A recent talking point re-emerges in another light....

[Keith Davis]

Seems cash dollars US is the 3rd world currency as well...
On Jan 25, 2012 8:33 PM, "Technopaegnion Tapinosis" <
technopaegniontapinosis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Not really. The independence of the Fed has little to do with governments
> buying dollars during crises. In fact, it's not a consideration at all for
> most buyers of dollars. The dollar, as you note here, is a haven in
> difficult or uncertain economic periods (short or long) because, as you
> also note, it has an excellent history. But it is the dollars very special
> function as the currency of the world, its liquidity, its size as a
> currency, and the size the markets that trade in dollars, that make the
> dollar the currency the world turns to, bit only in times of trouble and
> undertainty, but all the time. Two nations that do little business with the
> USA, and who hold few secutities in dollars, will still hold and trade in
> dollars. It's not the Fed or anything political that motivates this, but
> the fact that it is in the dollar, as it is in English, that  business gets
> done in the world. The political play, say the surrent S&P move into the
> assessment of political risks, is a trend that may undermine the dollar in
> time, so the perception of an independent Fed seems, these days, important,
> but it matters almost not at all.
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:08 PM, <malignd at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> The gold standard is absurd.  If the world's currencies devalued to such
>> an extent that everyone demanded gold, then gold would be equally
>> worthless, except to make jewelry with.
>>
>> Also, if this hasn't been discusssed (I haven't read the entire thread)
>> the independence of the Fed is of great importance to the dollar's being
>> the world's currency.  Nations are not going to invest in the dollar if it
>> is subject to the policies of changing administrations.  The dollar has
>> never failed, not through two world wars.  When things go bad, governments
>> buy dollars.  The independence of the Fed is one big reason.
>>
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alex Colter <recoignishon at gmail.com>
>> To: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>
>> Cc: pynchon-l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> Sent: Wed, Jan 25, 2012 10:29 am
>> Subject: Re: A recent talking point re-emerges in another light....
>>
>>   Would it be fair to say all money must be back'd by Energy?
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/25/2012 12:42 PM, David Morris wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.trutv.com/**conspiracy/government/ron-**
>>>> paul/gallery.html?curPhoto=11<http://www.trutv.com/conspiracy/government/ron-paul/gallery.html?curPhoto=11>
>>>>
>>>> The New World Order
>>>>
>>>> "[Is there] an international conspiracy to overthrow our government?"
>>>> Paul said in 2003, repeating the question of an audience member at his
>>>> Austin speech. "The answer is 'Yes'. I think there are 25,000
>>>> individuals that have used offices of powers, and they are in our
>>>> Universities and they are in our Congresses, and they believe in One
>>>> World Government. And if you believe in One World Government, then you
>>>> are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking
>>>> about setting up something that you could well call a dictatorship -
>>>> and those plans are there!"
>>>>
>>>> Ron Paul's call for a return to the Gold Standard are clear proof that
>>>> he's w/o a clue about economics and monetary dynamics.  But neither do
>>>> most people...
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey, I got an idea.  Why doesn't the Fed just SAY it has enough gold
>>> buried somewhere to "back" all the money it creates.  Of course, the public
>>> would have to take this on faith.  It wouldn't be possible to actually
>>> count or weigh this much gold.  So in the end the value of money depends on
>>> trust.  Like so much else in this world.
>>>
>>> Approached from another angle, is there enough gold in the world, above
>>> or below, ground to "back" but a tiny fraction of the money supply?  Any
>>> kind of conceivable "gold standard" would just add an unnecessary, though
>>> minor,  complication to something that is complicated enough already.
>>>
>>>  Saying all money must be backed by gold  is kind of like saying that
>>> all books have to be printed on paper.
>>>
>>> Good-bye Kindle.
>>>
>>>
>>> P
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Paul Mackin<mackin.paul at verizon.net**>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's my impression that spinners of this particular conspiracy theory,
>>>>>  espoused by Ron Paul and others, don't really understand how money and
>>>>> banking work, or of American economic history.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120125/d89845a9/attachment.html>