WO3 al aan de gang: "Hegemonie Amerikaanse dollar"

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 juli 2006 15:30 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Jij begrijpt mijn punt niet, ik heb geen zin om uren te besteden aan het vinden van tegenbewijzen die door aanhangers van de conspiracy toch niet geaccepteerd worden. Het is een zinloze exercitie, net als pogingen om mij te bekeren tot een religie zinloos zijn zal ik geen enkele gelovige kunnen overtuigen om niet meer te geloven.

Maar stel dat hij gelijk heeft, then what?

Ik ga er sowieso van uit dat de dollar wel degelijk gaat vallen, hoe hard en hoe snel is de vraag.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 juli 2006 15:30 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Jij begrijpt mijn punt niet, ik heb geen zin om uren te besteden aan het vinden van tegenbewijzen die door aanhangers van de conspiracy toch niet geaccepteerd worden. Het is een zinloze exercitie, net als pogingen om mij te bekeren tot een religie zinloos zijn zal ik geen enkele gelovige kunnen overtuigen om niet meer te geloven.

Maar stel dat hij gelijk heeft, then what?

Ik ga er sowieso van uit dat de dollar wel degelijk gaat vallen, hoe hard en hoe snel is de vraag.

quote:

Op woensdag 12 juli 2006 13:54 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Mjah, waar moet ik jou van overtuigen dan? De schrijver heeft goede punten, ok, en als ik net zulke goede punten op tafel leg, wat dan?

Het is een geen wetenschappelijke theorie maar een verhaal "Hoe het gegaan zou kunnen zijn", da's op zich prima maar dan ga ik kijken naar de auteur en dan zie ik zaken als het feit dat hij een aanhanger was van Lyndon LaRouche en een stuk op zijn naam heeft dat een de vogelgriep als een Pentagon samenzwering ziet. Tja, sorry, maar dan houdt het voor mij op.

quote:

Revisited - The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War With Iraq: A Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth

by William Clark

Summary

Although completely unreported by the U.S. media and government, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is in large part an oil currency war. One of the core reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. The second coalescing factor that is driving the Iraq war is the quiet acknowledgement by respected oil geologists and possibly this administration is the impending phenomenon known as Global "Peak Oil." This is projected to occur around 2010, with Iraq and Saudi Arabia being the final two nations to reach peak oil production. The issue of Peak Oil has been added to the scope of this essay, along with the macroeconomics of `petrodollar recycling' and the unpublicized but genuine challenge to U.S. dollar hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. The author advocates graduated reform of the global monetary system including a dollar/euro currency `trading band' with reserve status parity, a dual OPEC oil transaction standard, and multilateral treaties via the UN regarding energy reform. Such reforms could potentially reduce future oil currency and oil warfare. The essay ends with a reflection and critique of current US economic and foreign policies. What happens in the 2004 US elections will have a large impact on the 21st century.

Website: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
Essay (PDF): http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.pdf

quote:

Op woensdag 12 juli 2006 14:14 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Dan begrijp jij mij verkeerd, ik zeg nergens dat ik de 'informatie' weerleg. Ik heb al eerder gesteld dat een dergelijk verhaal niet te weerleggen is. Je kan hooguit een bepaalde geloofwaardigheid toe kennen op basis van het werk van de auteur, daarmee weerleg je echter niets.

Waarom is iemand die een MBA heeft en IT gestudeerd heeft geloofwaardig op het gebied van geo-politiek? Haal jij je medisch advies ook van een drs theologie? Kan hij gelijk hebben? Yep. Het is maar net waarin je wilt geloven, ik kan iig nooit bewijzen dat hij ongelijk heeft omdat het niet gaat om bewijsbare zaken hier.

quote:

Op dinsdag 11 juli 2006 15:55 schreef Starfish het volgende:
nog een tvp. interessant stuk!

quote:

Op donderdag 13 juli 2006 12:43 schreef JohnDope het volgende:
De komende wereld oorlog wordt er 1 met weinig bloedvergieten, maar het facistische regime zal op iedereen dwang uitoefenen; de kleinen en de groten, de zwarten en de blanken, de vrijen en de slaven, de rijken en de armen.

