# The Collapse of the USA Possible?



## wayneL (2 September 2009)

Yes - according to Russian academic Igor Panarin. What a scary thought! 

I must admit, I don't discount the possibility, even if I think... hope it is highly unlikely. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html#articleTabs=article



> "There's a 55-45% chance right now that disintegration will occur," he says. "One could rejoice in that process," he adds, poker-faced. "But if we're talking reasonably, it's not the best scenario -- for Russia." Though Russia would become more powerful on the global stage, he says, its economy would suffer because it currently depends heavily on the dollar and on trade with the U.S.




Not many are taking him seriously, but not many would have believed what has happened in the last year beforehand.

**fingers crossed


----------



## bowman (2 September 2009)

California is almost broke and has been morally bankrupt for years.

That's two strikes for California. One more strike and I say hand it over to the Mexicans.


----------



## Sean K (2 September 2009)

There'll probably be a world war before hand, and at the moment, it's hard to see the US not prevailing.

After that, who knows.

Marc Faber has been saying that for a little while.


----------



## tech/a (2 September 2009)

Highly likely.
Its what we don't know or see that will bring it all down.
How many Ponzi schemes are really out there?

This has been pushed under the table.

http://www.cornerstoneri.com/comments/TrillionDollarSecret.htm

Still there!


----------



## Mr J (2 September 2009)

It's certainly possible, and it doesn't seem unlikely if they continue on the path they're on. War doesn't seem unreasonable, as it's expected that a wounded beast lash out in desperation. As US influence starts to wail more significantly, perhaps they'll resort to force.


----------



## theasxgorilla (2 September 2009)

Didn't the US invent Chapter 11, duh, hello...???  Just do business there and with them with your eyes open.  There one day, gone the next, and back again as something else... that's the American way.


----------



## wayno76 (2 September 2009)

Google video zeitgeist

This could be the start of another play by the real players.


----------



## explod (2 September 2009)

tech/a said:


> Highly likely.
> Its what we don't know or see that will bring it all down.
> How many Ponzi schemes are really out there?
> 
> ...




I am not saying anything Tech, I dont know much but from the books I have read the last few years it is a sad prospect for millions of ordinary people, not only in the US, the prospects will hurt all of us in one way or another.


----------



## Trembling Hand (2 September 2009)

Why does everything have to Collapse? People talk about the USD Collapsing all the time, never devaluing which is far more likely. People talk like there will be anarchy just around the corner, rioting hungry mobs burning down the Government and business infrastructure sending them back to the dark ages.

People like to use past outcomes to predict/guide future events. Have a look at the last blow up of a super power, Russia. They collapsed and hardly a dog missed a nail clipping here. And another 10-20 years they may be stronger than ever only 30 or so years later. Communism was much more of a ponzi joke than the non-free market Capitalist too big to fail US.

A more likely path is the UK example. Being by passed by a new player.


----------



## swm79 (2 September 2009)

theasxgorilla said:


> Didn't the US invent Chapter 11, duh, hello...???  Just do business there and with them with your eyes open.  There one day, gone the next, and back again as something else... that's the American way.




second that.... they want what THEY want but at the same time parade around trying to make you think they're doing it for you... meanwhile you're bent over a table with your pants around your ankles... and HEAVEN FORBID *THEY* find themselves in the same situation.

Hugo Chavez anyone? dont get me started


----------



## pointr (2 September 2009)

Trembling Hand has expressed an idea that has been in my head for a while. If the Net had been around as the British Empire was unravelling what would everyone had said. America has lived on borrowed money for too long and exported a lot of its manufacturing overseas, there has to be a reckoning. Economically Australia is in a better position than most being an exporter to some of the next economic superpowers


----------



## wayneL (2 September 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> Why does everything have to Collapse? People talk about the USD Collapsing all the time, never devaluing which is far more likely. People talk like there will be anarchy just around the corner, rioting hungry mobs burning down the Government and business infrastructure sending them back to the dark ages.
> 
> People like to use past outcomes to predict/guide future events. Have a look at the last blow up of a super power, Russia. They collapsed and hardly a dog missed a nail clipping here. And another 10-20 years they may be stronger than ever only 30 or so years later. Communism was much more of a ponzi joke than the non-free market Capitalist too big to fail US.
> 
> A more likely path is the UK example. Being by passed by a new player.



