Cliff Varnell Wrote:[quote=David Guyatt]

I think we could break thru exaggeration, spin and over-simplification if you could point to me one negative impact "de-dollarization" has had on the US economy.

David Guyatt Wrote:

Cliff Varnell Wrote:[quote=David Guyatt]

I think we could break thru exaggeration, spin and over-simplification if you could point to me one negative impact "de-dollarization" has had on the US economy.

That's generous of you, Cliff, allowing me to "break through" the log jam of "exaggeration, spin and over-simplification" by pointing out one negative impact of something that hasn't yet happened. Never let it be said that you set the bar too high.

Quote:Punished for the Dollar's Virtue?
October 7, 2014 3:48 pm October 7, 2014 3:48 pm

I rarely disagree with Jared Bernstein, and actually agree with most of his latest post. Yes, the persistent US trade
deficit is a problem for achieving full employment, and we should have a weak-dollar, not strong-dollar policy.

But is the dollar's reserve-currency status the root of the problem? I have long argued that reserve-currency status is
a much overrated phenomenon it's not actually a significant benefit to the country that issues the currency, even aside
from the employment issues. But I'm also not convinced that it's that big a deal when we try to understand persistent
trade deficits. After all, we're not the only country that has run persistent external deficits:

We do have things that cause a global savings glut to spill into America a big, deep financial market, with lots of
players willing to create what look like safe assets, a general sense that America is the refuge of last resort, and
so on. But Britain offers many of the same things, and has in fact a comparable record of persistent capital inflows
and deficits; while Australia has run really big external deficits for a very long time.

As a policy issue I don't think this matters too much we should seek a weaker dollar. But I don't think phrasing it
in terms of the reserve currency status is helpful.

Quote:

Aleppo: The Reality Is Not Good News for Americans

12.08.2016 Author: Phil Butler
Emerging reports from Syria suggest United States naval and special warfare elements may be assisting extreme jihadists break out of embattled Aleppo. Unconfirmed reports of US warships sharing intelligence with the group Jeish al-Fatah, also suggest US Special Forces elements may be trapped within the surrounded city. If confirmed, these reports would not be the biggest surprise to objective observers. Al Nusra and Al Qaeda, along with ISIL having changed identities a dozen times supersedes any adamant amazement by now. As the Syrian civil war seems to be winding down, we must begin to question America's real role in this catastrophe.I was reading earlier today a report FARS News Agency, about alleged assistance being rendered by US forces to a group inside Aleppo. According to this report;" Syrian army and Hezbollah said the terrorists in Aleppo are both receiving logistical aid and intelligence support from the western states, specially the US warships deployed in the Mediterranean Sea."While FARS may not be the most credible source given the Iranian agency's past record of sensationalist diatribe, these days every news source needs to be scanned and scrutinized, to find the actual truth of matters. If Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal can provide puzzle pieces, then certainly the most one sided media on Earth can render puzzle pieces. As to US collaboration with Al Nusra and Al Qaeda, there is already a mountain of proof. But US warships forwarding intel? Green Berets or Seals embedded in terrorist units? I had to investigate.First of all, Fatah al-Islam was a near dissolved militant jihadist organization from Lebanon. Once classified by the US State Department a "terrorist organization", magically this designation was lifted in 2010, just after then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took office. The group, led by the ghost guerilla Shaker al-Absi, is believed to have melted in with Al Nusra and Al Qaeda to form a new jihadist cell, one now surrounded by Assad's Syrian Army forces. As far back as 2007, reports like the one of David Welch, Assistant to Secretary of State, negotiating with Saudi Arabia and Saad Hariri of the American-backed government of Fouad Siniora, in order to funnel aid to Fatah al-Islam, foretell of the current US-Russia-Iran-Hezbollah-Israel symmetry going on in the region. What's most disturbing about these reports is the fact this same organization planned ambushes and no doubt killer US service personnel in Iraq on a few short years ago. In the final analysis, some American family has dead and buried heroes put in the ground by the same people Clinton and the Obama administration now fund. The funding of Jeish al-Fatah is not in question here, but direct intelligence and advisers is. I hope the reader grasps the significance.Like other extremists organizations fighting in the region, Fatah al-Islam has no qualms about using barbaric tactics. Some readers will recall recent reports of Jaysh al-Islam using Syrian soldiers and their families in cages in Eastern Ghouta to deter Assad Regime attacks. Incidents such as this, accentuate the devastating news of the Obama administration's vehement doggedness to overthrow another standing government. Regime change by any means necessary puts the United States' reputation on the line, and sullies the legacy of generations of Americans. This says nothing for the far reaching terror and chaos caused. But direct support such as the kind mention by the Iranians bodes of an even more sinister strategy. Jaysh al-Sham has received funding from Saudi Arabia since its inception in 2013, and currently receives funding from Qatar and Turkey as well.On US military assistance to Jaysh al-Sham, this Yahoo News report from last November tells of land deliveries of ammunition to the jihadists by the Pentagon, and it speaks in the same sentence of U.S. special operations forces. This suggests Special Forces personnel may in fact be with the jihadists blowing themselves up against Assad in Aleppo. I witnessed a YouTube video just yesterday, an anti-Assad rebel driving a makeshift armored vehicle laden with explosives into a strategic target inside the city. Of course this video could have been concocted, but Pentagon support for rebels there is not.Turning to the sharing of intelligence in what now amounts to a proxy war with Syria, Iran, and Russia, this is not as easy to determine. Reports Arizona Senator John McCain called for stingers and TOW missiles, for these insurgents is one thing, US Navy or other surveillance or counterintelligence shares is quite another. But given the likelihood Special Forces advisers are on the ground in Aleppo, it only makes sense to assume the US Navy Seals are there as well. I am speculating a bit, but anybody who familiar with Spec-Ops knows, the Seals are never left blind. Chances are, this time the Iranian reports are accurate.Finally, this Foreign Affairs report talks about the "rebranding" of Al Qaeda, and how ISIL extremism has afforded the boldest of US enemies a chance to go chameleon. Jaysh al-Sham is now Al Qaeda and Al Nusra, an alphabet soup more desirable as frenemies than ISIL, Daesh, or any other name for barbaric head chopper-offers. At the end of all this, underneath the piles of dead bodies, investigators may one day connect the truck loads of US, Saudi, Qatari, UK, and other western money donations that flowed into Syria to kill off Assad. This RT report shows a sequence of videos where these Syrian rebels used TOW anti-tank missiles to destroy a Russian made T90 outside Aleppo late last year. Given this, and other mounting evidence, I think it is safe to say American arms and mercenaries are now aligned against Assad and his Russian allies. The relief chopper shot down just the other day near Aleppo, may well have been as a result of Mr. McCain's call for Stinger missiles for the jihadists. For those who saw the desecration of the Russian crewmembers' lifeless bodies, the dreadful end of this proxy war can be surmised.Our Navy offshore pumping intel in to Special Warfare operatives embedded with Al Qaeda or Al Whatever…. US politicians doing everything in their power to start another war…. a presidential candidate proven a liar 100 times…. Somehow I just do not see all this going well for my country. Europe is overrun China and Russia, and almost all the Middle East and Africa are alienated US taxpayer billions are being spent to not transparent ends one has to wonder if dethroning one political figure was worth it all? On a personal level, I would just like to hear the justification for all this killing. One TOW missile costs $60,000 dollars, or enough to buy a homeless family a nice small home in America. I think America at peace would help Americans a lot more than war. What do you think?Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook".

