[Biofuel] U.S. Dollar Collapse: Where is Germany's Gold?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-dollar-collapse-where-is-germanys-gold/5321894 U.S. Dollar Collapse: Where is Germany's Gold? By Peter Schiff Global Research, February 05, 2013 LewRockwell.com The financial world was shocked this month by a demand from Germany's Bundesbank to repatriate a large portion of its gold reserves held abroad. By 2020, Germany wants 50% of its total gold reserves back in Frankfurt - including 300 tons from the Federal Reserve. The Bundesbank's announcement comes just three months after the Fed refused to submit to an audit of its holdings on Germany's behalf. One cannot help but wonder if the refusal triggered the demand. Either way, Germany appears to be waking up to a reality for which central banks around the world have been preparing: the dollar is no longer the world's safe-haven asset and the US government is no longer a trustworthy banker for foreign nations. It looks like their fears are well-grounded, given the Fed's seeming inability to return what is legally Germany's gold in a timely manner. Germany is a developed and powerful nation with the second largest gold reserves in the world. If they can't rely on Washington to keep its promises, who can? Where is Germany's Gold? The impact of Germany's repatriation on the dollar revolves around an unanswered question: why will it take seven years to complete the transfer? The popular explanation is that the Fed has already rehypothecated all of its gold holdings in the name of other countries. That is, the same mound of bullion is earmarked as collateral for a host of different lenders. Since the Fed depends on a fractional-reserve banking system for its very existence, it would not come as a surprise that it has become a fractional-reserve bank itself. If so, then perhaps Germany politely asked for a seven-year timeline in order to allow the Fed to save face, and to prevent other depositors from clamoring for their own gold back - a 'run' on the Fed. Now, the Fed can always print more dollars and buy gold on the open market to make up for any shortfall, but such a move could substantially increase the price of gold. The last thing the Fed needs is another gold price spike reminding the world of the dollar's decline. Speculation Aside None of these theories are substantiated, but no matter how you slice it, Germany's request for its gold does not bode well for the future of the dollar. In fact, the Bundesbank's official statements are all you need to confirm the Germans' waning faith in the US. Last October, after the Bundesbank had requested an audit of its Fed holdings, Executive Board Member Carl-Ludwig Thiele was asked in an interview why the bank kept so much of Germany's gold overseas. His response emphasized the importance of the dollar as the world's reserve currency: Thiele's statement can lead us to only one conclusion: by keeping fewer reserves in the US, Germany foresees less future need for US dollar-denominated liquidity.Gold stored in your home safe is not immediately available as collateral in case you need foreign currency. Take, for instance, the key role that the US dollar plays as a reserve currency in the global financial system. The gold held with the New York Fed can, in a crisis, be pledged with the Federal Reserve Bank as collateral against US dollar-denominated liquidity. History Repeats The whole situation mirrors the late 1960s, during a period that led up to the Nixon Shock. Back then, the world was on the Bretton Woods System - an attempt on the part of Western central bankers to pin the dollar to gold at a fixed rate, while still allowing the metal to trade privately as a commodity. This led to a gap between the market price of gold as a commodity and the official price available from the Treasury. As the true value of gold separated further and further from its official rate, the world began to realize the system was unsustainable, and many suspected the US was not serious about maintaining a strong dollar. West Germany moved first on these fears by redeeming its dollar reserves for gold, followed by France, Switzerland, and others. This eventually culminated in Nixon closing the gold window in 1971 by ending any link between the dollar and gold. This Nixon Shock spurred chronic inflation throughout the '70s and a concurrent rally in gold. Perhaps the entire international community is thinking back to the '60s, because Germany isn't the only country maneuvering away from the dollar today. The Netherlands and Azerbaijan are also discussing repatriating their foreign gold holdings. And every month, we hear about central banks increasing gold reserves. The latest are Russia and Kazakhstan, but in the last year, countries from Brazil to Turkey have been adding to their gold holdings in order to diversify away from fiat currency reserves. And don't forget China. Once the biggest purchaser of US bonds, it
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of Swedish words will be somewhat worse than my choices of English words. It is after all an International list and the majority of us have other native languages than English. Until you attacked my for my English, I found a very large understanding for this, by the other list members. Hakan At 00:28 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Mike Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, The weakening of the dollar is not a result of any concerted foreign effort. The dollar is amazingly strong, considering that US breaks all fundamentals. It is probably the opposite, it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I would not surprised to hear such things from children mom/dad said we could do it and maybe I am not that surprised to hear it from US. It is however wrong to try to find any to blame other then US itself. I do not see that US is under
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hello Mike Keith, You wrote: He means the other superpower, the Social Forum in Porto Alegre for example, and I'm sure the policy changes have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments. It's hard to misunderstand his meaning - especially since he actually uses the term second superpower. Not in your quote of him, and it wasn't obvious. Nowhere in your post did you mention the second superpower. You'd have to know Chomsky at least a bit to divine from your quote that he's talking about the global grass-roots movement against corporate globalisation, not one that's trying to influence foreign governments to put financial pressure on Washington. You gave no hint of it. Of course there are links between the two issues but they're not the same, and they're not interchangeable. I don't have that book but I recognised part of your quote because Chomsky recycles a lot of what he writes, so I was able to find it elsewhere and restore the missing context. I'm glad I got you to amplify it a bit, it needed it. It still doesn't hold any water though. I wrote: ...and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of 'Hegemony or Survival'. What I'm saying is that events like the Social Forum What you said is foreign policy decisions around the world, that means government, you didn't mention the Social Forum and it wasn't implicit. On the other hand what the Social Forum etc actually is doing might be relevant, but you don't mention that. might actually effect public policy outside (and perhaps inside) the U.S.. You said: When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. I wasn't trying to interpret his quote I read it to mean... but rather, speculate and widen the scope where Chomsky's observation might also be true. It doesn't widen the scope of it, it transfers it to a different context. You said this: When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, is coalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result is an indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing military buildup and globalization. A popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species is not the same as a global grass-roots movement directed against corporation globalisation, which is what Chomsky is talking about. It can't be stretched to include this: I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is the result of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's) It breaks. What concerted effort? They may have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments. as you say. However, to what extent is that true? Does that mean that it doesn't effect governments to any meaningful degree? If so, I think I would disagree with your assessment. In fact, there are times when I cannot distinguish between the motives of the World Bank/IMF/WTO and the US government or other governments. More importantly, a successful campaign against one would certainly effect the other. How would a global grass-roots movement campaigning to weaken the US dollar result in the IMF dropping its vicious neo-liberal policies, or force the World Bank to stop financing big dams and fossil-fuels projects, or achieve debt relief and end the dumping of subsidised farm surpluses on 3rd World markets? That would be an improbably Machiavellian way for a grass-roots movement to go about achieving those goals (those are their goal;s). How would it stop Bechtel selling your water supply to Coca-Cola, or stop an Indian peasant farmer's future being sold out to Monsanto? Are you aware of what Cancun and Porto Alegre et al have achieved by way of forcing policy? I don't think it included any concerted effort to weaken the US dollar. Confusing the aims of the Social Forum movement risks bluntening its effectiveness. The mainstream media always do that - the anti-globalisation protesters, they call them, but they're not anti-globalisation at all, nobody's that dumb, especially when they're a part of globalisation, they help to propel it. Although quantifying that effect is debatable, I feel it is worth mentioning. A concerted effort should at least be identifiable. Finally, I offer this as a contribution to the discussion. I'm not an expert and if I were asked for an expert opinion, I would defer most economic and foreign policy matters to you. That's a load of crap, with all due respect. If that happened I'd close the list down and nobody would bother to cry, least of all me. There aren't any experts here, that's a dirty word where I come from: http://www.prwatch.org/books/experts.html Trust Us, We're Experts If (as you say)
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of Swedish words will be somewhat worse than my choices of English words. It is after all an International list and the majority of us have other native languages than English. Until you attacked my for my English, I found a very large understanding for this, by the other list members. Hakan At 00:28 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
WHICH MIKE? Henceforth I'm signing my posts as Weaver. ARGGH. -Weaver Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Keith, You wrote: He means the other superpower, the Social Forum in Porto Alegre for example, and I'm sure the policy changes have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments. It's hard to misunderstand his meaning - especially since he actually uses the term second superpower. Not in your quote of him, and it wasn't obvious. Nowhere in your post did you mention the second superpower. You'd have to know Chomsky at least a bit to divine from your quote that he's talking about the global grass-roots movement against corporate globalisation, not one that's trying to influence foreign governments to put financial pressure on Washington. You gave no hint of it. Of course there are links between the two issues but they're not the same, and they're not interchangeable. I don't have that book but I recognised part of your quote because Chomsky recycles a lot of what he writes, so I was able to find it elsewhere and restore the missing context. I'm glad I got you to amplify it a bit, it needed it. It still doesn't hold any water though. I wrote: ...and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of 'Hegemony or Survival'. What I'm saying is that events like the Social Forum What you said is foreign policy decisions around the world, that means government, you didn't mention the Social Forum and it wasn't implicit. On the other hand what the Social Forum etc actually is doing might be relevant, but you don't mention that. might actually effect public policy outside (and perhaps inside) the U.S.. You said: When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. I wasn't trying to interpret his quote I read it to mean... but rather, speculate and widen the scope where Chomsky's observation might also be true. It doesn't widen the scope of it, it transfers it to a different context. You said this: When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, is coalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result is an indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing military buildup and globalization. A popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species is not the same as a global grass-roots movement directed