Request for comment: Collapse of the U. S. A.

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> New Nexus, your doomsday scenario was based upon

> the fact that China rejects use of Special Drawing

> Rights and would destroy Society as we know it to

> prevent their use.

>

> Are you now changing your mind?

>

> I'm reassured that finally you accept that SDR is

> not a currency, but a loan system from a basket of

> currencies. And of course the devaluation of the

> US$ through QE is something I explicitly recognize

> and support. There is no surprise that China are

> unenthusiastic about it, but that's not the same

> as the end of the world.

>

> Turns out I seem to understand what I'm talking

> about eh?

>

> Pray tell, what else have you changed your mind

> about? ;-)

And china will reject it, when they find that they cannot negotiate favorable or fair transformation of the SDR.(Into a reserve unit)

Given that the IMF and bank for international settlement will be the prime movers and shakers in this new reserve, how could china get a fair deal?

Lots have already happened sense 2009, UN and IMF are and will remain the preserve of North America and EU.

China may want to think about the saying ?Be careful what you wish for? or are they already thinking about it?

[New Nexus]

Ps.

SDR is a currency.

If the IMF can and has - via SDR print into being $250 billion with QE, and that in turn can effect markets, that is a currency. For years the IMF did not have this power.

No change of mind, no capitulation, no surrender.

[Huguenot]

Yet more relentless negative speculation on issues of which you demonstrate a very poor understanding.

It is clear that you 'cannot see how China could get a fair deal' because you don't understand the mechanisms or the motivations.

Lots has indeed happened, and lots will happen, and your silly apocalypse fantasy will continue to be pointless dramatising and scare-mongering.

[Huguenot]

Regarding whether on not the SDR is a currency, please read this factsheet on SDR from the International Monetary Fund.

The IMF created and own the SDR system - so they should be the ones who know what it is, right?

Let me quote it, just so you're absolutely clear"

"The SDR is neither a currency, nor a claim on the IMF. Rather, it is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members."

Shall we consider that the last word on this issue?

It doesn't surprise me that you think that you can decide what SDRs are, but it'll just go into the great pool of fabricated claims that you've made, that prove to be unsubstantiated, and in the end wrong.

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yet more relentless negative speculation on issues

> of which you demonstrate a very poor

> understanding.

>

> It is clear that you 'cannot see how China could

> get a fair deal' because you don't understand the

> mechanisms or the motivations.

>

> Lots has indeed happened, and lots will happen,

> and your silly apocalypse fantasy will continue to

> be pointless dramatising and scare-mongering.

You cannot construct a rebuttal, only scurry off down your rabbet hole of denial.

Huguenot?s paradigm, if I cannot see it ? it?s not happening.

?Only a fool walks into the future backwards.?

[Huguenot]

@NN: What rebuttal do I need beyond proving what I have already - it's you who's making extraordinary claims without any substantiation. It's you who is persistently making assertions that turn out to be incorrect.

China is already a voting member of the IMF, and controls approximately the same number of votes (around 4%) as UK, France, Germany or Japan.

The US only controls 16% of votes, so is in no way able to call the shots. It's all very equitable, and apart from the usual jockeying for position trundles along quite nicely.

The only thing you can see is your own crazed vision of apocalypse - the only forecast that I make is that we'll muddle through as we always do. That's not denial, that's insight backed by history.

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @NN: What rebuttal do I need beyond proving what I

> have already - it's you who's making extraordinary

> claims without any substantiation. It's you who is

> persistently making assertions that turn out to be

> incorrect.

>

> China is already a voting member of the IMF, and

> controls approximately the same number of votes

> (around 4%) as UK, France, Germany or Japan.

>

> The US only controls 16% of votes, so is in no way

> able to call the shots. It's all very equitable,

> and apart from the usual jockeying for position

> trundles along quite nicely.

>

> The only thing you can see is your own crazed

> vision of apocalypse - the only forecast that I

> make is that we'll muddle through as we always do.

> That's not denial, that's insight backed by

> history.

China has only just within the last few years been invited / corralled into the juicy meetings and international steering groups.

Once they realize they are being stitched up, what do you think they are going to do?

How to piss-off china in two moves, (QE) and Libya.

Sorry I forgot one more, US bases

[Yahira77]

Yahira77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Psychology is the mentor factor when governing on

> how to revive the economy and prevetn further

> losses.

[Huguenot]

@NN 'Pissing people off' is not the same thing as creating an apocalypse.

As of this year, and proportionate to the size and influence of their economy, China will become the third largest vote within the IMF, and have four 'emerging' markets (with India, Brazil and Russia) in the top 10.

This isn't being 'stitched up', this is gettting their fair dues.

This is how compromises happen, this is how the world works.

This isn't the collapse of society - just a more equtable and practical model.

