mises, in his insistence on building the intellectual basis for freedom, was merely baiting the trap of tribal monetary primacy. If one adopts the idea, therefore, that people have the property of self-determination, one might as well join a Temple and begin to recite the (Babylonian) Talmud.
Even the great poetic genius Ezra Pound rejected this "stupid, suburban prejudice" late in life. Pound, an exquisite intellect, realized finally that the key to living life well was a certain nobility of soul, a generous appreciation of the best of human nature.
He'd spent his life advocating theories like those of Douglas and Gesell, but finally at the end of life he likely saw it was not so simple. That there was neither one single monetary panacea nor one single mortal enemy.
This, in a sense, is what Ron Paul has realized as well. Life is too complicated for any one solution to hold sway.
Let monetary systems compete, he has decided. Let there be a rich tapestry of currency and fiscal solutions – including even Greenbackerism, Georgism and social and mutual credit – that allow people and the larger society to choose what best suits them.
This doesn't seem to be such a hard concept to grasp but those of late who have taken to propounding paper promotions will have none of it.
And yet ... in our view, it is a kind of faux economics to preclude certain monetary solutions and advocate others with frenetic purity. Whence comes this certainty? And from what personal experiences springs the bitter bounty of absolutism and prejudice?
Conclusion: We will close by quoting from Ron Paul's most recent column:
As Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises explained, sound money is an instrument that protects our civil liberties against despotic government. Our current monetary system is indeed despotic, and the surest way to correct things simply is to legalize competing currencies.

http://www.thedailybell.com/4186/Competing-Currencies-and-Ron-Paul-Mismatch-or-Monetary-Heaven

AILING CURRENCIES...Stable Countries to Fall, Emerging Countries to Rise....

 

 

AILING CURRENCIES
 
Low growth and a lack of jobs are haunting the West
 
The Telegraph, Calcutta, India
 
Writing on the Wall: Ashok V. Desai

 

 

 

Currency issue is an immensely profitable

industry. A well managed currency commands a market value that is a multiple of its cost. A 500-rupee note costs no more than a few paise to manufacture; the rate of return on its production is close to 50,000 per cent. Currency production is so profitable that it would attract too many entrepreneurs. If they put out too much currency, its value would decline; in other words, there would be inflation. Inflation brings losses to those who hold currency; they would be better off if they held anything else, such as gold. So inflation beyond a point can cause a flight from currency. So currency issuers have to be moderate in their greed. It is impossible to limit their greed. So governments eliminate competition and become monopoly issuers of currency.

Coins can be stolen. They are also difficult to carry around beyond a point. Early on, governments tried to solve this problem by using valuable, malleable and durable commodities to make coins. They settled on three minerals — copper, silver and gold. But their scarcity fluctuated as new reserves were found and exhausted; the fluctuations caused long cycles of inflation and deflation. To overcome this instability, governments invented paper currency, whose supply they monopolized and controlled.

Paper currency can be stolen, burnt or washed away; it would be convenient if cash could be parked in a safe place. Someone could make a business of storing it for others for a fee. But soon people found a better alternative. If the safekeepers could lend out the cash, they would earn interest, which they could share with the depositors. This business was called banking.

Once people got used to keeping money in banks, they kept only a fraction of their money in cash, and withdrew money only occasionally from banks. While they withdrew money, others would be depositing it; if as much money was being deposited as withdrawn, banks would not have to keep any cash. They could lend it all out. So banks started lending out most of their deposits.

It happened once in a while that people came to withdraw more money than to deposit, and a bank ran out of money. If depositors heard that a bank had run out of cash, they would all run to the bank to get out what they could before the owner ran away. Seeing them run, depositors of other banks would also panic, and run to withdraw their deposits. These episodes of infectious running came to be known as bank runs. When the depositors found that the banker had run away, they would break his bench or table in rage. This rupture of the bench was transformed into bankruptcy.

Bank runs were extremely disruptive. They suddenly made depositors poor, and sent some of them into bankruptcy. And if they could not pay their debts, their creditors too went bankrupt. Thus bankruptcies could bring business to a halt, sometimes for years. To prevent such catastrophes, governments created central banks. They tried to stop banks from being too foolish, made them keep minimum cash reserves, and in return lent them cash when they were afflicted by bank runs.