against corporation globalisation, which is what Chomsky is talking about. It can't be stretched to include this: I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is the result of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's) It breaks. What concerted effort? They may have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments. as you say. However, to what extent is that true? Does that mean that it doesn't effect governments to any meaningful degree? If so, I think I would disagree with your assessment. In fact, there are times when I cannot distinguish between the motives of the World Bank/IMF/WTO and the US government or other governments. More importantly, a successful campaign against one would certainly effect the other. How would a global grass-roots movement campaigning to weaken the US dollar result in the IMF dropping its vicious neo-liberal policies, or force the World Bank to stop financing big dams and fossil-fuels projects, or achieve debt relief and end the dumping of subsidised farm surpluses on 3rd World markets? That would be an improbably Machiavellian way for a grass-roots movement to go about achieving those goals (those are their goal;s). How would it stop Bechtel selling your water supply to Coca-Cola, or stop an Indian peasant farmer's future being sold out to Monsanto? Are you aware of what Cancun and Porto Alegre et al have achieved by way of forcing policy? I don't think it included any concerted effort to weaken the US dollar. Confusing the aims of the Social Forum movement risks bluntening its effectiveness. The mainstream media always do that - the anti-globalisation protesters, they call them, but they're not anti-globalisation at all, nobody's that dumb, especially when they're a part of globalisation, they help to propel it. Although quantifying that effect is debatable, I feel it is worth mentioning. A concerted effort should at least be identifiable. Finally, I offer this as a contribution to the discussion. I'm not an expert and if I were asked for an expert opinion, I would defer most economic and foreign policy matters to you. That's a load of crap, with all due respect. If that happened I'd close the list down and nobody
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike W, If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOL If you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes. Hakan At 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of Swedish
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hakan, Weaver and Redler are the same person. He does this to confuse the point and disorient us all!!You want proof? Have you ever seen them together in the same room?fred On 6/1/06, Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike W,If you look at my post, it was an answer toMichael Redler's post, so do not worry. We areprobably all confused by all the Mikes and itmight be good if you sign your posts withWeaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am oldexcept I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lotwith this, if he understand Swedish. LOLIf you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted tosay I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig.I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes.HakanAt 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote:Hakan,I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up.I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike theElder.I didn't say any of this.Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed withyou that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency.I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below:-Mike WeaverYou wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value ofthe dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower.So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defendthemselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value ofcurrencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below isan attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules.I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someonewithout using the word blame, or:culpabilityfaultguiltrapresponsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like:regretremorseself-reproachshameaccountabilityliabilitycomplicityblameworthinessreprehensibleness sinfulnesscensurecondemnationdenunciation(courtesy:http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame )I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules.However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive andantagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attackThat one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has sobroadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or notyou can see it?My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiablepopular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both insideand outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions incountries around the world.It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) andexpress dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm noteven asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might findit helpful to your own credibility.Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
The Real Mike, Sorry, I got two messages from you, one personal and one through the list. I appreciated you message, but sent the same answer to both you and the list. It was not until afterwards, that I saw the difference and that you in the personal one try a Swedish sentence, also much appreciated because of the effort that must have gone into it. To try to construct a sentence in an unfamiliar language is a lot of work and it is easy to get it wrong. In Swedish we would say Heder åt dig, which is in translation Honor to you. To make my answer to the list understandable. I have to explain to the list that I tried to explain what you said in Swedish, which was JAG er gammal utom JAG rengör! and suggest the Swedish text for what you probably wanted to say. Hakan At 14:10 01/06/2006, you wrote: Mike W, If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOL If you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes. Hakan At 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I'm taller and have much better hair than Redler Fred Finch wrote: Hakan, Weaver and Redler are the same person. He does this to confuse the point and disorient us all!! You want proof? Have you ever seen them together in the same room? fred On 6/1/06, *Hakan Falk* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike W, If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOL If you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes. Hakan At 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
That's my fault - I sent two messages - I was worried you were mad at me. -Weaver Hakan Falk wrote: The Real Mike, Sorry, I got two messages from you, one personal and one through the list. I appreciated you message, but sent the same answer to both you and the list. It was not until afterwards, that I saw the difference and that you in the personal one try a Swedish sentence, also much appreciated because of the effort that must have gone into it. To try to construct a sentence in an unfamiliar language is a lot of work and it is easy to get it wrong. In Swedish we would say Heder åt dig, which is in translation Honor to you. To make my answer to the list understandable. I have to explain to the list that I tried to explain what you said in Swedish, which was JAG er gammal utom JAG rengör! and suggest the Swedish text for what you probably wanted to say. Hakan At 14:10 01/06/2006, you wrote: Mike W, If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOL If you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes. Hakan At 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Fred, If it is the same person, he is going through a lot of efforts to hide it, even using two different computers, with different software and different locations, if you read the message headers. It is not likely that they are in the same room, so maybe you are right. If he go trough all of this to be able to have dual personalties, he deserves it. LOL Hakan At 14:38 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, Weaver and Redler are the same person. He does this to confuse the point and disorient us all!! You want proof? Have you ever seen them together in the same room? fred On 6/1/06, Hakan Falk mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike W, If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOL What you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOL If you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOL Best wishes. Hakan At 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote: Hakan, I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike the Elder. I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers. I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency. I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer. I did not write this below: -Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someone without using the word blame, or: culpability fault guilt rap responsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like: regret remorse self-reproach shame accountability liability complicity blameworthiness reprehensibleness sinfulness censure condemnation denunciation (courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blamehttp://ww w.m-w.com/dictionary/blame http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame ) I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules. However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. You also said: I do not see that US is under any attack That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can see it? My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world. It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hakan, He's good...Really good!!fredOn 6/1/06, Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...fair enough.Mike R Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike W,If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with Weaver or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with The Real Mike. LOLWhat you are saying in Swedish is I am old except I am cleaning. Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOLIf you wanted to say I am old but clean it is Jag är gammal men ren. Probably you wanted to say I am old but innocent which is Jag är gammal men oskyldig. I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOLBest wishes.HakanAt 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote:Hakan,I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike theElder.I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers.I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed with you that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency.I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer.I did not write this below:-Mike Weaver You wrote: ...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value ofthe dollar high, when it according to all financial rules andfundamentals should be much lower. So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defendthemselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value ofcurrencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan? You said: I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below isan attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules.I find it amazing too - since I didn't blame other countries for anything. I find it amazing that (according to you) I can blame someonewithout using the word blame, or:culpabilityfaultguiltrapresponsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like:regretremorseself-reproachshameaccountabilityliabilitycomplicityblameworthinessreprehensibleness sinfulnesscensurecondemnationdenunciation(courtesy:http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame )I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking all the rules.However, I did say White House policy is both self destructive andantagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack.You also said: I do not see that US is under any attackThat one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has sobroadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy ofattack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or notyou can see it?My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both insideand outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions incountries around the world.It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) andexpress dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm noteven asking for respect (although it would be nice). Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might findit helpful to your own credibility.Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