That has basically been my view... economic hegemony handed to China on a silver platter.

There are a few dynamics at play in the US however that make a collapse *possible* (though I still think... hope, improbable).

I'm always one to account for possibilities... prepare for the worst but hope for the best. But don't ever underestimate the Yanks - If they face reality (and I believe they will sometime soon), they will pull a rabbit out of a hat.


----------



## $20shoes (2 September 2009)

With the current banking system almost completely broken, and no one seemingly able to completely reinvent the rules for a new monetary system, the US remains completely exposed to any shock. Large scale  Ponzi schemes/derivatives unwinding would be a crippling blow right now.

All the government seems willing/able to do is to keep amassing larger amounts of debt. This is a path to tread if you've flushed out all the non-performing loans and you see a way of coping with this over the next decade or so. But the US still doesn't know what's around the corner. The US/UK are already in a position where they cannot hope to pay off their debt.  

From Bloomberg a couple of days ago - 

The U.S. added 111 lenders to its list of “problem banks,” a jump that suggests rising bank failures may force the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to deplete a reserve fund that shrank 40 percent this year.             A total of 416 banks with combined assets of $299.8 billion failed the FDIC’s grading system for asset quality, liquidity and earnings in the second quarter, the most since June 1994, the Washington-based FDIC said in a report today. 

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

The FDIC insures deposits at 8,195 institutions with $13.3 trillion in assets, including over 150 publicly traded U.S. lenders who own nonperforming loans that equal 5 percent or more of their holdings (What the?? even with lax  mark to market guidelines?)

The FDIC reported on Thursday that more than one out of four U.S. banks was unprofitable during the second quarter. 

Anyone for a deposit bailout in the next 18 months?


----------



## Taltan (2 September 2009)

Firstly the US exports more than us and thier household debts are lower so if they do collapse we would be in real trouble. 

Having said that looking at the Roman empire onwards it is incongruent for the world's superpower/s to not be the place where people enjoy the best standard of living. Currently the US (and Aus, Can etc) can sustain debt because basically people want to live there. As long as life is better in the US than China than millionnaires will be willing to put capital in the US and keep it afloat. 

Alternatively the only way China could reach US living standards would be to float their currency and lose the competetive advantage they currently enjoy. So its a catch 22.


----------



## Trembling Hand (2 September 2009)

$20shoes said:


> Large scale  Ponzi schemes/derivatives unwinding would be a crippling blow right now.




The Derivatives blow up as a furphy, a beat up by the tin hat nutters. 

It will be one of the many forgot mistakes of this opportunity. But why would you expect anything else. Few think most regurgitate.

Have a look at the evidence you have in your post after the above line? Derivatives involved???


----------



## $20shoes (2 September 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> The Derivatives blow up as a furphy, a beat up by the tin hat nutters.
> 
> It will be one of the many forgot mistakes of this opportunity. But why would you expect anything else. Few think most regurgitate.
> 
> Have a look at the evidence you have in your post after the above line? Derivatives involved???




Yes TH, I'm not talking about a systemic collapse in our monetary system - that's doomsday drivel and alarmist. (But our banking is seemingly broken right now).I'm suggesting that where we saw issues in hedging and credit default swaps earlier in the piece, we may yet see some further "unknown" risk. For instance, if you are propping up over 150 institutions with 5% non performing loans, you are betting that at some point you can fix these insolvent banks either by moving their debt out to a buyer etc. Bailout money does not make them solvent. Obviously the market has this factored in anyway, but where i'm coming from is that there is still  a lot of "unforseeables" still to play out in this arena, and I can see an opportunity for shock to the system.