If there are governments, there will be a multiplicity of currencies. Anyone who wants to buy, sell, borrow or lend abroad will need another currency than his own. This can be easily organized in currency exchanges. But if one currency is more stable than another or interest rates are higher in one country than in another, people will want to transfer their money to the better country. They will buy that country’s currency and sell their own; the exchange rate of their currency will fall. The government of the worse country would not like that at all; it would worsen the government’s reputation and reduce the demand for its currency. So governments of worse countries place restrictions on their citizens’ foreign exchange transactions; they are known as exchange control. The strictest form of exchange control is one in which the government gives itself a monopoly of holdings of foreign currency and sells it to its citizens at fixed exchange rates subject to detailed conditions.

If governments hold all foreign exchange and regulate all transactions in it, they are in a good position to fix the exchange rate. But if two governments cannot agree on the exchange rate between their currencies, there can be a currency war. Especially when there is a world slump and shortage of demand, it is in every country’s interest to push down the exchange rate of its own currency, so that its goods become cheaper abroad and foreign goods become expensive in that country. The way to do it is to buy gold or foreign currencies, so that their value goes up relatively to its currency. But if all countries try to do it, none of them can be sure to win. So currency wars are usually indecisive.

After much bitter experience, governments of the world decided to abandon currency wars after World War II, and appointed a policeman, named International Monetary Fund, in 1945. Every country declared its exchange rate in terms of gold to the IMF, and to stick to it; in return, it could introduce as draconian exchange controls as it liked. Then in 1971, the biggest country, the United States of America, suddenly said it would not maintain its exchange rate in terms of gold: it went off the gold standard. There soon followed the Yom Kippur war in between Israel on the one side and Egypt and Syria on the other; it led Arab countries to impose an embargo on export of oil. The price of crude suddenly quadrupled from $3 to $12 a barrel; the sharp rise sent the balances of payments of many oil importing countries into deficit. The deficits were far bigger than what they could borrow from IMF and elsewhere, so they were forced to stop trying to fix exchange rates. Thus the world entered a period of floating currencies.

The exchange rate of floating currency was no longer fixed by its government. So it needed no gold foreign exchange reserves. Industrial countries soon realized this, and stopped accumulating reserves; some liquidated reserves entirely. But governments cannot do without a religion. So they replaced the pursuit of external stability by internal stability; their central banks pursued price stability by means of monetary policy.

However, old ghosts continued to haunt us. The industrial world is suffering from low growth and high unemployment. In the circumstances, it would be of advantage to an industrial country to devalue. They cannot do this the old way since they no longer fix exchange rates; but they can induce devaluation by means of expansionary policies such as reducing interest rates and running fiscal deficits. This is what the US and the European Union are doing. They do see that like competitive devaluation of old, their present policies are also beggar-thy-neighbour policies. But for domestic reasons, they see no alternative. So they continue what they are doing, and meet periodically to look for an alternative. They meet so often that to save paper, media have abbreviated their meetings to G8 and G20.

 

IMF predicts end of age for America  America's economic dominance on the world stage could end in five years, according to a new report.

The International Monetary Fund's latest forecast predicts that China's economy will outflank the United States' in 2016.

That moment would come more than a decade earlier than most forecasters suggest. However, other forecasts compare the gross domestic products and current exchange rates of the U.S. and China in arguing that it will be many years before the countries trade places. MarketWatch reported that the IMF is using what's known as "purchasing power parities," comparing what residents of both countries earn and spend domestically.

Based on that comparison, China's economy will rise from $11.2 trillion in 2011 to $19 trillion in 2016. The U.S. economy will rise at a slower pace, from $15.2 trillion to $18.8 trillion in that period. According to MarketWatch, China's share of the global economy will hit 18 percent, while the United States' share will lag behind at 17.7 percent.

The finding comes at a rocky time for the U.S. economy. Though the job market has improved since the 2008 Wall Street collapse, unemployment remains high and Washington has struggled to balance stimulus and incentive programs against the need to close the deficit.