...fair enough.Mike RHakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike W,If you look at my post, it was an answer to Michael Redler's post, so do not worry. We are probably all confused by all the Mikes and it might be good if you sign your posts with "Weaver" or Mike W. Maybe you should sign it with "The Real Mike". LOLWhat you are saying in Swedish is "I am old except I am cleaning". Mike R. could make a lot with this, if he understand Swedish. LOLIf you wanted to say "I am old but clean" it is "Jag är gammal men ren". Probably you wanted to say "I am old but innocent" which is "Jag är gammal men oskyldig".I hope that MR understands that it was a reply to him. LOLBest wishes.HakanAt 12:56 01/06/2006, you wrote:Hakan,I think you've gotten your Mikes mixed up. I'm Mike Weaver, or Mike theElder.I didn't say any of this. Go back and check the headers.I responded to your post of a few days ago, and basically agreed withyou that the US suffers from corruption, pollution and lack of transparency.I most certainly didn't attack your English nor your grammer.I did not write this below:-Mike WeaverYou wrote: "...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value ofthe dollar high, when it according to all financial rules andfundamentals should be much lower."So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defendthemselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value ofcurrencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan?You said: "I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below isan attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules."I find it amazing too - since I didn't "blame" other countries for anything.I find it amazing that (according to you) I can "blame" someonewithout using the word blame, or:culpabilityfaultguiltrapresponsibility for wrongdoing or failureI didn't say any related words like:regretremorseself-reproachshameaccountabilityliabilitycomplicityblameworthinessreprehensiblenesssinfulnesscensurecondemnationdenunciation(courtesy:http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame )I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking "all the rules".However, I did say "White House policy is both self destructive andantagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack."You also said: "I do not see that US is under any attack"That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has sobroadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy ofattack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or notyou can "see" it?My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiablepopular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both insideand outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions incountries around the world.It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-mindedpersonal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) andexpress dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm noteven asking for respect (although it would be nice).Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might findit helpful to your own credibility.Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral. I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also. National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability. If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of Swedish words will be somewhat worse than my choices of English words. It is after all
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
WHICH MIKE? Mike R., the one I replied to. Okay, I'll put it on top next time, sorry. Henceforth I'm signing my posts as Weaver. ARGGH. -Weaver You don't mind hello Weaver? Or is that ARGGH-Weaver? :-) But I don't think of you as Weaver, I think of you as Mike. Well, whatever, I shall strive to mend mine evil ways. Keith Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Keith, snip ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hakan,"I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner."I thought your message was very clearly written. I also think your English is excellent. I fully understoodyour child analogyand my list of words was used to indicate that I did not "blame" anyone for anything and it would have been directed at anyone, irrespective of whether their first language was English.Mike Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Mike,I said that I found it amazing in the text, that was copied, and referred to by you. I did not said that you blamed anyone. If it was your text, then I misunderstood your referral.I must have misunderstood you, since you now are saying that other countries defend themselves from US. I thought you said that they attacked US in a concerted manner. This is the first time that you introduce organizations and we all know that there are organizations that are trying to attack US and many other countries also.National economy is a bit more complicated and generally you cannot say that a too high evaluated currency is good for a country. In most cases an artificial high currency is not good, which US experienced for some years now. US have tried for some time now, to get some selected other countries to rise their currencies, so it didn't had to devaluate. It would have been the same thing, but looked better for the US government. It would also given US the best of both worlds and kept the others to pay an artificially high price for the dollars they needed for their energy purchases. It is many factors that tell us that US no longer deserve the responsibility to be the guardian of a world currency and some diversification to Euro and other currencies will create better stability.If you at your leisure chooses to misunderstand my choice of English words and that way take advantage of my choice of words and nationality, I will start to write Swedish in my responses to you. I do not like that you take advantage of that I try to write to you in your language and get upset/ridicule my choice of words, instead of try to understand what I want to say in a positive manner. You can try to communicate with me in Swedish and I am quite sure that your choices of Swedish words will be somewhat worse than my choices of English words.It is after all an International list and the majority of us have other native languages than English. Until you attacked my for my English, I found a very large understanding for this, by the other list members.HakanAt 00:28 01/06/2006, you wrote:Hakan,You wrote: "...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower."So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currencies other than the Dollar? Who's the child Hakan?You said: "I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules."I find it amazing too - since I didn't "blame" other countries for anything.I find it amazing that (according to you) I can "blame" someone without using the word blame, or:culpabilityfaultguiltrapresponsibility for wrongdoing or failureI didn't say any related words like:regretremorseself-reproachshameaccountabilityliabilitycomplicityblameworthinessreprehensiblenesssinfulnesscensurecondemnationdenunciation(courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame )I didn't try to excuse the U.S. from breaking "all the rules". However, I did say "White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack."You also said: "I do not see that US is under any attack"That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can "see" it?My observation/speculation was related to a growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world.It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice).Others might find it useful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility.MikeHakan Falk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:Mike,The weakening of the dollar is not a result of any concerted foreigneffort. The dollar is amazingly strong, considering that US breaksall fundamentals. It is probably the opposite, it is a concertedeffort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it accordingto all financial rules and fundamentals
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Stop making fun of my name. My mother was an ARGGH, my father was a Weaver. Therefore, it's ARGGH-Weaver. Honestly, what did they teach you in school? Mike ARGGH-Weaver Keith Addison wrote: WHICH MIKE? Mike R., the one I replied to. Okay, I'll put it on top next time, sorry. Henceforth I'm signing my posts as Weaver. ARGGH. -Weaver You don't mind hello Weaver? Or is that ARGGH-Weaver? :-) But I don't think of you as Weaver, I think of you as Mike. Well, whatever, I shall strive to mend mine evil ways. Keith Keith Addison wrote: Hello Mike Keith, snip ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike, Very good analysis and it describes the situation. The problem is the currency base, which before was stable with the gold standard. Now the currency base is the collective wealth of the society. Rising debts and deficits should in theory mean some adjustments downwards of the currency, but it is more complex than that, because it now has many emotional and political factors. No one can afford a wholesale collapse of the US economy and it takes time to diversify currency dependence. The best for the world economy, would be stable Euro, dollar and yen, with little movement between them. The loss of prosperity in the world, if the dollar fail, would be enormous, but the current evaluation is based on wishful thinking rather than fundamentals. The world is waiting out the current US administration and hope for something better in the future. If that does not happen, then US and the world will be in serious problems. It will also mean that Russia and China would play much more important parts in the world economy. Hakan At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: I don't see a wholesale collapse of the US economy. I do think the dollar will continue to slide until the country elects some Republicans or Democrats. I am not sure what to call the gang in power now; they are most certainly NOT Republicans. I'm also not sure how successful the Iranian oil bourse will be - so they'll get Euros. Big whoop. All major markets are still denominated in dollars. Maybe they can buy nuclear thechnology from France. Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. And whose to say China and the other Asian countries holding out debt won't decide to trim our sails a bit. A very small sell off would devastating. From Safehaven: The US Dollar has been the reserve currency of the world since the end of WW2 and the Bretton Woods Agreement (July 1944). Bretton Woods signalled the end of the British Pound as the worlds reserve currency. The Pound was the principal currency of the world for over 100 years from 1816 to 1933 and it was backed by gold. But at the outset of WW1 Britain and other European countries came off the gold standard because of the financial dislocations caused by the war. The US$ still backed by gold slowly began to replace the faltering British Pound but by 1933 the US joined them in coming off the gold standard due to the deteriorating deflationary conditions of the Great Depression. The period was also marked by the collapse in international trade and financial flows prior To WW2. With Britain and Europe in ruins after WW2 the way was clear for the US, who emerged unscathed by war to assume the role as the world's reserve currency and the king of the international financial markets. And backing the US Dollar was once again convertibility into gold. The Bretton Woods Agreement saw other key features such as fixed but adjustable exchange rates against the US Dollar and the birth of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. **What will happen to the US as it is flat on its back engaged in Afganistan, Iraq and Iran? With Europe, China and India wait politely as we sort it out? I doubt it. I don't think China is playing for second place. But by the early 1970's growing structural imbalances amongst the world's leading economies led to increased currency speculation, the floating of the Pound Sterling followed by others, and deteriorating confidence in the US Dollar. The gold standard and Bretton Woods collapsed in 1971 and by 1973 the floating exchange rate system took hold. Since then we have been through a roller coaster ride for the US Dollar and numerous other currencies. The US Dollar after falling precipitously through the 1970's regained strength in the 1980's particularly following the election of the Reagan administration in 1980. That ended in 1985 with the Plaza Accord as the strong US Dollar was causing structural imbalances with the growing US twin deficits of budget and trade (sound familiar). In less then two years the US Dollar lost half its value. The 1990's was the decade of currency crises. The British Pound (1992), the Mexican Peso (1994), the Asian contagion (1997) followed by Asian Contagion II in 1998 along with the collapse of the Russian Ruble. This led to the collapse of the giant hedge fund Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) that required the Federal Reserve to bail the banks that were threatened with collapse. To a lesser degree we also had the Turkish Lira crisis and numerous currency and financial woes in Latin America especially Argentina. And least we forget, the Canadian Dollar also fell to new multi year lows although it was never described
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar/question??
