Iran Yay or Nay?

[CDB]

The dollar hasn't devalued in the last 6 months, its actually strengthened.

Because excess has still be sterilized or gone into currency. The monetary base has gone through the roof. Relatively speaking our currency's current strength isn't on the most solid ground right now. There's a ****load of money that's already been created ready to pour into the system.

Its not about diplomatic relations, its about which currency the seller feels will maximize their capital. The dollar is the lesser of all evils now. Like I said previously, the dollar will stay dominant until there is something safer/better.

And that's correct. I'm just saying I think you're underestimating how tenuous the dollar's position is in that game.

[RobInKuwait]

Because excess has still be sterilized or gone into currency. The monetary base has gone through the roof. Relatively speaking our currency's current strength isn't on the most solid ground right now. There's a ****load of money that's already been created ready to pour into the system.

I agree. However, there are two sides to the currency strength supply and demand equation. First is the one you mentioned, the supply, which has in fact grown at unprecedented levels. The other side of the coin is the safe haven play. When there is a global financial meltdown, worldwide, the big money is looking for the safest possible place to put their money. The dollar, right or wrong was seen as the safest place over the last six months, which increased demand significantly and thus the value of the dollar went up.

I envision two things happening, as the financial situation clears up and the additional dollars infiltrate the market, the safe haven play will dry up and inflation will take hold, and the dollar and treasuries will take a significant hit.

And that's correct. I'm just saying I think you're underestimating how tenuous the dollar's position is in that game.

I think we're completely on the same page on this. I actually have been looking to buy some Jan 2011 puts today on a 20 year treasury bond fund and finally pulled the trigger. I'm expecting treasuries to take a big hit and the dollar to follow suit over the next couple of years.

CDB, what do you think will take the place of the dollar near term and long term?

[CDB]

CDB, what do you think will take the place of the dollar near term and long term?

Something from Asia. Technically the real safe haven is the currency that's the least manipulated and has the most backing, but in actuality my guess is people will jump to currencies that can be further inflated on top of a productive workforce for a time as the dollar finally pops and does fart circles around the money market. Asia, with oil rich county currencies as a second option. A far third, and if this happens we're really screwed, is the Amero; everyone meets and devises a world wide currency to universally screw everyone with at the same rate. It's a far third in my opinion because people are still too nationalistic to accept it, and they'd have to sprinkle some gold dust on it a la BrettonWoods II, but that would mean having to take a substantial portion of our medicine first which no central bank wants to do.

So, there will be a lot of noise about the dollar being king but not much action, foreign reserves will diversify to hold fewer and fewer greens and probably more yen and yuan and hard commodities especially. Oil, gold, etc. Maybe a few wars will be fought to make sure US production doesn't fall through the floor and our citizens have something fun to do with their time while our economy implodes and reorganizes itself from the rubble. And then, if we're lucky, something of a manufacturing base will have been rebuilt under our noses while we were off bombing some marginally significant country, so we can make a nice smooth transition from war time production to making rubber dog **** or something, a la the shift that happened in 45-46 after WWII. The only reason we didn't collapse then is because a significant portion of the workforce got killed - a creative way of dealing with unemployment - and our manufacturing ability was rebuilt despite, not because of, the war and all the government 'help'. We can only hope this time that a similar recovery is under way and waiting to take off once the government spending ends.

[RobInKuwait]

Something from Asia. Technically the real safe haven is the currency that's the least manipulated and has the most backing, but in actuality my guess is people will jump to currencies that can be further inflated on top of a productive workforce for a time as the dollar finally pops and does fart circles around the money market. Asia, with oil rich county currencies as a second option. A far third, and if this happens we're really screwed, is the Amero; everyone meets and devises a world wide currency to universally screw everyone with at the same rate. It's a far third in my opinion because people are still too nationalistic to accept it, and they'd have to sprinkle some gold dust on it a la BrettonWoods II, but that would mean having to take a substantial portion of our medicine first which no central bank wants to do.