Cliff Varnell Wrote:

David Guyatt Wrote:

Cliff Varnell Wrote:[quote=David Guyatt]

I think we could break thru exaggeration, spin and over-simplification if you could point to me one negative impact "de-dollarization" has had on the US economy.

That's generous of you, Cliff, allowing me to "break through" the log jam of "exaggeration, spin and over-simplification" by pointing out one negative impact of something that hasn't yet happened. Never let it be said that you set the bar too high.

Ah. Then your "smell the fear" comment was nothing more than wishful thinking?

Quote:Jared Bernstein thinks the dollar's reserve currency status is a drag on the US economy.

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/full-employment-trade-deficits-and-the-dollar-as-reserve-currency-what-are-the-connections/

But Paul Krugman disagrees, argues DRCS is no big deal either way.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/punished-for-the-dollars-virtue/

emphasis added

Quote:Punished for the Dollar's Virtue?
October 7, 2014 3:48 pm October 7, 2014 3:48 pm

I rarely disagree with Jared Bernstein, and actually agree with most of his latest post. Yes, the persistent US trade
deficit is a problem for achieving full employment, and we should have a weak-dollar, not strong-dollar policy.

But is the dollar's reserve-currency status the root of the problem? I have long argued that reserve-currency status is
a much overrated phenomenon it's not actually a significant benefit to the country that issues the currency, even aside
from the employment issues. But I'm also not convinced that it's that big a deal when we try to understand persistent
trade deficits. After all, we're not the only country that has run persistent external deficits:

We do have things that cause a global savings glut to spill into America a big, deep financial market, with lots of
players willing to create what look like safe assets, a general sense that America is the refuge of last resort, and
so on. But Britain offers many of the same things, and has in fact a comparable record of persistent capital inflows
and deficits; while Australia has run really big external deficits for a very long time.

As a policy issue I don't think this matters too much we should seek a weaker dollar. But I don't think phrasing it
in terms of the reserve currency status is helpful.

Quote:The advantages this system bestows on the US are enormous. "Reserve currency status" generates huge demand for dollars from governments and companies around the world, as they're needed for reserves and trade. This has allowed successive American administrations to spend far more, year-in year-out, than is raised in tax and export revenue.

Quote:[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: arttitle"]Ankara Ready to Close Its Border with Syria[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: artbody, align: justify"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: artbody, align: justify"]Turkey is already mulling the possibility of closing its border with Syria, amid the ongoing diplomatic fence-mending between Moscow and Ankara, according to the Russian newspaper Izvestia.

The Izvestia newspaper quoted the deputy head of the Russian Lower House's Defense Committee as saying that during a recent session of the joint Russian-Turkish commission, Moscow specifically stressed the necessity of closing the Turkish-Syrian border.