In the absence of a deficit-reduction deal, Standard & Poor's rating agency last week announced that it was downgrading the U.S. debt outlook from stable to negative, warning that a failure to strike a deficit agreement could lead to a lower credit rating in the future.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...-surpass-2016/

 

Jim Rogers: Currency Crisis Coming Within Two Years

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/jim-Rogers-Currency-Crisis/2011/05/13/id/396258?s=al&promo_code=C42A-1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi, I have been a equity investor and a currency trader for 25 years. I have had great success in stocks (specifically biotech's). Currency traded has not been so kind. I can tell you from my experience and from other forex traders I communicate with on a frequent basis that a global currency reset is a fantasy. If this did happen, the USD would take a hard fall because in comparison to strong currencies such as Kuwaiti Dinar, UAE, Swiss Franc the dollar would definitely be devalued as it should be. Look what just happened in Venezuala with their recent currency devaluation of 30%. Chavez ordered it devalued from his death bed because of years of that government and Chavez's corruption with spending the country bankrupt. IMO, until we get these governments out of power, they will continue to spend other people's money. That's socialism 101. Sorry if my rant got off base.

Yeah, one of them is Odumdumb Obama!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If things I've been reading in several articles over the past 2 or 3 months are true, apparently as far as the US goes...something is expected to happen as far as the economy goes! And not in a negative direction. The Obama administration seems to be banking on an increase from somewhere...to the extent that it is to increase approx 3 million Americans to a "millionaire" status. This was according to an article in the Washington Post (the most recent one i read...will have to find the article for a link). There are those who are expecting this so strongly that many are predicting that by 2015 some laws will be changed to the extent that Obama will be eligible for a 3rd term....one person stating this also predicted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would declare bankruptcy months before they did! Dont know how much of this i believe...at one time i would have dismissed it totally...but now days, who truly knows!! Jist info...not my opinion. God Bless!

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49419220

Don't think this is it, but it's close to what you were saying

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 million americans just about own the Dinar.  Thats interesting.  How do you determine that unless something is about to happen?

 

 

If things I've been reading in several articles over the past 2 or 3 months are true, apparently as far as the US goes...something is expected to happen as far as the economy goes! And not in a negative direction. The Obama administration seems to be banking on an increase from somewhere...to the extent that it is to increase approx 3 million Americans to a "millionaire" status. This was according to an article in the Washington Post (the most recent one i read...will have to find the article for a link). There are those who are expecting this so strongly that many are predicting that by 2015 some laws will be changed to the extent that Obama will be eligible for a 3rd term....one person stating this also predicted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would declare bankruptcy months before they did! Dont know how much of this i believe...at one time i would have dismissed it totally...but now days, who truly knows!! Jist info...not my opinion. God Bless!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guru I4U believes all currencies will re-set tomorrow.

 

He also heard on Bloomberg that a global re-set all at one time will be the only thing that can possibly save the Euro & USD at this time.

 

Disparate economies do not play well with one another under one roof.  The EU should have taught the world that with the mess they've had these past few years.

 

The only thing that will save the USD is for the US to find a way to corner the market on air and water. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are in a currency war. The only thing we will see is the US dollar fall in value to the lowest levels ever.

 

That is all guru Bullsh*t about the global reset.

 

Here is what is really going on, brace yourself for the truth.

 

http://w3.newsmax.com/a/currency-wars/video_uwr.cfm?p=n&promo_code=12374-1&gclid=CLv9jJa9yrYCFQgHnQod0DQA7g

 

Newsmax has a history of pushing these type of "stories" about how to make obscene profits from the coming economic calamity.

 

http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2010/02/14/6039/newsmax-hocking-financial-services-is-it-manipulating-news/

Link to post
Share on other sites

A global reset, revalue is a fantasy. :rolleyes:  For instance, they reset tomorrow, and the US treasury doesn't stop printing $85 billion a month. What would the US dollar gain?? Maybe a small temporary bump before the devalue continued. A  world currency would mean a world government. Would you personally ever allow that to happen.  Would any non-communist US citizen. If you thought just a little you would know a global reset will NEVER happen. If you honestly believe it could, please pass the blunt. :cigar:  I could use a temporary break from reality.    :peace:  :D

Edited by mgpwia1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.