So, there will be a lot of noise about the dollar being king but not much action, foreign reserves will diversify to hold fewer and fewer greens and probably more yen and yuan and hard commodities especially. Oil, gold, etc. Maybe a few wars will be fought to make sure US production doesn't fall through the floor and our citizens have something fun to do with their time while our economy implodes and reorganizes itself from the rubble. And then, if we're lucky, something of a manufacturing base will have been rebuilt under our noses while we were off bombing some marginally significant country, so we can make a nice smooth transition from war time production to making rubber dog **** or something, a la the shift that happened in 45-46 after WWII. The only reason we didn't collapse then is because a significant portion of the workforce got killed - a creative way of dealing with unemployment - and our manufacturing ability was rebuilt despite, not because of, the war and all the government 'help'. We can only hope this time that a similar recovery is under way and waiting to take off once the government spending ends.

Interesting theory. I could definitely see much of this playing out over the next 10-15 years. I think China is positioning the Yuan to be the currency of choice in the future.

I disagree in your WWII/Great Depression explanation. I agree with Amity Schlaes' explanation that attributed the post WWII boom to the 1930s era over-regulation of private enterprise freeing up underutilized private capital.

As for your unemployment theory from WWII, it seems to me that if you wanted to boost an economy through death, you'd kill off your old people, not the people with the greatest future economic output.

[CDB]

Interesting theory. I could definitely see much of this playing out over the next 10-15 years. I think China is positioning the Yuan to be the currency of choice in the future.

I disagree in your WWII/Great Depression explanation. I agree with Amity Schlaes' explanation that attributed the post WWII boom to the 1930s era over-regulation of private enterprise freeing up underutilized private capital.

Where can I read more, which book, Forgotten Man? I've avoided it. I love Greedy Hand but Forgotten Man seemed a rehash of stuff I've already read from Higgs and Rothbard on the policies of Hoover/FDR, and the misleading nature of WWII GDP stats. I honestly don't get the idea of over regulation freeing up capital.

As for your unemployment theory from WWII, it seems to me that if you wanted to boost an economy through death, you'd kill off your old people, not the people with the greatest future economic output.

True. I'm not saying it was intentionally the way they figured to deal with unemployment. It was just interesting in a sarcastic way that unemployment hovered around 18% for years as FDR was supposedly saving us from the Great Depression, then we commit fully one fifth of our workforce to the army, unemployment goes down, and FDR gets praise. More a comment on ow easily fooled most people are.

But make no mistake, economic woes and war are tied together like **** and stink. In the past it was about conquest. Kings would party until resources started to dry up, conquer some more land, get some ore gold and title and what not, and keep the party going. In our day and age its monetary policy first, military second. The spending is necessary to keep the money flowing and the inevitable collapse just out of sight. So, when all else fails, direct capital and production efforts into war making.

[Zero V]

We should only mess Iran if we can drop the Panzy BS, drop nukes, and carpet bomb the place flat. Then trash through with the Marines and Army and execute any officials or military persons still ticking....as for the other deaths. Its a term called "acceptable losses" or, for the greater good....

a war is a friggin war, dont rage one unless its ok to kill people.

[RobInKuwait]

Where can I read more, which book, Forgotten Man? I've avoided it. I love Greedy Hand but Forgotten Man seemed a rehash of stuff I've already read from Higgs and Rothbard on the policies of Hoover/FDR, and the misleading nature of WWII GDP stats. I honestly don't get the idea of over regulation freeing up capital.

Yeah, the Forgotten Man. I'll see if my library has Greedy Hand. I haven't read Rothbard and Higgs, but I'm open to all recommendations you have on good books to check out.

I miswrote the part apart over-regulation freeing up capital. When business was essentially deregulated between 1938 until post WWII (deregulated in the sense that some of the iron fist price control / wage control policies of 1930s were abandoned) there was a flood of capital that was previously tied up in Muni bonds and other tax avoidance instruments came back into business.