----------



## $20shoes (2 September 2009)

$20shoes said:


> ...there is still  a lot of "unforseeables" still to play out in this arena.




Silly comment - everything is unforseeable! :
I guess we're talking about probabilities.


----------



## websman (2 September 2009)

Just outside my window, there are rioters and looters.  The dollar has collapsed...I am forced to steal food to survive.  oh yes...My country is doomed...I will suffer, for sure.

*NOT!!!!  LMFAO!!!!*

No...We're fine.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 September 2009)

The Roman empire took 200 years to collapse once the rot set in and Mexican's and Canadian's are hardly barbarians.

All the US needs is a couple of good Presidents. I think Obama will help unite the country and then we need another one following. Surely George Bush the lessor has a son waiting in the wings

What the USA desperately needs is a better media. Unfortunately they don'y have the BBC or ABC and the standard of reporting is unbelievably awful generally. Have you seen how the health policies are being reported??

I really hate the pandering to the dumb right, such as Sarah Palin saying heath care reform will lead to euthanasia and death panels! She should be laughed at, not taken seriously with bated breath.

http://sarahpalintruthsquad.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/palin-death-panels-smite-journalism/


----------



## wayneL (2 September 2009)

websman said:


> Just outside my window, there are rioters and looters.  The dollar has collapsed...I am forced to steal food to survive.  oh yes...My country is doomed...I will suffer, for sure.
> 
> *NOT!!!!  LMFAO!!!!*
> 
> No...We're fine.




Just think webs, another opportunity for the Confederacy


----------



## Trembling Hand (2 September 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> All the US needs is a couple of good Presidents. I think Obama will help unite the country.



 maybe 



Knobby22 said:


> Have you seen how the health policies are being reported??



 Yes and its splitting the country. So I don't think they will find much love there. Forget about BO leading them to Nirvana.


----------



## jancha (2 September 2009)

The Collapse of the USA possible?
 I think that it would effect us all globally if it got that bad so I don't think the rest of the world would let it happen. Debts would wiped clean if it got that bad otherwise there could be a war & that I think no one wants.


----------



## Real1ty (2 September 2009)

What happened in the Savings and Loans Crisis in the late 80's?

Didn't over 1000 Banks go under and the appointed underwriter of these savings go under as well?

Government came to the rescue, Recession followed and then things got back on track again eventually.


----------



## Mr J (2 September 2009)

> The Roman empire took 200 years to collapse once the rot set in and Mexican's and Canadian's are hardly barbarians.




Neither were the people that expanded through the Western Roman empire. The _Empire_ collapsed, but the civilisation did not, and it was simply factured off into separate kingdoms. It didn't decend into chaos, and I don't know of any historical example that did.



> All the US needs is a couple of good Presidents. I think Obama will help unite the country




A country requires more than a good leader, and it seems the jury is still out on Obama. Many people think he's doing a very poor job, and in my uninformed view seems to be a typical politician, just better in the popularity stakes.



> I think that it would effect us all globally if it got that bad so I don't think the rest of the world would let it happen. Debts would wiped clean if it got that bad otherwise there could be a war & that I think no one wants.




Enough is enough. Bars cut off drunks, so the world may cut off the US. Likely, the world will just move on from US dominance, just as the world moved on every time a previous power declined.


----------



## Happy (2 September 2009)

Russia fell apart so united states USA can fall apart too.
Bankrupt states can cause that other states will decide to pull out of the federation.

Do they must go forward together?


----------



## cuttlefish (2 September 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> Why does everything have to Collapse? People talk about the USD Collapsing all the time, never devaluing which is far more likely.
> 
> ...<edit>...
> 
> ...




I agree with this as well.  Even if the USD doesn't actually fall in price against other currencies it will effectively become like a protected currency, propped up artificially and thus become shunned as people/countries/businesses turn to some other sort of unmanipulated currency vehicle for value.  That could be gold but it could just as easily be another currency (is yen a possibility?) or some other paper that hasn't been considered yet (e.g. some kind of oil derivatives or who knows what - "credit notes for plastic animals made in china" ).  