Viktor Vodolatsky said that the August 11 session was a continuation of Tuesday's dialogue in St. Petersburg between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

"The two, among other things, discussed the peace settlement in Syria, which is why we decided to urge Ankara to close the Syrian-Turkish border in order to stop the flow of terrorists and weapons," Vodoloatsky said.

He added that the issue is of paramount importance in ensuring Russia's national security, and that Moscow pledged to provide the Turkish side with satellite images of those areas where it is shown that weapons and militants are being trafficked.

It is safe to say that Ankara will most likely give the green light to the closure of Syrian-Turkish border given the ongoing normalization of relations between Russia and Turkey, according to Izvestia, which cited relevant agreements clinched during the meeting between Putin and Erdogan.

In this context, Igor Morozov, member of the Russian Upper House's International Affairs Committee, said that with Turkey's relations with Europe and the US leaving much to be desired, Ankara will now be focusing on developing cooperation with Russia.

It gives Russia a chance to reach a compromise with Turkey on a spate of contentious issue, and under conditions that will be dictated by Moscow, Morozov was quoted by the Izvestia as saying.

"The Turkish negotiators actually have no room to maneuver, and they are poised and ready to arrive at a consensus on difficult issues. This is why they will most likely say "yes" to our proposal to close Turkey's border with Syria," he said.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Quote:Fed's Kashkari says dollar could lose reserve currency status

Friday, 15 Jul 2016 | 3:03 PM ET

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]





ST. LOUIS, July 15 (Reuters) - Minneapolis Federal Reserve President Neel Kashkari said on Friday "it's possible" the dollar could lose its status as the world's sole reserve currency during his lifetime.


If the euro or China's yuan did become the world's reserve currency, said the 42-year-old Kashkari, it could be a positive development for the United States, whose currency strengthens during global crises, hurting U.S. exports and manufacturing.


Kashkari, who spoke during a panel discussion in St. Louis, also said he is encouraged that inflation is creeping up toward the Fed's 2 percent target. He added that he sees no possibility the U.S. central bank could overshoot on inflation.

Quote:Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari thinks we need to break up big banks

[URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/"]

Myles Udland
[/URL]February 16, 2016





Neel Kashkari, the newly appointed president of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, has come out swinging in his first speech as a Fed official.

In a speech delivered at the Brookings Institution on Tuesday, Kashkari called for breaking up the biggest banks in the US.
"I believe we need to complete the important work that my colleagues are doing so that, at a minimum, we are as prepared as we can be to deal with an individual large bank failure," Kashkari said.


He added (emphasis added):


"But given the enormous costs that would be associated with another financial crisis and the lack of certainty about whether these new tools would be effective in dealing with one, I believe we must seriously consider bolder, transformational options. Some other Federal Reserve policymakers have noted the potential benefits to considering more transformational measures. I believe we must begin this work now and give serious consideration to a range of options, including the following:

• Breaking up large banks into smaller, less connected, less important entities.
  
• Turning large banks into public utilities by forcing them to hold so much capital that they virtually can't fail (with regulation akin to that of a nuclear power plant).
  
• Taxing leverage throughout the financial system to reduce systemic risks wherever they lie.
  

Kashkari, it is worth noting, led President Obama's TARP program or Troubled Asset Relief Program in the wake of the financial crisis.

And so Kashkari's previous government experience dealt directly with the fallout from the US government needing to step in to rescue large US banks, and it is clear this is something he worries about having to do again.


The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis has been at the forefront of understanding the risks and challenges posed by large banks and moral hazard for a long time," Kashkari said. "Our work on these topics goes back to the 1970s, with specific work on [too big to fail] beginning in the 1990s. In fact, my colleague Ron Feldman and one of my predecessors, Gary Stern, both of whom are here today, authored the original book on this topic, Too Big to Fail, arguing in 2004 that policymakers would not stick to their no-bailout pledges. They were right.


"Building on this important work, and the work done since the crisis, the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis is launching a major initiative to consider transformational options and develop an actionable plan to end TBTF."


Quite an entrance.

Quote:Fed's New Bank Critic, Neel Kashkari, Keeps Heat On

An unlikely regulatory threat to nation's biggest banks

By Kate Davidson and
Anupreeta Das

Updated April 4, 2016 9:17 a.m. ET Neel Kashkari, the new president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, is positioning himself as an unlikely regulatory threat to the nation's biggest banks.
...

Magda Hassan Wrote:Oh, Mr. Cash and Carry is back. Seems an integral part of their party.

Cliff Varnell Wrote:

Magda Hassan Wrote:Oh, Mr. Cash and Carry is back. Seems an integral part of their party.

Not at all.

Life-long Republican who's had a come-to-Jesus epiphany over breaking up the big banks.

Goes to show dollar hegemony ain't shit.

Russia prevented' potential NATO launch of 624 cruise missiles in Syria Defense Minister

Russian Tu-22M3 'Backfire' long-range bombers strike ISIS from Iran's Hamadan airfield (VIDEO)