Posted on 12/13/2006 12:18:26 AM PST by MadIvan
You've already shipped a passel of leftist @ssholes to Canada, and I can't see that it's improved either country!
If the Euro collapses what say OPEC to pricing oil in Euro's?
Looks like the dollar beats all again.
Strategery + Shardenfreude = Stratenshardenfreudery.
Enjoy
"I'd like to get your take on why the Euro hasn't plunged yet. It does seem long overdue. Is Soros money propping it up? Or more likely, Soros owned politicians at the expense of the Eurozone taxpayers?"
Don't forget $oreA$$'s bed buddies, the Opecker Princes, Thugs, Despots and other Opecker funders of the WOT.
How many of the Opecker countries only accept and trade in Euros instead of $'s?
The problem is that we are so outnumbered by them. :-(
Going great...the top seller at 7-11 stores is a "do-it-youslf" dental kit.....
.....includes industrial strength whitener, exoxy glue, pick and small locking device and string for removing tooth, cotton wads and iodine paste.
On a separate issue...the Spanish language has adopted a new word ...which roughly translated means...the tall pale foreigner with bad teeth.
The euro should be dumped. The currency is ugly. French currency was so beautiful. The fifty franc note in honour of St.Expury (sp?) was issued shortly before the switch to the euro, and is a work of art.
Everything is so squalid and anti-human under the EU. Really horrid litle men squatting on the aspirations and aesthetic yearnings of formerly free peoples...the EU was a concept that made no sense economically and ignored the emotional loyalty people had to their own history.
It's an unnatural conceit that in reality is a combination of feudalism and totalitarianism. Most member states ignore EU rules that do not suit them, except the UK which enforces every demeaning regulation on its own people, much like the Stalinists that run the town councils.
The EU will find a way to circumvet the referendums that rejected their constitution. Someone should nuke Brussels.
They're already doing a fine job by losing the Dollar's value against the Euro going on a decade now.
Do you believe this will finally quell calls from some in your government then to make a stronger connection with Europe or do you feel the calls will strengthen with the hopes that an immediate move closer could possibly save the Euro? Or is it past all hope of saving? It's always seemed there is a split on that particular concern.
BTW Happy Hogswatchnight to any fans out there. I am indeed jealous I will have to wait a year for it to be on Sci-Fi.
I'm not familiar with Opecker. Do you have a link or am I just slow in picking up on a pun?
Opecker is a pun for Opec.
Opecker Princes, despots, thugs, and financial supporters of Islamofascist Serial Killers
Meanwhile, the Chinese rattle their sabres about selling out the dollar.
Let's all flee to the Kroner!
Nee, the Ringit!
Go ahead and gloat.
The EU pursues policies that ensure their irrelevency in the future. Should we in the US feel sad that they are destroying themselves, or happy in the knowledge that their attempts to match or beat the US as a 'hyperpower' are doomed to fail?
A diverse and somewhat disunited Europe is what enable Europe to rule the world from 1500-1900. It can still do so if it learns the lessons of its own history.
LOL. :)
Go ahead and gloat with glee.
You put your plastic card in the machine and it pumps out pounds. (Don't look at the receipt.) They spend pretty much like dollars and you don't find out how badly you've been screwed until you check your bank statement when you get back to the States.
<< Ponzi scheme that is kept afloat because so many very powerful clients are in up to their foreheads. No constitution just a enormous shell game hosted by die hard socialists, fascist, statists and communists. >>
Socialists, fascist, statists and communists are all but shades of the same color.
And the Europeon Neo-Soviet's offshore satellite state -- the nowadays gloatingly ingrate and greatly, gratingly groveling once great britain, every bit as doomed as is the Euro and as are the rest of the old europeon/New-Eurabia states -- but heads up the herd.
<< .... should the question be .... why has the US Dollar been so bearish in the same currency trending time frame? >>
Pleased to see a little objectivity raise its beautiful head in such an otherwise pointless from an American perspective thread. Congratulations for its several best questions.
QUOTE:
Will the US dollar collapse?
Gerard Jackson
BrookesNews.Com
Monday December 18 2006
The US dollar is having a hard time of it. But why is this so? Why has the dollar been falling? The basic argument is that the trade deficit is unsustainable and is driving down the dollar. But this argument does not tell us what is driving the deficits. However, some commentators are pointing an accusing finger at aggregate demand, arguing that if the economy grows “too fast” this will suck in imports. But this is to admit that the Fed has implemented a loose monetary policy. Keynes made the same point:
... some part of the new demand will be met, not by increasing home output, but by imports… (Borrowing for Defence: Is it Inflation?, The Times, 11 March, 1937).
Let’s look at some figures. During the last year the dollar fell by about 11 per cent against the euro. In September imports fell by 2 per cent and exports rose by 0.5 per cent while in November the dollar once more dropped against a range of major currencies. How do we explain these movements? The answer lies in the supply and demand for dollars. Any first year student of economics understands that to increase the supply of any product while demand for its services remains unchanged will lower its price. Commentators still miss the point even when they observe that imports fall when the economy contracts. A reader sent me the following which he had taken from an article:
The deficit rose throughout the 1970s, from $1 billion in 1971 to $24 billion in 1979 — all this despite a dollar that mostly fell during that decade . The dollar strengthened throughout the 1980s, yet the trade deficit’s rise continued from $19 billion in 1980 to $93 billion in 1989. Between 1996 and 2001 (years of impressive dollar strength) the trade deficit rose 250 percent. The dollar strengthened throughout the 1980s, yet the trade deficit’s rise continued from $19 billion in 1980 to $93 billion in 1989. Between 1996 and 2001 (years of impressive dollar strength) the trade deficit rose 250 percent. Since 2001 the dollar has fallen pretty substantially against the pound, euro, and yen, yet Feldstein’s own statistics show that the current account deficit rose to $668 billion in 2004 and will rise above its current level of $790 billion in 2006.