There was a post from another list that has me confused. I trust the source so I pay attention but can not understand any possible reasoning here. There are several old/closed gold mines in the U.S. that still have good veins with rich to very rich ore in these veins .. and the veins are substantial and could be easily mined. Apparently they are plentiful enough. These areas with closed mines are not available for purchase and/or lease unless the purchase reason is altered .. which is being done. When a property is obtained and gold has been mined .. and mining activities have become known .. the owners are visited by federals (unidentified) telling them they need to close down because their activity threatens the economy. This plus enough scare tactics seems to have caused this whole thing to become a bit more quietly approached. I have no other information I would be willing to offer other than, because of the source, I believe this is actually happening. .. any other information I have is extremely limited. And, while I believe it's true, I find it beyond my reasoning and/or ability to understand. I know I'm missing massive chunks of information here so I have no information links to connect it. So, pretending that's it's true .. Is there anyone who could possibly shed some light on this. What possible reason could there be? Mary Lynn Rev. Mary Lynn Schmidt, Ordained Minister ONE SPIRIT ONE HEART TTouch . Reiki . Pet Loss Grief Counseling . Animal Behavior Modification . Shamanic Spiritual Travel . Behavior Problems . Psionic Energy Practitioner . Radionics . Herbs . Dowsing . Nutrition . Homeopathy . Polarity . The Animal Connection Healing Modalities http://members.tripod.com/~MLSchmidt/ http://allcreatureconnections.org ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on. But it it better than the systems in most of the world, except Western Europe. There is a functioning legal system, something I think you'd be hard-pressed to claim about China and to some degree India. Our corruption is better managed and on a grander scale - Halliburton. But you don't have to pay a bribe to get driver's license or cross a bridge or open a business. Would you rather own stock in Exxon or Cnooc? Well, figuratively, I wouldn't own oil stocks personally, but one has reasonably open books, and putatively complies with Sarbanes-Oxley, and one can be manipulated at the will of the government. Despite the best efforts of the current administration, our pollution levels are nothing like that of China or India, and the days of major ecological disasters like the Three Gorges Dam are passed. Transparency has suffered mightily under Bush, but Transparency International still rates the US well above China and India. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I'd call it Magical Thinking. We're still pretty much the only country in the world that can print money to pay its debts. Gotta wonder if that temptation will rise... Our economic policy is nuts. I personally don't mind a *little* foreign debt, in fact I think it's good; keeps our neighbors invested in keeping the counrty in good shape. Would you blow up the business of someone who owed you money? But I think borrowing a billion dollars a month to finance a war we can't win is crazy. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, Very good analysis and it describes the situation. The problem is the currency base, which before was stable with the gold standard. Now the currency base is the collective wealth of the society. Rising debts and deficits should in theory mean some adjustments downwards of the currency, but it is more complex than that, because it now has many emotional and political factors. No one can afford a wholesale collapse of the US economy and it takes time to diversify currency dependence. The best for the world economy, would be stable Euro, dollar and yen, with little movement between them. The loss of prosperity in the world, if the dollar fail, would be enormous, but the current evaluation is based on wishful thinking rather than fundamentals. The world is waiting out the current US administration and hope for something better in the future. If that does not happen, then US and the world will be in serious problems. It will also mean that Russia and China would play much more important parts in the world economy. Hakan At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: I don't see a wholesale collapse of the US economy. I do think the dollar will continue to slide until the country elects some Republicans or Democrats. I am not sure what to call the gang in power now; they are most certainly NOT Republicans. I'm also not sure how successful the Iranian oil bourse will be - so they'll get Euros. Big whoop. All major markets are still denominated in dollars. Maybe they can buy nuclear thechnology from France. Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. And whose to say China and the other Asian countries holding out debt won't decide to trim our sails a bit. A very small sell off would devastating. From Safehaven: The US Dollar has been the reserve currency of the world since the end of WW2 and the Bretton Woods Agreement (July 1944). Bretton Woods signalled the end of the British Pound as the worlds reserve currency. The Pound was the principal currency of the world for over 100 years from 1816 to 1933 and it was backed by gold. But at the outset of WW1 Britain and other European countries came off the gold standard because of the financial dislocations caused by the war. The US$ still backed by gold slowly began to replace the faltering British Pound but by 1933 the US joined them in coming off the gold standard due to the deteriorating deflationary conditions of the Great Depression. The period was also marked by the collapse in international trade and financial flows prior To WW2. With Britain and Europe in ruins after WW2 the way was clear for the US, who emerged unscathed by war to assume the role as the world's reserve currency and the king of the international financial markets. And backing the US Dollar was once again convertibility into gold. The Bretton Woods Agreement saw other key features such as fixed but adjustable exchange rates against the US Dollar and the birth of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. **What will happen to the US as it is flat on its back engaged in Afganistan, Iraq and Iran? With Europe, China and India wait politely as we sort it out? I doubt it. I don't think China is playing for second place. But by the early 1970's growing structural imbalances amongst the world's leading economies led to increased currency speculation, the floating of the Pound Sterling followed by others, and deteriorating confidence in the US Dollar. The gold standard and Bretton Woods collapsed in 1971 and by 1973 the floating exchange rate system took hold. Since then we have been through a roller coaster ride for the US Dollar and numerous other currencies. The US Dollar after falling precipitously through the 1970's regained strength in the 1980's particularly following the election of the Reagan administration in 1980. That ended in 1985 with the Plaza Accord as the strong US Dollar was causing structural imbalances with the growing US twin deficits of budget and trade (sound familiar). In less then two years the US Dollar lost half its value. The 1990's was the decade of currency crises. The British Pound (1992), the Mexican Peso
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar/question??
