Doug, interesting that the author concludes that It is inconvenient for the moment, to talk of gold, since the policy of the United States is resolutely against the remonetization of gold. .
i wonder...if he is against dollarization, or quasi-dollarization, why give a hoot about what the US is resolutely against? if they use silver, it will be promptly against silver too, i bet.
i also found this part interesting:
It is worth mentioning in passing, that this need to export to the United States has caused serious damage to the productive structure of the United States, and that producers in the United States are constantly complaining that Mexico exports more to the United States than the United States exports to Mexico, a situation which of course is determined by Mexicoïs life or death need for export surpluses. There is important political dissatisfaction in the United States with regard to massive imports of Chinese and Japanese goods. This condition is a consequence of the fact that currencies and financial systems, the world over are dependent on reserves of Dollars, sine qua non.
of course the establishment of the dollar as the sole, or main, reserve currency benefits mostly the issuer of the dollar...but perhaps this benefit is overstated, as the author suggests. i believe btw. that the dollar's role is mainly a function of the US status as sole remaining military superpower and hegemon. the admittedly dynamic US economy is probably a secondary consideration. surely all those holders of 'IOU's' printed in the US are getting somewhat antsy when looking at the growing current account deficit...solution: buy up US assets, i.e. stocks and bonds. if the bubble, and with it the dollar, goes to hell in a handbasket you at least own claims on US based businesses....better than just green paper of which more gets printed at the drop of a hat.
regards,
hb |