Zodra ze de baas over ons geld zijn, zijn wij slaaf van hun systeem, dan hebben zij amper wapens nodig. Het lijkt mij persoonlijk niet onverstandig om de wereldbank te saneren en dubieuze organisaties als de VN te negeren.

quote:

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
Before the U.S. House of Representatives

February 15, 2006

The End of Dollar Hegemony

A hundred years ago it was called “dollar diplomacy.” After World War II, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, that policy evolved into “dollar hegemony.” But after all these many years of great success, our dollar dominance is coming to an end.

It has been said, rightly, that he who holds the gold makes the rules. In earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade required an exchange for something of real value.

First it was simply barter of goods. Then it was discovered that gold held a universal attraction, and was a convenient substitute for more cumbersome barter transactions. Not only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day.

Though money developed naturally in the marketplace, as governments grew in power they assumed monopoly control over money. Sometimes governments succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold, but in time governments learned to outspend their revenues. New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the people, so it wasn’t long before Kings and Caesars learned how to inflate their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin-- always hoping their subjects wouldn’t discover the fraud. But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.

This helped pressure leaders to seek more gold by conquering other nations. The people became accustomed to living beyond their means, and enjoyed the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more. Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold, they brought home slaves as well. Taxing the people in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires. This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves. There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end. When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled. In those days those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived well.

That general rule has held fast throughout the ages. When gold was used, and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived. Whenever wealthy nations-- those with powerful armies and gold-- strived only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations failed.

Today the principles are the same, but the process is quite different. Gold no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is: “He who prints the money makes the rules”-- at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.

Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation’s people-- just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.


[knip]


The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.

The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to “rule” the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can’t last.

Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble-- generated by easy money-- has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world’s rejection of the dollar. It’s bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979-1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.

Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually they will fail.

Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged—as it already has been.

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein-- though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.

It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.

In 2001, Venezuela’s ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.

After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.

It’s become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.

Now, a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the “axis of evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.

Most Americans forget how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of evil didn’t do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries. Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, doesn’t seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there’s little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us. But that didn’t stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she’s made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.

It’s not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein’s connection to 9/11, were false. The dollar’s importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel’s influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting “our” oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.

But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That’s not so today. Now, more than ever, the dollar hegemony-- it’s dominance as the world reserve currency-- is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.

For the most part the true victims aren’t aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the “tax” that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world’s reserve currency.

It is an unbelievable benefit to us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars. The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and their participation keeps the dollar’s value artificially high. If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never have to work again. We too could enjoy “bread and circuses” just as the Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.

The same thing will happen to us if we don’t change our ways. Though we don’t occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have spread our troops across 130 nations of the world. Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not a coincidence. But unlike the old days, we don’t declare direct ownership of the natural resources-- we just insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money. Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.

Once again Congress has bought into the war propaganda against Iran, just as it did against Iraq. Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically, and militarily if necessary. These arguments are all based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly occupation of Iraq.

Our whole economic system depends on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar is crucial. Currently, we borrow over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and take our paper for their goods. Then we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire (DOD budget $450 billion) plus more. The military might we enjoy becomes the “backing” of our currency. There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority, and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are today’s “gold.” This is why countries that challenge the system-- like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela-- become targets of our plans for regime change.

Ironically, dollar superiority depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar. As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo will continue regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account deficit become.

But real threats come from our political adversaries who are incapable of confronting us militarily, yet are not bashful about confronting us economically. That’s why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously. The urgent arguments about Iran posing a military threat to the security of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq war.

It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It’s only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.

The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.

But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.

Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

And once again there’s this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.

Bron: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm

quote:

Op vrijdag 14 juli 2006 18:21 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Willem Middelkoop hierover:
[..]

Bron

quote:

De dag dat de dollar valt...
zondag 20 november 2005 20:55 Ned 3
zaterdag 26 november 2005 11:00 Ned 3 (Herhaling)
Leven we op een zeepbel? Kan de zwaar in de schulden geraakte Amerikaanse economie instorten en ons, Europeanen, meesleuren in de vrije val? Zijn de dagen van wereldmunt dollar geteld? En is een herhaling van de crisisjaren dertig echt zo ondenkbaar?

