Skip to main content

How to cease being the world's superpower in two easy steps...

... in a post, by the way, that has nothing in particular to do with either Presidents Bush or Obama.

Step One: Borrow so much money from the Chinese that you are no longer allowed to criticize them, but they are empowered to critique your performance, hint that they can crash the dollar any time they so desire, and threaten to displace the dollar as the world's reserve currency....

Step Two: Swap out your dependence on Saudi oil with a dependence on petrochemical exports from greasy Vlad Putin's Russia:

Russia has taken center stage in oil exports. For the first time Russia has topped Saudi Arabia in oil exports. Russia exported about 7.4 million barrels per day in the first quarter compared with Saudi Arabia's 7 million barrels per day.

Russian supplies of energy to the US jumped 33% in the past six months compared with a drop of 29% for Saudi Arabia in the same period.


Short-term some folks see this as good news, because Russia currently needs petrodollars badly enough to want to undercut OPEC. Long-term, however, this means that both the wizened old men in Bejing and the once-and-future-Russian imperialists in Moscow will each have acquired a functional veto over US foreign policy....

Comments

tom said…
I'm feeling slow today.

Explain to me again why it would be a bad thing for the dollar to be replaced as the world's reserve currency. Particularly if it is replaced by a commodity backed currency such as gold, rather than some sort of SDR scam.
Libertarian in Colorado said…
Tom... in general it's not a bad thing. The problem is the terms in which it happens. If China decides that they want to crash the dollar one day, they can do it quite easily.

We can take steps to prevent them from being able to do that ourselves. But if we don't address the issue, and China decides to destroy the dollar, we'll really be up shit creek.

But, the conventional wisdom is that China would never start economic warfare with the United States. That wisdom is flawed.

If you want to see the US fall apart, destroy the dollar. They can't touch our military, but they can destroy us economically.

That would be their "nuclear option."
tom said…
China doesn't have to try to destroy the US$.

Congress and the Federal Reserve are doing it for them.
Libertarian in Colorado said…
That's not true. Not as long as there is a demand (which China is currently providing).

Congress and the Fed are performing a passive destruction. China is assisting. It's symbiotic. If China didn't buy dollars, it'd all go to hell.

Right now, the difference is that China is actively moving towards lessing the blow within their own borders by encouraging internal consumption. We're digging ourselves deeper in the whole by deficit spending.

Eventually, their nuclear option won't have mutually assured (economic) destruction as a deterrent for them.
tom said…
It is rumored that the Fed is keeping the illusion of demand up by purchasing up to half of all U.S. debt offerings via proxies.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...