I hope this is not too OT, but IMO the financial mechanisms of the current "epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory" are tried and true monetary mechanisms for achieving power. While the American and developed country middle classes may soon come to understand at a much more visceral level how this game is played, it's certainly familiar territory to those in developing countries/markets - that is the people as opposed to corrupt elites - whom have with some notable geostrategic exceptions - e.g. Japan, Korean, Taiwan, etc - frequently suffered from such outside influence. Significantly here, we are talking Latin & Central America, Africa, and the Middle East.
Which is why the recent collapse of the WTO talks in Cancun is of such significance. Particularly interesting of late is the emergence of Brazil's da Silva as a leading voice in the Americas. Brazil's leading role in the "collective voice" of the G21/22 is of importance significance IMO. The following article by ex-Boston Globe report Al Gordinio, proprietor of Narco News, and a voice for authentic journalism in the Americas has a wonderful article on this subject today. Not always understood, the so-called Drug War, like central banking control of the money supply, is significantly a mechanism for geopolitical power and influence. Please see the following link:
Cancún Trade Battle also Turns the Tables on the Drug War
Poor Countries Set a Precedent for How to Beat Impositions by the Wealthy Countries
narconews.com
Interesting, Jimmy Rogers and Marc Faber speak of currencies inflating against commodities. What if indigenous, the impoverished, and the middle classes in developed countries decide that they no longer wish to send cheap raw materials to developed countries for inflated US$, and began to apply very high tax rates to profits made from raw material extraction and export, and reinvest that capital in the primary interests of the peoples of their nations, rather than primarily for the benefit of local elites and developed nation. From a purely economic point of view, it could worsen the already bleak outlook for developed world economies.
BTW, I do feel that a global trade system can be of benefit for all stakeholders, and that it is not inherently purely adversarial. But governments should be primarily responsible to local constituencies, and players must bargain in good faith, no?
Thoughts? Alternative perspectives?
Regards,
Glenn |