VPRO's Tegenlicht en NRC Handelsblad presenteren in nauwe samenwerking hun eerste proeve van 'stel dat'-journalistiek. Stel dat op een dag de dollar valt. In een scenario dat zich ontrolt in 24 uur buitelen waarheid en fictie over elkaar heen. Om negen uur 's morgens krijgt een handelaar in Singapore de opdracht om een grote hoeveelheid dollars te verkopen, waarmee hij een ongekend diepe val van de dollar in gang zet. Uur na uur zien we hoe de wereld daarop reageert. Aan het eind van de dag staat correspondent Twan Huys handenwringend voor de camera in Washington, Chinezen maken zich op voor een mogelijke oorlog, en in Amsterdam kan een vrouw haar taxi alleen nog maar betalen met drie pakjes sigaretten.
Per seconde raken de Verenigde Staten 18.000 dollar dieper in de rode cijfers. Per dag lenen overheid, bedrijfsleven en particulieren inmiddels zo'n 3 miljard dollar (!) van de rest van de wereld. Bij de introductie van de euro in 2002 was een dollar 1.13 euro waard ; in februari/maart van 2005 werd - tijdelijk - de laagtegrens van 0,75 eurocent gepasseerd. Reden voor analisten als Stephen Roach, chief economist bij MorganStanley, om de noodklok te luiden: de almaar toenemende tekorten in Amerika vormen een tijdbom onder de huidige wereldeconomie. Andere experts zijn minder stellig maar moeten het ook toegeven: waarschijnlijk zal binnen nu en tien jaar een eind komen aan het tijdperk van de dollar als wereldreservemunt. Zoals ooit de dollar het estafettestokje overnam van het Britse pond, zo zal immers ook de dollarstandaard overgaan in een nieuwe standaard. In elk geval heeft het huidige valutastelsel, dat gemaakt lijkt om Amerikanen eindeloos te laten consumeren en investeren, de beste tijd gehad. Want het is nauwelijks voorstelbaar dat Azië - met name de exploderende economie van China - tot in lengte van dagen de tekorten van Uncle Sam zal blijven financieren.

Maar wat gebeurt er dan precies als die tikkende tijdbom ontploft? Tegenlicht nodigde Maarten Schinkel, financieel-economisch redacteur van NRC Handelsblad, uit om hardop mee te denken over (de gevolgen van) een dergelijke monetaire crisis. Een plotse spike in de dagkoersgrafiek van de dollar kan de eerste steen zijn in een nog rustige zee. Maar de vloedgolf die eruit voortkomt bedreigt de geglobaliseerde en geintegreerde mondiale economie. Want waren die internationale economische verhoudingen wel zo rustig als ze leken? Was alles wel zo in evenwicht? De kenners weten beter. De wereld steekt massaal de kop in het zand. "Het gaat goed zolang het nog goed gaat".

In 'De Dag dat de Dollar valt' voegt regisseur Roel van Broekhoven fictie en werkelijkheid samen. De in scene gezette val van de dollar wordt becommentarieerd door o.a. bankeconomen Stephen Roach (New York) en Andy Xie (Hong Kong), topbankier en voormalig thesaurier Cees Maas, defensiespecialist Rob de Wijk en GroenLinks kamerlid Kees Vendrik. In gespeelde scenes en journaalfragmenten zien we hoe de paniek van de financiële wereld overslaat naar het leven van alledag. Met medewerking van Twan Huys (New York) en nieuwslezeres Aldith Hunkar.

Samenstelling en regie: Roel van Broekhoven
Script en interviews: Maarten Schinkel (NRC Handelsblad)
Research: Ger Wieberdink/William de Bruijn
Productie: Madeleine Somer/Karin Spiegel
Eindredactie: Doke Romeijn/Frank Wiering

quote:

Op vrijdag 14 juli 2006 17:13 schreef pberends het volgende:
Frappant bericht uit Amerika:

RTL Video: Amerikaanse bank: Schuld 66 biljoen kan failliet VS betekenen

[afbeelding]

Het rapport van de Amerikaanse centrale bank FED (!) zelf Is the United States Bankrupt?