4 ms·

Unless Western leaders or US particularly, want a severe global recession to persist, I think they will eventually pursue whatever means necessary to weaken $ a

by PKop 4y ago

Unless Western leaders or US particularly, want a severe global recession to persist, I think they will eventually pursue whatever means necessary to weaken $ and help Europe, rest of world, perhaps with a new "Plaza Accord" type arrangement[0]. This is if one believes they actually care about stabilizing European industry and economy and not rather that they are keen on seeing global chaos for a period of time and a weaker Europe dependent on US instead of having close trade relations with Russia and a thriving domestic industrial sector (which they have with cheap Russian energy, which they don't with sanction and less supplied more expensive substitutes), in service to US's own relative position becoming stronger and maintenance of global hegemony. Many analysts, particularly leaders form China, have opined on the nature of US periodic "harvesting" through dollar strengthening policy which crushes developing (and now even developed) countries so as to maintain their reserve currency status and relative global strength (even conceding that in short term everyone experiences pain as result). Great speech from Qiao Liang, a Chinese PLA Major-General articulating the nature of the reserve $ and the way US uses it as financial weapon particularly when they strengthen it to temporarily crush world economy [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord [1] http://chinascope.org/archives/6458 http://chinascope.org/archives/6458 ^From link General Qio Lian quote: "Not many people had a clear understanding of this at the time. People, including economists and financial experts, didn’t realize that the most important thing in the 20th century was not World War I, World War II, or the disintegration of the USSR, but rather the August 15, 1971, disconnection between the U.S. dollar and gold." Precient insight into developing Ukraine crises, (speech made in 2015): "Where else did [US] target? Ukraine, the connection between the EU and Russia. Of course there were some problems under Ukraine President Yanukovych’s administration, but the reason that the Americans picked it was not simply because of his problem. They had three goals: teach a lesson to Yanukovych who didn’t listen to the U.S., prevent the EU from getting too close to Russia, and create a bad investment environment in Europe." ^In the context of recent financial sanctions against Russian trade and currency, this is exactly what is happening across Europe right now.

rowanajmarshall 4y ago
> whatever means necessary to weaken $ and help Europe, rest of world I might be misunderstanding something here, but wouldn't a weak dollar strengthen the US economy (in terms of exports) relative to other peer economies (e.g. Euro area, the UK, Japan)?
- PKop 4y ago
  Yes and I think there are often conflicting interests around who gains and who loses even within the US from a strong or weak dollar. But this is why I noted that, every so often US for geopolitical reason seems willing to except even domestic pain for some period of time if the relative position of US increases due to the rest of world suffering more during strong-dollar periods. Give that article a read to understand what I'm saying regarding periodic "harvesting" of rest of world economy (for one, via financial flows into $ and assets as safe haven). Arguably Volcker's extreme tightening in 1970's, with his willingness to crush even the domestic economy for a time, was due to geopolitical interests to maintain trust in the $ as reserve currency and to crush USSR economy by destroying commodity prices and bankrupting their economy partially due to their inability to print the currency of which they had some external debts in. But I think this is a complex topic you can find many arguments both ways. And US policy has gone back at forth at times pursing both strong and weak for their own interest. Though I didn't mean to imply weak dollar wouldn't also boost US domestic economy. But to the thrust of my post which way US regime wants to go depends on current geopolitical context.
reducesuffering 4y ago
How is that last part prescient? That's a year after Euromaidan. Ever since then, 2014, critics have always lambasted any US/EU in support of the Ukrainian people. Why? Because geopolitically Ukraine was meant to be another Belarus, a patsy state, for Russia and its allies. That statement is the opposite of prescient, in that we now see the mask off and the devil that patsy Ukrainian governments were actually making a deal with.
- PKop 4y ago
  Ukraine is a patsy regardless of who dominates that region, as allying with US has led to the complete destruction of their country. They picked the wrong horse to follow. If they stuck with Russia, they wouldn't be in this situation (would US have invaded?). It's prescient because it hints as US long term interest in keeping Europe and Russia apart (in recent times seen most clearly with meddling with Nord Stream 2 pipeline agreement, and encouraging sanctions that are on their way to destroying European industrial power and impoverishing their citizens on account of lack of cheap energy).
  - reducesuffering 4y ago
    > allying with US and Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Germany, France, UK, Spain, Slovakia, Georgia, and everyone else who understands what a bloody nightmare Russia has been the last 100 years. Ask any closest neighbor: Pole, Slovak, or Georgian 10 years ago how much they trust anything Russia says. > They picked the wrong horse to follow. If they stuck with Russia, they wouldn't be in this situation (would US have invaded?). Seriously? They picked the wrong ally because the other would invade and murder them? Should France have allied with Germany against UK in WW2 instead too? We already know US won't invade with the script flipped; Belarus exists. > seen most clearly with meddling with Nord Stream 2 pipeline agreement Are you living under a rock? Every civilized country now unanimously realizes how stupid trying to Nord Stream 2 with Russia was, including Germany. I am so sick and tired of the goalposts being moved for Russian apologetics. Invasion of Georgia, Donbas, and now full scale invasion of Ukraine. I thought, surely, surely if Russia invades all of Ukraine, there's no possible way some fool can try to make these arguments anymore.