True. I'm not saying it was intentionally the way they figured to deal with unemployment. It was just interesting in a sarcastic way that unemployment hovered around 18% for years as FDR was supposedly saving us from the Great Depression, then we commit fully one fifth of our workforce to the army, unemployment goes down, and FDR gets praise. More a comment on ow easily fooled most people are.

I agree, FDR was more of a PR campaign than any actual results.

But make no mistake, economic woes and war are tied together like **** and stink. In the past it was about conquest. Kings would party until resources started to dry up, conquer some more land, get some ore gold and title and what not, and keep the party going. In our day and age its monetary policy first, military second. The spending is necessary to keep the money flowing and the inevitable collapse just out of sight. So, when all else fails, direct capital and production efforts into war making.

If this is true, I guess we can expect a major war in the next 5-20 years. Have you read any books that talk about the second part of what you said....monetary policy and war.....I'm curious about the whole concept.

[CDB]

Yeah, the Forgotten Man. I'll see if my library has Greedy Hand. I haven't read Rothbard and Higgs, but I'm open to all recommendations you have on good books to check out.

Rothbard: America's Great Depression
Higgs: Depression, War, and Cold War
Higgsl Crisis and Leviathan

The first two I consider must reads. Eye opening at the least.

I miswrote the part apart over-regulation freeing up capital. When business was essentially deregulated between 1938 until post WWII (deregulated in the sense that some of the iron fist price control / wage control policies of 1930s were abandoned) there was a flood of capital that was previously tied up in Muni bonds and other tax avoidance instruments came back into business.

I see, she's saying the relaxation of the war time restrictions finally allowed capital to flow. I agree.

I agree, FDR was more of a PR campaign than any actual results.

A good one too. Look how many people still believe he and the war 'got us out of the depression'. I mean, the ****ing thing lasted ten years and people think he 'helped' the situation. Still amazes me to this day.

If this is true, I guess we can expect a major war in the next 5-20 years. Have you read any books that talk about the second part of what you said....monetary policy and war.....I'm curious about the whole concept.

The Higgs books go into a bit, as does Rothbard in Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy. Basically it's monetary imperialism, or the defecit without tears. You get a dominant currency, inflate it, send it abroad, and other nations pyramid their currency and credit on top of it. In this way you get to inflate a hell of a lot without a strain on home reserves; no gold or dollars flowing out in other words because liabilities are never returned.

That ties in historically with war. Here it's good to read a little Hoppe in Democracy, the God that Failed. Historically war was waged for specific ends; territory, title, riches. Once aquired the war stopped and most importantly war time debt was paid down. War contrary to what most say is not an engine of economic growth but rather a destroyer of growth. It can't go on for very long without taxing the populace in the extreme, unless you can devise a system that essentialy lets you to "give without taking, to lend without borrowing and to acquire without paying," as Jacques Rueff put it about the gold exchange standard.

Fiat money is tied inexorably to welfare and warfare. Neither can persist for very long unless debt can be monetized.

[RobInKuwait]

I see, she's saying the relaxation of the war time restrictions finally allowed capital to flow. I agree.

Not even just war time restrictions. Many corporations and rich people put obscene amounts of capital in Municipal Bonds and other tax safe havens in the 1930s due to over-regulation and obscenely high taxes. This had the effect of holding down capital growth even before the War. FDR began loosing up these regulation when war stated and he actually had a vested interest in production in supplying his allies in Europe. He never had any real incentive to promote economic recovery prior to that, he just had the incentive to promote the idea that economic recovery was happening.

[nopeace]

If we nuke Iran we won't be able to roam around there cause of the Fallout right?

[dynomite]

Hey you two up there going back and forth about currencies. You have majorly hijacked this thread!!! But yeah the devaluation of the dolalr in the near future is why you should invest in commodities now. metals, oil, food...

As for my opinion on if we should start another war in Iran.....this has got to be a joke right. Our current 2 wars of changing entire populations are going marvelously. We should make it 3!