I'm not sure I believe that - there is quite a bit of gold mining going on in the US. Newmont Mining: At the heart of Newmont’s Eastern Nevada operations is the Carlin mine. The mine traces its origins to 1961, when geologists began probing the high desert area around the Tuscarora Mountains in search of finely disseminated gold. By the summer of 1963, drilling had identified a 3-million-ounce deposit, sufficient to justify a mine even at the then prevailing gold price of $35 an ounce. Newmont’s first open pit mine and oxide mill began production in 1965. As additional gold was discovered and new mines opened, the faulted terrain running northwest to southeast from the town of Carlin became known as the Carlin Trend, a 50-mile (80 kilometer) long, 5-mile (8 kilometer) wide belt that contains more than 20 major gold deposits and is the most prolific goldfield in the Western Hemisphere. Newmont’s Carlin Trend operations include several surface and underground mines that supply ore to a variety of Nevada processing facilities. Most of the 1,600 employees reside in Elko, Spring Creek and Carlin, where Newmont is the largest private employer. Marylynn Schmidt wrote: There was a post from another list that has me confused. I trust the source so I pay attention but can not understand any possible reasoning here. There are several old/closed gold mines in the U.S. that still have good veins with rich to very rich ore in these veins .. and the veins are substantial and could be easily mined. Apparently they are plentiful enough. These areas with closed mines are not available for purchase and/or lease unless the purchase reason is altered .. which is being done. When a property is obtained and gold has been mined .. and mining activities have become known .. the owners are visited by federals (unidentified) telling them they need to close down because their activity threatens the economy. This plus enough scare tactics seems to have caused this whole thing to become a bit more quietly approached. I have no other information I would be willing to offer other than, because of the source, I believe this is actually happening. .. any other information I have is extremely limited. And, while I believe it's true, I find it beyond my reasoning and/or ability to understand. I know I'm missing massive chunks of information here so I have no information links to connect it. So, pretending that's it's true .. Is there anyone who could possibly shed some light on this. What possible reason could there be? Mary Lynn Rev. Mary Lynn Schmidt, Ordained Minister ONE SPIRIT ONE HEART TTouch . Reiki . Pet Loss Grief Counseling . Animal Behavior Modification . Shamanic Spiritual Travel . Behavior Problems . Psionic Energy Practitioner . Radionics . Herbs . Dowsing . Nutrition . Homeopathy . Polarity . The Animal Connection Healing Modalities http://members.tripod.com/~MLSchmidt/ http://allcreatureconnections.org ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike, I would not take issue on pollution per facility, but pollution per nation. US is very much larger polluter per capita than both China and India together. US is also larger polluter in absolute terms,so it is not surprising that US did not sign Kyoto. Even Bush said that it would be too expensive to meet the Kyoto targets, which means that US is way above them, otherwise it would not be that costly. Looking at GDP levels, if anyone could afford a clean up, it is US. I also think that the US glass house is damaged beyond repair, with all the stone throwing that it suffered. As usual, it is more about image, than practical realities. Hakan At 13:56 31/05/2006, you wrote: I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on. But it it better than the systems in most of the world, except Western Europe. There is a functioning legal system, something I think you'd be hard-pressed to claim about China and to some degree India. Our corruption is better managed and on a grander scale - Halliburton. But you don't have to pay a bribe to get driver's license or cross a bridge or open a business. Would you rather own stock in Exxon or Cnooc? Well, figuratively, I wouldn't own oil stocks personally, but one has reasonably open books, and putatively complies with Sarbanes-Oxley, and one can be manipulated at the will of the government. Despite the best efforts of the current administration, our pollution levels are nothing like that of China or India, and the days of major ecological disasters like the Three Gorges Dam are passed. Transparency has suffered mightily under Bush, but Transparency International still rates the US well above China and India. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I think the 5/30/06 post and attached article from AltEnergyNetwork did a excellent job explaining the administration's decision making process, the U.S. economy and how it compares to similar situations in other countries. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63309.html I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is the result of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's) and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of Hegemony or Survival. For the first time, concrete alliances have been taking shape at the grassroots level . These are impressive developments, rich in opportunity. And they have had effects, in rhetorical and sometimes policy changes. When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, is coalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result is an indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing military buildup and globalization. (IMO) this adds to Mike Weaver's position: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63345.html Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. Military spending/use, energy, the environment, you name it, the U.S. government is enormously wasteful and destructive (not that I need to tell anyone in this forum) and people are taking notice. Like Keith wrote: Eco-economics has been on the table since Maggie Thatcher put it there by mistake in 1988. It's not going to go away, it's been gaining ground steadily. It's about holding back the most destructive empire in human history - destructive for what it does and doesn't do. Re: WMD's - how U.S. policy threatens our survival. In addition to U.S. engagement in continuous military conflicts since WWII, the Bush administration has vetoed or avoided discussion on nearly every international effort to limit nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, has militarized space in violation of past nuclear weapons treatise and has prompted other countries to react and build more arms. U.S. spending on nuclear weapons has surpassed the entire state department budget. The U.S. Pharmaceutical industry is helping develop vaccine resistant Anthrax (for example) and an arms race for biological weapons is already underway. Mike Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I would not take issue on pollution per facility, but pollution per nation. US is very much larger polluter per capita than both China and India together. US is also larger polluter in absolute terms,so it is not surprising that US did not sign Kyoto. Even Bush said that it would be too expensive to meet the Kyoto targets, which means that US is way above them, otherwise it would not be that costly. Looking at GDP levels, if anyone could afford a clean up, it is US. I also think that the US glass house is damaged beyond repair, with all the stone throwing that it suffered. As usual, it is more about image, than practical realities. Hakan At 13:56 31/05/2006, you wrote: I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on. But it it better than the systems in most of the world, except Western Europe. There is a functioning legal system, something I think you'd be hard-pressed to claim about China and to some degree India. Our corruption is better managed and on a grander scale - Halliburton. But you don't have to pay a bribe to get driver's license or cross a bridge or open a business. Would you rather own stock in Exxon or Cnooc? Well, figuratively, I wouldn't own oil stocks personally, but one has reasonably open books, and putatively complies with Sarbanes-Oxley, and one can be manipulated at the will of the government. Despite the best efforts of the current administration, our pollution levels are nothing like that of China or India, and the days of major ecological disasters like the Three Gorges Dam are passed. Transparency has suffered mightily under Bush, but Transparency International still rates the US well above China and India. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL ___ Biofuel
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hello Mike R. I think the 5/30/06 post and attached article from AltEnergyNetwork did a excellent job explaining the administration's decision making process, the U.S. economy and how it compares to similar situations in other countries. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63309.html Yes it does, but there's been a lot more about it previously, especially in comments on the implications of Iran's new oil bourse, there are other points of view, and I think they all have to be assessed. I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is the result of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's) and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of Hegemony or Survival. For the first time, concrete alliances have been taking shape at the grassroots level . These are impressive developments, rich in opportunity. And they have had effects, in rhetorical and sometimes policy changes. When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, is coalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result is an indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing military buildup and globalization. I think you credit them with more strategy than they deserve. I don't think Chomsky is talking about the same thing. He also said this, with the same sentence in it: The harmful effects of the corporate globalisation project have led to mass popular protest and activism in the South, later joined by major sectors of the rich industrial societies, hence becoming harder to ignore. For the first time concrete alliances have been taking shape at a grassroots level. It is fair to say, I think, that the future of our endangered species may be determined in no small measure by how these popular forces evolve. He means the other superpower, the Social Forum in Porto Alegre for example, and I'm sure the policy changes have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments. (IMO) this adds to Mike Weaver's position: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63345.html Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. I think it adds to Gabriel Kolko's position and mine 18 months ago, and since - Vote Bush! LOL! ... But a Kerry win would still have left you with the duopoly party, followed by business-as-usual, especially on the foreign policy front. There's not much essential difference between the two parties' foreign policy, eg between Clinton's and Bush's, it's mostly just the Bushies' outrageous in-your-face style of it that's different. I agreed with Gabriel Kolko at the time, that Bush might be the lesser of two evils, but while Kolko was thinking of other nations and international alliances I was thinking of the Other Superpower. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg38234.html [Biofuel] The Coming Elections and the Future of American Global Power 16 Sep 2004 Also this: Gabriel Kolko -- in this writer's estimation, our most indispensable historian -- argues in a recent piece on the Counterpunch website that because a second Bush term would possibly intensify the international enmity elicited by its bumbling unilateralism, it could be preferable to a Kerry Administration: 'Kerry is neither articulate nor impressive as a candidate or as someone who is likely to formulate an alternative to Bush's foreign and defense policies, which have much more in common with Clinton's than they have differences. To be critical of Bush is scarcely justification for wishful thinking about Kerry. Since 1947, the foreign policies of the Democrats and Republicans have been essentially consensual on crucial issues -- bipartisan as both parties phrase it -- but they often utilize quite different rhetoric. 'Critics of the existing foreign or domestic order will not take over Washington this November. As dangerous as it is, Bush's reelection may be a lesser evil because he is much more likely to continue the destruction of the alliance system that is so crucial to American power...' It is becoming clear that all-too-many Kerry supporters view November's plebiscite as an end in itself. That, if Kerry should prevail, the reaction of a too-large proportion of his voters will be overwhelming relief -- Whew! That was a close one! -- followed by a repeat of Clinton-era apathy and apologetics. Whereas, a Bush victory couldn't but propagate the amazingly diverse and widespread lobbying and protest movement which saw the New York Times declare public political involvement the World's second superpower. From the unprecedented pre-war protest mobilisations, to the hundred-plus official municipal renunciations of the PATRIOT
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Mike, The weakening of the dollar is not a result of any concerted foreign effort. The dollar is amazingly strong, considering that US breaks all fundamentals. It is probably the opposite, it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower. I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt to blame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I would not surprised to hear such things from children mom/dad said we could do it and maybe I am not that surprised to hear it from US. It is however wrong to try to find any to blame other then US itself. I do not see that US is under any attack, it is only taking the consequences of its own doing. I see no reason to develop any mental feelings like being pursued over it. It is not any background for see what they are doing to us when it should be see what we are doing to ourselves. On the other hand, conspiration theories are favorite themes for Americans and they will soon find someone who is making it to the Americans, so the Americans will make it to themselves. Do not misunderstand me, I like Americans very much and I also like children very much. I wonder if there are any connections in this. How they could elect Bush is beyond me, but he is there. Hakan At 17:05 31/05/2006, you wrote: I think the 5/30/06 post and attached article from AltEnergyNetwork did a excellent job explaining the administration's decision making process, the U.S. economy and how it compares to similar situations in other countries. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63309.html I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is the result of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's) and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of Hegemony or Survival. For the first time, concrete alliances have been taking shape at the grassroots level . These are impressive developments, rich in opportunity. And they have had effects, in rhetorical and sometimes policy changes. When he says policy changes, I read it to mean within the United States. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S. government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, is coalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result is an indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing military buildup and globalization. (IMO) this adds to Mike Weaver's position: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63345.html Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack. Military spending/use, energy, the environment, you name it, the U.S. government is enormously wasteful and destructive (not that I need to tell anyone in this forum) and people are taking notice. Like Keith wrote: Eco-economics has been on the table since Maggie Thatcher put it there by mistake in 1988. It's not going to go away, it's been gaining ground steadily. It's about holding back the most destructive empire in human history - destructive for what it does and doesn't do. Re: WMD's - how U.S. policy threatens our survival. In addition to U.S. engagement in continuous military conflicts since WWII, the Bush administration has vetoed or avoided discussion on nearly every international effort to limit nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, has militarized space in violation of past nuclear weapons treatise and has prompted other countries to react and build more arms. U.S. spending on nuclear weapons has surpassed the entire state department budget. The U.S. Pharmaceutical industry is helping develop vaccine resistant Anthrax (for example) and an arms race for biological weapons is already underway. Mike Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, I would not take issue on pollution per facility, but pollution per nation. US is very much larger polluter per capita than both China and India together. US is also larger polluter in absolute terms,so it is not surprising that US did not sign Kyoto. Even Bush said that it would be too expensive to meet the Kyoto targets, which means that US is way above them, otherwise it would not be that costly. Looking at GDP levels, if anyone could afford a clean up, it is US. I also think that the US glass house is damaged beyond repair, with all the stone throwing that it suffered. As usual, it is more about image, than practical realities. Hakan At 13:56 31/05/2006, you wrote: I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on.