In that scenario the dominant players in that currency will be the countries that are productive and able to service their debt or have little or no debt in the first place.  The US will have trouble exchanging their 'valuable' US dollars for this currency even though 'officially' it will have value against that currency. This is because nobody will actually be willing to exchange large amounts of the valuable currency for USD, but all USD holding countries/corporations will play the game and not sell down either because they won't want to see their 'value' destroyed.


----------



## Hend0 (2 September 2009)

wayno76 said:


> Google video zeitgeist
> 
> This could be the start of another play by the real players.




Just watched Zeitgeist I & II on google video - damn - isnt that rather eye opening. I'd known a little about some parts, ie - how the fractional reserve system worked for all its money & how it was winding up out of control - but the sections on religion and the comparisons & similarities it presented were insightful.

Hendo


----------



## Ageo (3 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> they will pull a rabbit out of a hat.




or shoot a shell out of a tank......

either way you cant possibly go on manipulating the fk out of the system and expect the market to react nicely.

Somethings gotta give eventually and you dont need to be a chief economist to see that one.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 September 2009)

Here is what a chief economist thinks, and he thinks some of you are deficit hysterics!!

Robert Reich was US secretary of labour from 1993 to 1997 and is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. 

September 3, 2009  The Age


"AT EVERY stage in the growth of the debt it has been seriously asserted by wise men that bankruptcy and ruin were at hand. Yet still the debt went on growing, and still bankruptcy and ruin were as remote as ever.'' So wrote great 19th-century British historian Lord Thomas Macaulay. He was referring to the English public debt, but he might as easily have been referring to the US in the 21st century.

Last week the White House forecast that deficits over the next 10 years were likely to be worse than had been expected and the same old group of deficit hysterics went ballistic. ''A deficit of $US9 trillion is $US30,000 for each man, woman and child in the US!'' Kabaam. ''Public debt will total $US17.5 trillion by 2019 - three-quarters of the entire economy!'' Kaboom. ''The number would send Reagan's stack of $US1000 bills into orbit!'' Zowee.

Can we please relax? Ten-year budget projections are notoriously wrong. Remember Ross Perot? He ran against Bill Clinton and the first George Bush in 1992, garnering enough votes to deny Clinton a majority. Perot based his campaign on deficit hysteria. He argued that the federal budget deficit was on track to end the world as we knew it. In fact, the growth of the economy from 1993 to 1998 reduced the deficit to zero. Neither Clinton's famous deficit-cutting nor Republican insistence on a balanced budget was primarily responsible; the deficit reached zero before most fiscal changes kicked in.

The numbers attached to deficits and debts take on meaning only in relation to something else. And the most important something else, in terms of what the nation can afford, is the size of the national economy. Pay close attention, in particular, to the debt-to-GDP ratio. True, that ratio is heading in the wrong direction - it's likely to reach 80 per cent by the end of 2010. That's high, but not compared with the 119 per cent it reached in 1945, after the ravages of depression and war.

Yet by the mid-1950s, the debt as a proportion of GDP had been tamed. How did that happen? Not mainly because of cuts in government spending. Yes, wartime spending had ended. But the most important change occurred in the denominator of the equation. Economic growth kicked in big time after the war, and reduced the debt as a proportion of the US economy to manageable levels.

The US has always reduced the debt-to-GDP ratio by expanding the economy. As Macaulay noted, that's also the way Britain has done it. GDP growth makes even large debts manageable. When the economy is cooking, more people have jobs and better wages. So they pay more taxes. And they require less unemployment assistance and other social insurance.

That's why it's so important now that the Government step in and run large deficits. Without large deficits this year and next, and perhaps even the year after, the economy doesn't have a prayer of getting back on a growth path. In that case, the debt-to-GDP ratio could really get ugly.

Which brings me to the only item in last week's White House budget report worth looking at. It predicts a deficit of nearly $US1.6 trillion in the 12 months to September 30. This number worries me not because it's so large, but because it's so small. I'd prefer a larger deficit this year.