Looking period January 1970 to December 1979 we find that M1 rose by a very impressive 85 per cent. From January 1980 to December 1988 M1 rose by an even more impressive 104 per cent. During Bush 41’s presidency M1 grew by about 30 per cent. Under the Clinton administration M1 expanded by a more modest 25 per cent. Since his inauguration until last September MI had grown by about 24 per cent. It ought to be plain to see that the course of trade deficits follow the same course as M1. Whenever spending slows because M1 has slowed the deficit shrinks and vice versa.
Now there is absolutely nothing new in this aspect of monetary theory. Writing in 1553 the Dominican Domingo de Soto, a prominent Spanish Scholastic, applied supply-and-demand analysis to exchange rates and trade deficit, explaining that
the more plentiful money is in Medina the more unfavourable are the terms of exchange and the higher the price must be paid by whoever wishes to send money from Spain to Flanders....And the scarcer the money is in Medina [i.e., the greater its purchasing power] the less he need pay there, because more people want money there than are sending it to Flanders.
In other words, de Soto was using the theory of purchasing power parity to explain exchange rates in terms of the relative purchasing power of other moneys. Mises made the same point when said that “[e]xchange rates are determined by the relative purchasing power per unit of each kind of money”. The link between exchange rates and trade deficits was discussed in great detail during the bullion controversy in early nineteenth century England. What sparked this debate was the price of bullion rising relative to pounds while the trade deficit grew.
In 1797 England suspended gold payments. In response the issue of bank credit and notes expanded resulting in a growing trade deficit and a depreciating currency. (The story is far more complicated than this). Today, however, this process is obscured by the fact that the world is on a fiat standard and that relative money stocks are continuously changing. What happens here is that all currencies are experiencing a downward trend in relative purchasing power. Nevertheless that is no excuse for ignoring the fundamental role of money and denying the validity of the purchasing power parity theory.
Moreover, economists and a whole range of media wannabes are continually express opinions on the trade deficit without making any references to nominal incomes, something that was discussed long ago. (Gottried von Haberler’s Theory of International Trade, William Hodge and Company Limited, 1950, ch. 7, section 3. Also Ludwig von Mises’ On the Manipulation of Money and Credit, Free Market Books, 1978, Appendix). As the money supply increases nominal incomes rise which then raises the demand for imports and creates a trade deficit. This process occurs before any rise in general prices appear. This is exactly what Mr J. J. Polak’s 1957 study found. Polak, an economist with the IMF, discovered that credit expansion generated current account deficits.
One very important matter that is entirely overlooked by our economic commentariat is that “international imbalances” also include real factors. US current account deficits have had the perverse effect of misdirecting foreign companies into serving American consumers. The effect of a devaluation could therefore disrupt some foreign countries’ manufacturing processes. To what extent this could happen would be determined by the extent to which they have become dependent on the US market and are able to respond to swift changes in demand for their products.
It has been pointed out to me that between 1985 and 1987 the dollar fell against the German Mark and the Japanese yen by about 50 per cent. Nerveless, all three countries still rapidly grew while US exports surged. What is missing here is the fact that Germany, Japan, etc., also accelerated monetary growth.
We can therefore conclude that the US has been exporting its inflation. In doing so it has run massive trade deficits. However, trends clearly indicate that the dollar is undergoing a necessary adjustment. When the dollar falls the cry will go up that devaluation will worsen inflation. Talk about carts and horses. It should be clear that any devaluation will be the result of the Fed’s inflationary monetary policy. Moreover, such critics overlook that a devaluation should stimulate US exports.
Note: The Austrian definition of the US money supply is currency outside Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks and the vaults of depository institutions.
Demand deposits at commercial banks and foreign-related institutions other than those due to depository institutions, the U.S. government and foreign banks and official institutions, less cash items in the process of collection and Federal Reserve float.
NOW (negotiable order of withdrawal) and ATS (automatic transfer service) balances at commercial banks, U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, and Edge Act corporations. NOW balances at thrifts, credit union share draft balances, and demand deposits at thrifts.
AMS definition therefore equals cash plus demand deposits with commercial banks and thrift institutions plus saving deposits plus government deposits with banks and the central bank.
Gerard Jackson is Brookes’ economics editor
END QUOTE.
Some currency facts from the article:
"Let’s look at some figures. During the last year the dollar fell by about 11 per cent against the euro. In September imports fell by 2 per cent and exports rose by 0.5 per cent while in November the dollar once more dropped against a range of major currencies."
Current links:
1998-2006 U.S. Dollar Index Chart (DX, NYBOT)
Forex - US dollar weaker in Sydney morning trade after mixed US data (12-17-2006)
Chinese Stocks Surge to New Record High (SHANGHAI, China, Dec 18, 2006 (AP Online via COMTEX)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