by PKop 4y ago

rowanajmarshall 4y ago

> whatever means necessary to weaken $ and help Europe, rest of world I might be misunderstanding something here, but wouldn't a weak dollar strengthen the US economy (in terms of exports) relative to other peer economies (e.g. Euro area, the UK, Japan)?

PKop 4y ago
Yes and I think there are often conflicting interests around who gains and who loses even within the US from a strong or weak dollar. But this is why I noted that, every so often US for geopolitical reason seems willing to except even domestic pain for some period of time if the relative position of US increases due to the rest of world suffering more during strong-dollar periods. Give that article a read to understand what I'm saying regarding periodic "harvesting" of rest of world economy (for one, via financial flows into $ and assets as safe haven). Arguably Volcker's extreme tightening in 1970's, with his willingness to crush even the domestic economy for a time, was due to geopolitical interests to maintain trust in the $ as reserve currency and to crush USSR economy by destroying commodity prices and bankrupting their economy partially due to their inability to print the currency of which they had some external debts in. But I think this is a complex topic you can find many arguments both ways. And US policy has gone back at forth at times pursing both strong and weak for their own interest. Though I didn't mean to imply weak dollar wouldn't also boost US domestic economy. But to the thrust of my post which way US regime wants to go depends on current geopolitical context.

reducesuffering 4y ago

How is that last part prescient? That's a year after Euromaidan. Ever since then, 2014, critics have always lambasted any US/EU in support of the Ukrainian people. Why? Because geopolitically Ukraine was meant to be another Belarus, a patsy state, for Russia and its allies. That statement is the opposite of prescient, in that we now see the mask off and the devil that patsy Ukrainian governments were actually making a deal with.

PKop 4y ago
Ukraine is a patsy regardless of who dominates that region, as allying with US has led to the complete destruction of their country. They picked the wrong horse to follow. If they stuck with Russia, they wouldn't be in this situation (would US have invaded?). It's prescient because it hints as US long term interest in keeping Europe and Russia apart (in recent times seen most clearly with meddling with Nord Stream 2 pipeline agreement, and encouraging sanctions that are on their way to destroying European industrial power and impoverishing their citizens on account of lack of cheap energy).
- reducesuffering 4y ago
  > allying with US and Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Germany, France, UK, Spain, Slovakia, Georgia, and everyone else who understands what a bloody nightmare Russia has been the last 100 years. Ask any closest neighbor: Pole, Slovak, or Georgian 10 years ago how much they trust anything Russia says. > They picked the wrong horse to follow. If they stuck with Russia, they wouldn't be in this situation (would US have invaded?). Seriously? They picked the wrong ally because the other would invade and murder them? Should France have allied with Germany against UK in WW2 instead too? We already know US won't invade with the script flipped; Belarus exists. > seen most clearly with meddling with Nord Stream 2 pipeline agreement Are you living under a rock? Every civilized country now unanimously realizes how stupid trying to Nord Stream 2 with Russia was, including Germany. I am so sick and tired of the goalposts being moved for Russian apologetics. Invasion of Georgia, Donbas, and now full scale invasion of Ukraine. I thought, surely, surely if Russia invades all of Ukraine, there's no possible way some fool can try to make these arguments anymore.