You're just thrashing about to find catastrophic problems where none exist.

Stop reading bullshit US bulletin boards mate.

[StraferJack]

once again...

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

[StraferJack]

NN has just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. He reckons it's going to go 100% failure in 72 hours.

[New Nexus]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> NN has just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. He

> reckons it's going to go 100% failure in 72

> hours.

Will I dream?

[StraferJack]

yeah, but you'll have nightmares

[Santerme]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @NN: What rebuttal do I need beyond proving what I

> have already - it's you who's making extraordinary

> claims without any substantiation. It's you who is

> persistently making assertions that turn out to be

> incorrect.

>

> China is already a voting member of the IMF, and

> controls approximately the same number of votes

> (around 4%) as UK, France, Germany or Japan.

>

> The US only controls 16% of votes, so is in no way

> able to call the shots. It's all very equitable,

> and apart from the usual jockeying for position

> trundles along quite nicely.

>

> The only thing you can see is your own crazed

> vision of apocalypse - the only forecast that I

> make is that we'll muddle through as we always do.

> That's not denial, that's insight backed by

> history.

It has moved passed boredom and spiraled into ennui.

Your right, but it is pointless now.

In my humble opinion.

[LadyDeliah]

If China and other players do get more power in the IMF or World Bank, it follows that the US will have less power. In the past the US used both of these institutions to secure US commercial advantage around the world. If their power is lessened, their commercial advantage is also likely to be reduced.

In my opinion, the US are facing multiple economic catastrophes and the ripple effect of these are bound to affect is in the UK.

The US may survive, but I think the problems they are facing are monumental and I wouldn't put money on it.

[StraferJack]

what do you think not surviving might entail?

[mockney piers]

How does an erosion of competitive advantage in one sentence suddenly become a binary prognostication of survival in the next one?

You're all bonkers frankly.

End of empire isn't always catastrophic you know. Britain just got a bit of a self-image problem.

God even the Western Roman empire actually suffered comapratively little and had much more in the way of continuity whilst muddling through bleeding into slow social change rather than any sort of cataclysm, though Gibson reading 'new nexus' will probably claim otherwise, and throw in something about moral decline ;)

[New Nexus]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If China and other players do get more power in

> the IMF or World Bank, it follows that the US will

> have less power. In the past the US used both of

> these institutions to secure US commercial

> advantage around the world. If their power is

> lessened, their commercial advantage is also

> likely to be reduced.

>

> In my opinion, the US are facing multiple economic

> catastrophes and the ripple effect of these are

> bound to affect is in the UK.

>

> The US may survive, but I think the problems they

> are facing are monumental and I wouldn't put money

> on it.

What has been the US economic power, been based upon, it?s might is right war machine.

Now take a look at US base movements across the globe, to secure said economic power.

Can you see a pattern yet?

[Moos]

Oh God. This thread is becoming like a long-running family feud, rumbling on for generations with its origins lost in time, reduced to sniping & chilly requests to pass the butter.

In spite of Huguenot's noble efforts to retain some sense in the discussion it has lost any purpose. Marmora Man called it some time ago.

[StraferJack]

I think you'll find I called it first, back on page one. *sniff*

[LadyDeliah]

Sorry, should have clarified, may survive as any kind of economic power. I doubt it though.

[mockney piers]

"may survive as any kind of economic power. I doubt it though."

400 odd million in a country with good infrastructure, good education, massively influential culture and cutting edge technological research institutions, will probably do ok.

If you mean it will lose global hegemony I'm inclined to agree.

If you mean it will have suffer the social consequences of the loss of global hegemony and a global economic system biased in its favour, then I'm inclined to agree.

But it ain't going anywhere fast.

The world is going to have to adjust to a more equitable distribution and consumption of its resources, but that won't bring about catastrophe.

All having to make do with the finite resources we have left is a much more important issue than farting on about fucking derivatives.

[LadyDeliah]

You may be right Mockers.

I am a bit of a pessimist, but it may not be a rapid change.

I hope the change will be more gradual and peaceful, but there will have to be change, especially if we add in the ecological crises facing us too.

[mockney piers]

For starters they could pay a realistic amount to fill up their gas guzzling cars, start investing their reduced tax income into better public transport infrastructure and repairing all that lovely stuff they built under the new deal that's falling apart these days.

It's all a very long way away from civil wars, juntas and the utter rubbish that the OP predicted.

If sensible discussion is going to be done though I say lets start a new thread and let those with a semblance of intelligence abandon this thread to the loony fringes.

[ibilly99]

Oi Hugenot this is a local forum for local people by living in Singapore you've obviously voted with your feet and given this country the brush off can't you bug the Singapore Expats Forum with your carefully nuanced erudition. No taxation without representation.