The US economy is still mired in the worst depression since the Great Depression. Consumers are incapable of buying. Unemployment is soaring. Businesses are still not purchasing or investing, for lack of customers. Exports are still dead, because much of the global economy remains weak. So the purchaser of last resort - the Government - has to create larger deficits if the economy is to get anywhere near capacity and start to grow again.

That growth, by the way, will be faster and stronger if the nation invests in infrastructure, schools and the environment - which is exactly what Barack Obama is trying to do. The stimulus that's now kicking in, as well as the long-term spending budget, is focused on just these public investments.

Everyone who has looked at America's crumbling infrastructure knows how badly it suffers from decades of deferred maintenance: bridges collapsing, pipes bursting, sewers backed up, highways impassable, public transport in disrepair. Many schools are falling apart. And unless the US reduces its greenhouse gases, the world is heading for lots more trouble.

In this respect, national budgets are like family budgets. It's dumb for an indebted family to borrow more money to take a world cruise. But it's smart even for an indebted family to borrow money to send their kids to college. So too with the Obama budget. Public investments, just like family investments, build future wealth. They allow faster growth. They make the debt-to-GDP ratio even lower and more manageable over time.

Yet deficit hysteria might jeopardise these investments. It is already threatening Obama's goal of universal health care. The hysterics are screaming that the likely cost of $US1 trillion over the next 10 years is impossible to afford. Yet almost every expert agrees that without universal health care the nation's future health-care tab will be far higher. Those without health insurance will continue to wait until their health problems become so bad that they have to use emergency rooms, at huge cost to the system.

And pharmaceutical companies will continue to jack up their prices until the costs of America's large health programs for the poor and the aged - Medicaid and Medicare - are out of control. If ObamaCare includes an option capable of negotiating lower costs from drug makers and medical providers, it will tame these costs.

Look at the record of the past 75 years - how the US got out of the Great Depression, and the critical role that public investments, such as the interstate highway system, have played in speeding up growth - and you have ample evidence that the deficit hysterics are wrong. They

were wrong when they persuaded Clinton to chuck a large part of his investment agenda (the nation is now paying the price), and they're wrong now. 

GUARDIAN

Robert Reich was US secretary of labour from 1993 to 1997 and is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley.


----------



## weatherbill (3 September 2009)

only if they let it happen mate....

its all rigged


----------



## weatherbill (3 September 2009)

we still have dollar hedgemony= everyone forced to buy US dollar in order to buy oil, so until that is removed or downgraded from more oil moving out of the dollar, there won't be a total collapse.....at least that's the way its suppsoed to be, but the powewrs that be could innitiate a collapse by pulling alot fo moola fromt he system, like they did with bear sterns last fall


----------



## jono1887 (3 September 2009)

weatherbill said:


> we still have dollar hedgemony= everyone forced to buy US dollar in order to buy oil, so until that is removed or downgraded from more oil moving out of the dollar, there won't be a total collapse.....at least that's the way its suppsoed to be, but the powewrs that be could innitiate a collapse by pulling alot fo moola fromt he system, like they did with bear sterns last fall




for that to happen, we would need a new standard currency... not sure what we would revert to at the moment. There really isnt any replacement for the USD yet... we dont quite trust the chinese enough i think


----------



## Buckeroo (3 September 2009)

Real1ty said:


> What happened in the Savings and Loans Crisis in the late 80's?
> 
> Didn't over 1000 Banks go under and the appointed underwriter of these savings go under as well?
> 
> Government came to the rescue, Recession followed and then things got back on track again eventually.




That's true and a lot of the big companies that had those debts collapsed along with the banks, correcting the debt imbalance.

I think this time, the difference is that consumers which usually drive growth, still to have large debts. 

At the moment, Governments are generating much of the current growth, but when they withdrawal the big question will be, are consumers able to take the reins especially in light of rising interest rates & taxes?

Cheers


----------



## shortlist (4 September 2009)

"The Collapse of the USA Possible?"

