TheUtopian
Posts: 259
Status: offline
|
quote:
Currency arbitragers then take advantage of this split. They buy cheaper dollars on the open market, then sell then to the Fed, which would be forced under its obligations to pay the arbitrary fixed price. This further devalues the currency, so arbitragers invest their profits in more dollars at the true lower value, selling them to the Fed at the fixed higher price, etc. etc., pumping more and more money out of the government under the value of the dollar becomes so out of whack that the Fed would be forced to devalue the currency----and then the cycle starts again, until the currency is almost worthless, and inflation is rampant. Our currency is almost worthless right now. In fact, if were not for the intimidation factor of the US military---and the gullibility of certain trading partners---we'd have to exchange gold as a form of payment for imported goods. The current floating rate scheme encourages our government to spend into oblivion....and while you may be technically correct about the system's weakness through its susceptibility to speculation, the basis point for its creation was to eliminate speculation. Just like with the financier-driven derivatives model that is crushing the system right now, we need to contain and declare-war-on those who buy and sell large blocs of money for no other purpose than to make profits. Like I mentioned in reference to competitive-devaluation one-upsmanship, ala global trade - At least fixed parities/parity-between-currencies provided the crucial benefit of price predictability: which meant that international traders would know that dollar-denominated bills of exchange used in international import-export- transactions could be expected to vary no more than plus or minus 1% over their three month or six month period. You don't have anything close to that with this crapy floating rate scheme. The floating rate scheme is purely financier-driven - and you and I have a fundamental difference in philosophy in that respect. quote:
The evidence of credit markets freezing is already there---banks are reluctant to lend to each other, so they are unable to continue their day to day business as usual, and must hold their assets (hurting profits, incidentally) instead of participating in the money market. Should this continue, banks may be reluctant to lend to business and consumers too, and banks unable to meet cash flow demands will cease to exist, obviously never loaning again. The fear mongering is great, yes, but the problem does essentially exist. Yes, the bill sucks, is a band-aid, and manipulates the situation for the benefit of the wealthy elite. That's why I'm glad it failed in the House. But realistically, something will need to be done---preferably more at the consumer end. We'll see what "they" propose next. The Federal Reserve doesn't seem to be frozen up. Based on what I've been reading it seems as though they've extended over 1.5 trillion in credit over that last 45 days to a wholw host of Bankers, financiers, swap houses, etc. Since we've already nationalized AIG, Fannie & Freddy, why not keep going and just incrementally nationalize the Federal Reserve and force it to directly issue credit only to production-driven factions of ''mainstreet'' with an emphasis on rebuilding our infrastructure, new and alternative forms of transportation, health care, manufacturing, defense production, etc, etc. And while we're at it, go with Peter Defazio's--- My congressman----idea of instituting a ''Tobin themed'' securities transfer tax on all Wall Street transactions. It would raise billions. Anyways.....there's so many more alternatives to just handing over more sheep to the wolves. - R PS - The end of Bretton Woods was mentioned just for the sake of noting the specific point in time we began our tailspin.{My opinion}
< Message edited by TheUtopian -- 10/2/2008 2:31:57 AM >
_____________________________
Vae Victus! - Woe to the conquered.... My tears are the cure for cancer - I sweat testosterone, bleed black, and piss excellence.
|