PDA

View Full Version : IT'S OFFICIAL: It's Been Announced That 'Currency Wars' Are Back On



Ponce
21st September 2012, 09:36 AM
Why make such a big deal out of this? they should do like Cuba where six years ago it cost $1.05 dollars to get a One Cuban peso......it now takes $1.15 dollars for One Cuban Peso....... others countries should simply do the same, everytime the US print more dollars it should take more dollars to buy a foreign currency.......Countries like Germany should simply say that it takes $1.20 dollars to buy one of theirs, or what ever the exchange rate is.
The US would be simply digging their own grave deeper everytime the print more money.
================================================== ==========

Brazilian Finance Minister Mantega has just blasted the Fed's QE3policy for setting off "Currency Wars".

What he means by this is: The Fed has prompted every country to attempt to weaken the value of their currencies in order to boost exports.

The reason Mantega is furious about this is that he believes it dangerously boosts inflation, especially in emerging markets like his, Brazil.

He's made this charge before: In August 2010, the last time the Fed started to embark on QE, he blasted it for setting around a series of central banks weakening their currencies to boost exports.

We predicted two days ago, that with the Fed, the ECB, and the Bank of Japan all announcing easing within days of each other, that the term would soon be back.

Neuro
21st September 2012, 09:47 AM
The difference with Cuba is that almost all other countries have a floating exchange rate. They don't set the exchange rate vs the dollar, the market does. But you could lower the value of your currency by printing more of it, just like USA, or not print more of it and it will appreciate vs USD...

Glass
21st September 2012, 10:10 AM
I was watching Max Keiser just a while ago and he was all about this. While interesting to see this play out it won't be pleasant.

mamboni
21st September 2012, 10:49 AM
Why make such a big deal out of this? they should do like Cuba where six years ago it cost $1.05 dollars to get a One Cuban peso......it now takes $1.15 dollars for One Cuban Peso....... others countries should simply do the same, everytime the US print more dollars it should take more dollars to buy a foreign currency.......Countries like Germany should simply say that it takes $1.20 dollars to buy one of theirs, or what ever the exchange rate is.
The US would be simply digging their own grave deeper everytime the print more money.
================================================== ==========

Brazilian Finance Minister Mantega has just blasted the Fed's QE3policy for setting off "Currency Wars".

What he means by this is: The Fed has prompted every country to attempt to weaken the value of their currencies in order to boost exports.

The reason Mantega is furious about this is that he believes it dangerously boosts inflation, especially in emerging markets like his, Brazil.

He's made this charge before: In August 2010, the last time the Fed started to embark on QE, he blasted it for setting around a series of central banks weakening their currencies to boost exports.

We predicted two days ago, that with the Fed, the ECB, and the Bank of Japan all announcing easing within days of each other, that the term would soon be back.

Export nations are hurt by a strong currency. Of course, in Cuba's case the issue is moot. LOL

madfranks
21st September 2012, 10:57 AM
A "currency war" is exactly what it is though. When all modern economies are centrally managed, and one of them goes and starts printing tens of billions of dollars every month, that distorts the currency markets, just like centralized interventions in the general economy distort economic activity. There will be some winners and some losers, and those countries which are negatively affected by this distortion are right to be angry at it.

Sparky
21st September 2012, 11:06 AM
A "currency war" is exactly what it is though. When all modern economies are centrally managed, and one of them goes and starts printing tens of billions of dollars every month, that distorts the currency markets, just like centralized interventions in the general economy distort economic activity. There will be some winners and some losers, and those countries which are negatively affected by this distortion are right to be angry at it.

Right, and it's a currency war that threatens the whole fiat system. The thing that has kept fiat stable this past 40 years is the ability of the U.S. to maintain some control of the world's reserve fiat, even as other countries engage in currency wars. But when the reserve currency gets caught up in the war, it threatens the stability of the underlying foundation.

Neuro
21st September 2012, 11:47 AM
Right, and it's a currency war that threatens the whole fiat system. The thing that has kept fiat stable this past 40 years is the ability of the U.S. to maintain some control of the world's reserve fiat, even as other countries engage in currency wars. But when the reserve currency gets caught up in the war, it threatens the stability of the underlying foundation.
I wouldn't call Gold going from $42 an ounce to $1800 an ounce a mark of stability of the USD. But I found this chart, that relate the Federal Reserves balance sheet vs the value of the supposed gold it holds (those 8000 tons many believe belongs to the US government)...

http://cdn.greshams-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Gold-Covering-or-Backing-the-Gold-Since-the-Collapse-of-the-Bretton-Woods-Agreement.png?5cc8a3

Neuro
21st September 2012, 11:53 AM
Seems like gold has some way to go still, in relation to FED balance sheet it has the same value as it did in 1971.

mamboni
21st September 2012, 01:13 PM
I wouldn't call Gold going from $42 an ounce to $1800 an ounce a mark of stability of the USD. But I found this chart, that relate the Federal Reserves balance sheet vs the value of the supposed gold it holds (those 8000 tons many believe belongs to the US government)...

http://cdn.greshams-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Gold-Covering-or-Backing-the-Gold-Since-the-Collapse-of-the-Bretton-Woods-Agreement.png?5cc8a3

That chart illustrates how we are still early in this gold and silver bull market. Gold would have to rise about 8-fold to $14,000 to reach a price comparbale to the 1980 peak. Silver would have to rise to somewhere between $280 and $900. I get positively tumescent thinking about it.

Neuro
21st September 2012, 01:30 PM
That chart illustrates how we are still early in this gold and silver bull market. Gold would have to rise about 8-fold to $14,000 to reach a price comparbale to the 1980 peak. Silver would have to rise to somewhere between $280 and $900. I get positively tumescent thinking about it.
Good perception there. I had to look up the word tumescent, but yes the chart is very positive for our future, as far as I can tell it can't go anywhere but up up and up in an erectile way, And I don't see the Federal Reserve bank balance sheet going but up either in a close future...

Ponce
21st September 2012, 02:02 PM
mamboni?........TUMESCENT?...........here we only use Inglish........if you please

Serpo
21st September 2012, 02:51 PM
I looked it up also and was going to post meaning ..........but havnt ....hahaha