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar/question??
Marylynn; By way of explanation, one word: control. For clarification, add one more word: corporate control. And to refine that to bring in reality, tweak that: corporatocracy -- the system we live under. The same notion driving NAIS, and NSA databases, and ANWAR drilling, and a massively unpopular war, etc., etc.. Not massive chunks, unless you pursue the implications. Follow the money. Regards, Allen (E. Allen C.) --- Marylynn Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There was a post from another list that has me confused. I trust the source so I pay attention but can not understand any possible reasoning here. There are several old/closed gold mines in the U.S. that still have good veins with rich to very rich ore in these veins .. and the veins are substantial and could be easily mined. Apparently they are plentiful enough. These areas with closed mines are not available for purchase and/or lease unless the purchase reason is altered .. which is being done. When a property is obtained and gold has been mined .. and mining activities have become known .. the owners are visited by federals (unidentified) telling them they need to close down because their activity threatens the economy. This plus enough scare tactics seems to have caused this whole thing to become a bit more quietly approached. I have no other information I would be willing to offer other than, because of the source, I believe this is actually happening. .. any other information I have is extremely limited. And, while I believe it's true, I find it beyond my reasoning and/or ability to understand. I know I'm missing massive chunks of information here so I have no information links to connect it. So, pretending that's it's true .. Is there anyone who could possibly shed some light on this. What possible reason could there be? Mary Lynn Rev. Mary Lynn Schmidt, Ordained Minister ONE SPIRIT ONE HEART TTouch . Reiki . Pet Loss Grief Counseling . Animal Behavior Modification . Shamanic Spiritual Travel . Behavior Problems . Psionic Energy Practitioner . Radionics . Herbs . Dowsing . Nutrition . Homeopathy . Polarity . The Animal Connection Healing Modalities http://members.tripod.com/~MLSchmidt/ http://allcreatureconnections.org ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hey Mike; What Katrina did to New Orleans wasn't an ecological disaster? The Corps. saw that coming 30 years ago, but it suited the suits in Big Oil corp. suites to let it happen, for the good of the dynamic economy -- as we're finally beginning to realise, there's more to dynamism than bottom lines. As for our once-vaunted legal system, who besides hapless grunts has paid the price for Abu Graibe, what about the latest Supreme Court ruling its effect on journalists -- predictable since the addition of Roberts Alito ?? -- the challenge to Roe v. Wade is wending its way their way. Ahhh, but for the spin of it, we can take a Terry Schiavo case all the way (not to mention a national election!) Regards, Allen (E. Allen C.) --- Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on. But it it better than the systems in most of the world, except Western Europe. There is a functioning legal system, something I think you'd be hard-pressed to claim about China and to some degree India. Our corruption is better managed and on a grander scale - Halliburton. But you don't have to pay a bribe to get driver's license or cross a bridge or open a business. Would you rather own stock in Exxon or Cnooc? Well, figuratively, I wouldn't own oil stocks personally, but one has reasonably open books, and putatively complies with Sarbanes-Oxley, and one can be manipulated at the will of the government. Despite the best efforts of the current administration, our pollution levels are nothing like that of China or India, and the days of major ecological disasters like the Three Gorges Dam are passed. Transparency has suffered mightily under Bush, but Transparency International still rates the US well above China and India. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I was specifically addressing pollution, not ecological disaster, althoug arguably Katrina is similar to Three Gorges Dam. Both were (largely) avoidable, with Katrina especially. 1. I think there is a good argument to be made that global warming contributed to the severity. And that to FEMA, Army Corps failures and you've got a catastophe. But I think 3 Gorges was completely preventable, and I think Lousiana would have still been hit a major storm. I haven't heard anything that Big Oil somehow planned to let a major storm flatten NO. I think that was incompetence, racism and classism. Well, Kenny Boy and Skilling got sent away, even a presidential nickname couldn't save them. It's flawed, I don't deny that, but it often works. It's legal to start a business in the US. It's not in other countries. Try Guinea - Conakry. Heck try France, if your business fails, and many startups do, then you have an immediate law for fraud. It's assumed you are a crook if your business fails. How many people want to take that on? Not a good way to keep the clever young people at home. They all go to Britain. Sciavo is over. They're trying again with gay marriage. I'm getting bored. I'm going to email my Republican Senators and ask why they are allowing the federal goverment to take away power from our fair and sovereign state - which always regulated marriage. Why is it now a Federal issue? E. C. wrote: Hey Mike; What Katrina did to New Orleans wasn't an ecological disaster? The Corps. saw that coming 30 years ago, but it suited the suits in Big Oil corp. suites to let it happen, for the good of the dynamic economy -- as we're finally beginning to realise, there's more to dynamism than bottom lines. As for our once-vaunted legal system, who besides hapless grunts has paid the price for Abu Graibe, what about the latest Supreme Court ruling its effect on journalists -- predictable since the addition of Roberts Alito ?? -- the challenge to Roe v. Wade is wending its way their way. Ahhh, but for the spin of it, we can take a Terry Schiavo case all the way (not to mention a national election!) Regards, Allen (E. Allen C.) --- Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't say that. Nor would I. I said the US has a dynamic economy. Our infrastructure is beginning to fall apart; the highway system is crumbling; the electrical grid is shaky; we have no energy policy...the list goes on. But it it better than the systems in most of the world, except Western Europe. There is a functioning legal system, something I think you'd be hard-pressed to claim about China and to some degree India. Our corruption is better managed and on a grander scale - Halliburton. But you don't have to pay a bribe to get driver's license or cross a bridge or open a business. Would you rather own stock in Exxon or Cnooc? Well, figuratively, I wouldn't own oil stocks personally, but one has reasonably open books, and putatively complies with Sarbanes-Oxley, and one can be manipulated at the will of the government. Despite the best efforts of the current administration, our pollution levels are nothing like that of China or India, and the days of major ecological disasters like the Three Gorges Dam are passed. Transparency has suffered mightily under Bush, but Transparency International still rates the US well above China and India. Hakan Falk wrote: Mike, At 04:16 31/05/2006, you wrote: snip Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. snip And US have none of those problems? LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Keith,You wrote: "He means the other superpower, the Social Forum in Porto Alegre for example, and I'm sure the "policy changes" have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments."It's hard to misunderstand his meaning - especially since he actually uses the term "second superpower".I wrote: "...and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of 'Hegemony or Survival'."What I'm saying is that events like the Social Forum mightactuallyeffectpublic policy outside (and perhaps inside) the U.S.. I wasn't trying to interpret his quote but rather, speculate and widen the scope where Chomsky'sobservation might also be true.They may "have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments." as you say. However, to what extent is that true? Does that mean that it doesn't effectgovernments to any meaningful degree? If so, I think I would disagree with your assessment. In fact, there are times when I cannot distinguish between the motives of the World Bank/IMF/WTO and the US government or other governments. More importantly, a successful campaign against one would certainly effect the other.Although quantifying that effect is debatable, I feel it is worth mentioning.Finally, I offer this as a contribution to thediscussion. I'm not an expert and if I were asked for an expert opinion, I would defer most economic and foreign policy matters to you. If (as you say) it's been mentioned in your previous contributions, I apologize for being redundant.Mike R.Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Mike R.I think the 5/30/06 post and attached article from AltEnergyNetwork dida excellent job explaining the administration's decision making process,the U.S. economy and how it compares to similar situations in othercountries.http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63309.htmlYes it does, but there's been a lot more about it previously, especially in comments on the implications of Iran's new oil bourse, there are other points of view, and I think they all have to be assessed.I also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is theresult of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's)and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of"Hegemony or Survival"."For the first time, concrete alliances have been taking shape at thegrassroots level . These are impressive developments, rich inopportunity. And they have had effects, in rhetorical and sometimespolicy changes."When he says "policy changes", I read it to mean within the UnitedStates. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S.government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, iscoalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result isan indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing militarybuildup and globalization.I think you credit them with more strategy than they deserve. I don't think Chomsky is talking about the same thing. He also said this, with the same sentence in it:"The harmful effects of the corporate globalisation project have led to mass popular protest and activism in the South, later joined by major sectors of the rich industrial societies, hence becoming harder to ignore. For the first time concrete alliances have been taking shape at a grassroots level. It is fair to say, I think, that the future of our endangered species may be determined in no small measure by how these popular forces evolve."He means the other superpower, the Social Forum in Porto Alegre for example, and I'm sure the "policy changes" have more to do with the World Bank/IMF/WTO than with the US government or other governments.(IMO) this adds to Mike Weaver's position:http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63345.html"Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economicsystem perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have aneffect."I think it adds to Gabriel Kolko's position and mine 18 months ago, and since - Vote Bush! LOL!... But a Kerry win would still have left you with the "duopoly" party,followed by business-as-usual, especially on the foreign policyfront. There's not much essential difference between the two parties'foreign policy, eg between Clinton's and Bush's, it's mostly just theBushies' outrageous in-your-face style of it that's different.I agreed with Gabriel Kolko at the time, that Bush might be thelesser of two evils, but while Kolko was thinking of other nationsand international alliances I was thinking of the Other Superpower.http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg38234.html[Biofuel] The Coming Elections and the Future of American Global Power16 Sep 2004Also this:"Gabriel Kolko -- in this writer's estimation, our most indispensablehistorian -- argues in a recent piece on the Counterpunch websitethat because a second Bush term would possibly intensify
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. dollar
Hakan,You wrote: "...it is a concerted effort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it according to all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower."So, there are no organizations or governments attempting to defend themselves from U.S. Hegemony by trying to increase the value of currenciesother thanthe Dollar? Who's the child Hakan?You said: "I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules."I find it amazing too - since I didn't "blame" other countries for anything.I find itamazing that (according to you) I can "blame" someone without using the word blame, or:culpabilityfaultguiltrapresponsibility for wrongdoing or failure I didn't say any related words like:regretremorseself-reproachshameaccountabilityliabilitycomplicityblameworthinessreprehensiblenesssinfulnesscensurecondemnationdenunciation(courtesy: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/blame)I didn't try toexcuse the U.S. frombreaking "all the rules". However, I did say "White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attracting the attention of others to attack."You also said: "I do not see that US is under any attack"That one stands on it's own merit (or lack thereof). The U.S. has so broadly alienated countries on every continent, what strategy of attack do you think is being spared - irrespective of whether or not you can "see" it?My observation/speculation was related toa growing and justifiable popular dissent against the U.S. government, occurring both inside and outside the U.S. and how it may be effecting policy decisions in countries around the world.It would be a ray of sunshine if you could save the small-minded personal attacks, address a specific observation (accurately) and express dissent with at least a thimble full of objectivity. I'm not even asking for respect (although it would be nice).Othersmight find ituseful to the conversation and you might find it helpful to your own credibility.Mike Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike,The weakening of the dollar is not a result of any concerted foreigneffort. The dollar is amazingly strong, considering that US breaksall fundamentals. It is probably the opposite, it is a concertedeffort to try to hold the value of the dollar high, when it accordingto all financial rules and fundamentals should be much lower.I find it a little bit amazing that in the text below is an attempt toblame other countries for allowing US to break all the rules. I wouldnot surprised to hear such things from children "mom/dad said wecould do it" and maybe I am not that surprised to hear it from US.It is however wrong to try to find any to blame other then US itself.I do not see that US is under any attack, it is only taking theconsequences of its own doing. I see no reason to develop anymental feelings like "being pursued" over it. It is not any backgroundfor "see what they are doing to us" when it should be "see what weare doing to ourselves". On the other hand, conspiration theoriesare favorite themes for Americans and they will soon find someonewho is "making it to the Americans, so the Americans will makeit to themselves".Do not misunderstand me, I like Americans very much and I alsolike children very much. I wonder if there are any connections inthis. How they could elect Bush is beyond me, but he is there.HakanAt 17:05 31/05/2006, you wrote:I think the 5/30/06 post and attached article from AltEnergyNetwork dida excellent job explaining the administration's decision making process,the U.S. economy and how it compares to similar situations in othercountries.http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63309.htmlI also think it's possible that the weakening of the U.S. Dollar is theresult of a concerted effort by foreign entities (governments and NGO's)and might be related to what Noam Chomsky describes on the last page of"Hegemony or Survival"."For the first time, concrete alliances have been taking shape at thegrassroots level . These are impressive developments, rich inopportunity. And they have had effects, in rhetorical and sometimespolicy changes."When he says "policy changes", I read it to mean within the UnitedStates. However, I think that a popular movement to identify the U.S.government as the single biggest threat to our survival as a species, iscoalescing in foreign policy decisions around the world. The result isan indication of US economic isolation with hopes of slowing militarybuildup and globalization.(IMO) this adds to Mike Weaver's position:http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg63345.html"Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economicsystem perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have aneffect."White House policy is both self destructive and antagonistic, attractingthe attention of others to attack.Military spending/use, energy, the environment, you name it, the U.S.government is
[Biofuel] U.S. dollar
I don't see a wholesale collapse of the US economy. I do think the dollar will continue to slide until the country elects some Republicans or Democrats. I am not sure what to call the gang in power now; they are most certainly NOT Republicans. I'm also not sure how successful the Iranian oil bourse will be - so they'll get Euros. Big whoop. All major markets are still denominated in dollars. Maybe they can buy nuclear thechnology from France. Also, say what you want about the US but it is still by far the most dynamic economy in the world. China and India still have significant infrastructure, corruption, pollution and transparency issues to overcome. Don't get me wrong - the concerted effort to destroy our economic system perpetuated by the Bush Administration will (and has) have an effect. And whose to say China and the other Asian countries holding out debt won't decide to trim our sails a bit. A very small sell off would devastating. From Safehaven: The US Dollar has been the reserve currency of the world since the end of WW2 and the Bretton Woods Agreement (July 1944). Bretton Woods signalled the end of the British Pound as the worlds reserve currency. The Pound was the principal currency of the world for over 100 years from 1816 to 1933 and it was backed by gold. But at the outset of WW1 Britain and other European countries came off the gold standard because of the financial dislocations caused by the war. The US$ still backed by gold slowly began to replace the faltering British Pound but by 1933 the US joined them in coming off the gold standard due to the deteriorating deflationary conditions of the Great Depression. The period was also marked by the collapse in international trade and financial flows prior To WW2. With Britain and Europe in ruins after WW2 the way was clear for the US, who emerged unscathed by war to assume the role as the world's reserve currency and the king of the international financial markets. And backing the US Dollar was once again convertibility into gold. The Bretton Woods Agreement saw other key features such as fixed but adjustable exchange rates against the US Dollar and the birth of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. **What will happen to the US as it is flat on its back engaged in Afganistan, Iraq and Iran? With Europe, China and India wait politely as we sort it out? I doubt it. I don't think China is playing for second