[youngandfree]

Iran just launched a missile today or yesterday that has range of Israel and US bases in Middle East. Does this change anyone's opinion on whether or not Iran is willing to do something offensively? I'm sure it has been said already, but NK launched a missile and Obama did jack squat about it. Hillary said on Greta Vansustren's talk show that she sent word she wanted to talk to them but didn't get a reply. She joked and said that since Greta is popular in NK, maybe someone high up there is watching the show. "Hey, we want to talk, give us a call." Total lack of backbone in the administration right now. We didn't do anything to NK at all, and Iran saw that and said I'll one up them and see if America will respond.

I don't think we should nuke them, but we should help protect Israel. Obama doesn't need to be threatening Israel for wanting the desire to protect themselves. If Israel wants to do a preemptive strike, that's their business. But we don't need to be threatening them if they do.

All in all, it's part of the master plan. The world isn't in our control, it's in God's. Check out a book called Epicenter by Joel Rosenburg, or any of his other books that talk about the events in the middle east and how they were written about in Revelation and other parts of the Bible. And no, it's not this Nostradamus BS predicting the WTC attack like people were spreading in 2001.

[nopeace]

Iran just launched a missile today or yesterday that has range of Israel and US bases in Middle East. Does this change anyone's opinion on whether or not Iran is willing to do something offensively? I'm sure it has been said already, but NK launched a missile and Obama did jack squat about it. Hillary said on Greta Vansustren's talk show that she sent word she wanted to talk to them but didn't get a reply. She joked and said that since Greta is popular in NK, maybe someone high up there is watching the show. "Hey, we want to talk, give us a call." Total lack of backbone in the administration right now. We didn't do anything to NK at all, and Iran saw that and said I'll one up them and see if America will respond.

I don't think we should nuke them, but we should help protect Israel. Obama doesn't need to be threatening Israel for wanting the desire to protect themselves. If Israel wants to do a preemptive strike, that's their business. But we don't need to be threatening them if they do.

All in all, it's part of the master plan. The world isn't in our control, it's in God's. Check out a book called Epicenter by Joel Rosenburg, or any of his other books that talk about the events in the middle east and how they were written about in Revelation and other parts of the Bible. And no, it's not this Nostradamus BS predicting the WTC attack like people were spreading in 2001.

Well since we have a bazillion way more effective missiles. I doubt we should even care. Israel has a ton of Nukes.

Using the bible for authorization of military action is not a very smart Idea.

[youngandfree]

I should have worded it differently. I agree. I didn't mean using the Bible as justification, I was referring to the fact that for so long America has been allies with Israel. For so long America has been blessed beyond measure compared to every other place on earth. I feel that it is a divine reason behind it. When the Bible talks about God destroying all the enemies of Israel, I hope our President is smart enough to stay on the right team. I'm more worried of Him than Iran.

[nopeace]

Good documentary, watch all eight parts.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjXaip5Foso"]YouTube - Iran is not the problem 1/8 (Why is the U.S. Government trying to start a war with Iran 2009)[/ame]

[roids1]

We can't afford another war right now. We have zero cash in the bank, two wars with no end in sight, and a president & congress doing their best to spend us into bankruptcy.

China isn't going to loan us the $ to flatten the country that supplies a great deal of their oil and Russia would be arming the **** out of the Iranians to punish us for arming the afghans in the 1980s. I say let Israel handle it.

[nopeace]

We can't afford another war right now. We have zero cash in the bank, two wars with no end in sight, and a president & congress doing their best to spend us into bankruptcy.

China isn't going to loan us the $ to flatten the country that supplies a great deal of their oil and Russia would be arming the **** out of the Iranians to punish us for arming the afghans in the 1980s. I say let Israel handle it.

Israel won't handle because they don't have the technology. They'll keep pressing the US to do it.

I say let Israel handle it as well, or just strike a deal with Iran.

[roids1]

Israel has nukes. I say let them test out their stuff over the skies of Tehran.