place. But by the early 1970's growing structural imbalances amongst the world's leading economies led to increased currency speculation, the floating of the Pound Sterling followed by others, and deteriorating confidence in the US Dollar. The gold standard and Bretton Woods collapsed in 1971 and by 1973 the floating exchange rate system took hold. Since then we have been through a roller coaster ride for the US Dollar and numerous other currencies. The US Dollar after falling precipitously through the 1970's regained strength in the 1980's particularly following the election of the Reagan administration in 1980. That ended in 1985 with the Plaza Accord as the strong US Dollar was causing structural imbalances with the growing US twin deficits of budget and trade (sound familiar). In less then two years the US Dollar lost half its value. The 1990's was the decade of currency crises. The British Pound (1992), the Mexican Peso (1994), the Asian contagion (1997) followed by Asian Contagion II in 1998 along with the collapse of the Russian Ruble. This led to the collapse of the giant hedge fund Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) that required the Federal Reserve to bail the banks that were threatened with collapse. To a lesser degree we also had the Turkish Lira crisis and numerous currency and financial woes in Latin America especially Argentina. And least we forget, the Canadian Dollar also fell to new multi year lows although it was never described as a crisis in the same breath as any of the above. But the biggest threat to the world's financial system was the falling US Dollar. The US did return to small trade surpluses in the early 1990's but the weak dollar was causing other problems particularly with the Japanese Yen. In 1994 the world was mired in a global recession with Japan almost in an outright depression. The US bond market collapsed in response to the weak dollar. In order to spur the Japanese and US economies and prevent a potential financial collapse the US and Japan agreed to change places. From 1995-2000 the stated goal of the Clinton Administration was a strong dollar. During each and every currency crisis the Federal Reserve stepped in and either cut interest rates and/or provided massive doses of liquidity to the banking system in order to stem any crisis. We saw this in 1994 following the Mexican Peso crisis, again in 1997 and especially 1998 after LTCM and the Asian Contagion crisis. Then along came Y2K (1999) and
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. Dollar and China
increase in value and further devalue the dollar as a result. The Japanese have this signed up saying they will support the dollar, but they are no longer able to sustain it as the Russians and Chines along with others are dumping it, putting pressure on those slated to support it. India is also falering on dumping it and OPEC has already started decreasing dollar influence in favour of the Euro. The US has always had the policy of exporting it's inflation this way, to get others to support their fiscal mismanagement, but this time it isn't working nor will it work resulting in a monumentous slide. JP Morgan's ( a parrtner member in the Federal Reserve) derivatives alone are in the trillions, way over any assets they can muster. A call-in of those derivatives and it' s toodaloo to the dollar supremacy overnight. And why should anyone want to support the currency of a nation fully engaged in criminal hegemony for ono one's benefit but the already too rich or those seeking to be rich and independant (finally, wink,wink)? Luc - Original Message - From: Ken Riznyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 4:17 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] U.S. Dollar and China Maybe very interesting but not entirely accurate. The Chinese yuan is pegged to the US dollar, so the dollar cannot deflate with relation to Chinese currency. This helps them because if the dollar deflated relative to the yuan imported Chinese goods would become more expensive and their sales to the US would decrease. Ken ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] U.S. Dollar and China
Maybe very interesting but not entirely accurate. The Chinese yuan is pegged to the US dollar, so the dollar cannot deflate with relation to Chinese currency. This helps them because if the dollar deflated relative to the yuan imported Chinese goods would become more expensive and their sales to the US would decrease. Ken --- robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a story I found on NPR. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4186041 Q: What happens if the dollar continues to slide? Zandi says he expects the dollar to continue to depreciate over the next three or four years. I don't think it will collapse, but it will deflate, particularly against the Chinese and other Asian currencies, he says. Theyll be buying less of our assets, hopefully, and that means higher interest rates. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] U.S. Dollar and China
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4186041 Most of us know that when the value of the dollar falls, we end up paying more for imported goods. But how else does this affect the U.S. economy? We turned to Mark Zandi, chief economist for the consulting firm Economy.com, for a primer on what the dollar's fall really means. Q: Why do we want foreign investment in the U.S. dollar? When we say that foreigners invest in the dollar, we mean they are buying U.S. Treasury securities, corporate stocks and bonds, mortgage-backed bonds -- everything for sale on U.S. markets. Foreign investment helps fuel the growth of those markets. In the 1990s, the bulk of foreign investment went into U.S. stocks and corporate acquisitions. Nowadays, most investment from abroad comes from central banks -- the central banks of China and Japan, in particular -- and most of that money is going into U.S. Treasury securities. Investing in U.S. Treasury securities is less risky for central banks than putting their money in corporate stocks and bonds. Foreign central banks are also less inclined to take an ownership stake in U.S. companies, Zandi says, adding: Can you imagine if the Chinese central bank owned a big chunk of GM? Q: What does the U.S. Treasury do with foreign investment? The U.S. Treasury uses investment from abroad to finance the federal deficit -- which, in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, was $413 billion. Much of that deficit is a result of the Bush administration's tax cuts, and spending associated with homeland security and U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In a very real way, foreign investment has been used to finance our national security activities abroad and at home, Zandi says. Q: What happens if the dollar continues to slide? Zandi says he expects the dollar to continue to depreciate over the next three or four years. I don't think it will collapse, but it will deflate, particularly against the Chinese and other Asian currencies, he says. Theyll be buying less of our assets, hopefully, and that means higher interest rates. Q: You used the word hopefully to describe foreign investors' potential loss of interest in U.S. assets. Is the dollar's slide a good thing? The dollar's fall will result in painful adjustments for the U.S. economy, but ultimately, it's the right thing, and we'll be better for it, Zandi says. U.S. consumers and the federal government are borrowing and spending aggressively, consuming more than they produce. Personal saving rates are close to zero, which means many households are borrowing more than they earn, Zandi notes. The federal government is borrowing at a record pace. So far, foreign investors have been willing to finance U.S. borrowing. But foreign nations have a finite amount of excess savings to lend to U.S. borrowers. We're very close to that end now, Zandi says. Some economists estimate that the United States is already borrowing about three-quarters of foreign nation's excess savings. These are things that can't continue forever, Zandi says. We need to save more, and the only way it's going to happen is if we're forced to do it. Meanwhile, the depreciation of the dollar will force U.S. consumers and the U.S. government to behave in a more responsible manner, to consume less aggressively and produce more goods, Zandi predicts. In the end, the dollar's fall will make it cheaper for foreign consumers to buy U.S. goods -- a positive outcome we'll reach only after an arduous period of correction. The longer it takes for us to make that adjustment, the more painful it will be, he says. If we take our medicine now, we won't need to take as much in the future. Q: Will the fall of the dollar send investors fleeing? There is an upside to the fact that so much of the money the U.S. Treasury borrows comes from the central banks of China and other Asian nations, Zandi notes: These investors can't pull their money out all at once without significantly affecting the value of what's left of their investment. That's likely to keep investor flight from getting too out of hand, he says. We're not going to lose the money, Zandi says. We'll just have to pay more to get it. Q: You've said the dollar's depreciation will spur a rise in interest rates. Does this pose a danger to America's economic recovery? As the dollar depreciates, foreign investors will want higher returns for their money to compensate for the increased risk. That means U.S. individuals, corporations and the federal government will have to pay more for the money they borrow. Zandi expects interest rates to rise in a measured, modest way. But he says how fast and how high rates rise depends on how quickly we can move from being big consumers to balanced consumers. The longer the process takes to begin, the more painful it will be, he says. We're likely to see inflation, though how fast it surges