Yes and No. There is a tendency in human psychology to fear the worst, and this is no exception. There is a lot of talk right now about the imminent collapse of the US, but this is not going to happen. I answered "yes and no" because yes, it is possible for any state to collapse, but no, not the US any time soon. 

It is still far and away the most powerful nation on earth. In fact it is several times more powerful than its next few rivals all put together. Economically, it has had difficult times before and like other Anglo-Saxon economies it is absolutely ruthless when ensuring its own survival and development. Writing off the US is a foolish pastime, IMO. My view on the current crisis is that the US will emerge with a lower standard of living for many of its citizens, but still decades ahead of its nearest rivals in both economic and military terms.

Let's look at those rivals:

1. Russia. A failed and directionless state dependent on oil and gas exports for its prosperity. It also has a seriously dangerous depopulation problem. It has more nukes than the US, but their C&C is questionable, and the rest of its armed forces, despite enjoying a recent upgrade (oil money) are in a wretched state compared with the US.

2. China. Despite all the hype, China remains a corrupt totalitarian state with truly abominable civil liberties and a seriously scary demographic problem thanks to its state-enforced family planning laws. It is totally dependent on the Western consumer buying its products, and the absence of a Chinese middle class for at least another 20 years means this dependence will continue. Militarily, the Chinese are expanding at an alarming rate, much like the USSR did, but this is to prop up its economy. It has no other reason to do so and the US cannot claim hegemony over Asia anyway.

3. EU. The EU has serious problems. First, indigenous Europeans are disappearing _en masse _from the continent. Part of this reason is the large numbers moving to Australia, Canada and NZ, but the main reason is that they are reproducing well below replacement ratio, with only 1.4 children per couple. The population of the EU is increasing however due to largely uncontrolled Islamic immigration from North Africa, Turkey and the Asian subcontinent. Add this to its bloated and unaffordable welfare programmes and its lack of natural resources, and it's clear to see the EU presents no threat to the US.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (5 September 2009)

> its lack of natural resources



Economically those countries with resources more than others tend to never progress or become inneficient or don't progress as well as they could. many countries without resources do much better and quickly.


----------



## GumbyLearner (5 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Economically those countries with resources more than others tend to never progress or become inneficient or don't progress as well as they could. many countries without resources do much better and quickly.




So true.

Take Japan, Korea or Singapore as a couple of classic examples of the above.


----------



## GumbyLearner (5 September 2009)

China has 7% of World GDP and Euro/US has 70%!

Collapse? NO

Faith in currency? MAYBE


----------



## Buckeroo (5 September 2009)

The collapse of the US is inevitable just like other great empires & IMO not far off. 

It will begin with the unraveling of derivatives & the first sign may be gold breaking the $1000 barrier. When this happens it be a signal of loss of confidence in the US dollar.

And for a replacement of the US dollar...what about gold & silver, maybe in the short term?

As more US dollars flood the world, there will be a time when the dollar will no longer be acceptable for payment of commodities. Something will have to be found quickly and I reckon gold & silver will be the only reliably valued asset that can be easily exchange.

Sounds far fetched? maybe but whats the alternative if the US collapses?

Cheers


----------



## Trembling Hand (5 September 2009)

Buckeroo said:


> The collapse of the US is inevitable just like other great empires & IMO not far off.
> 
> It will begin with the unraveling of derivatives & the first sign may be gold breaking the $1000 barrier. When this happens it be a signal of loss of confidence in the US dollar.




Arh!! Another that has swallowed the tin hat end of the world because of the $45736754838 tril dollars of Derivatives BS!!

Just run us through that again so we can understand it.

LOL.


----------



## shortlist (7 September 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> So true.
> 
> Take Japan, Korea or Singapore as a couple of classic examples of the above.




All totally reliant on the resources commodity countries. Japan even went to war over it, and would do again. Singapore's wealth derives from its money markets and tourism, both of which are driven by larger economies and resource nations.


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 September 2009)

*500 More Banks to Fail By End of 2010: Wilbur Ross*

By: JeeYeon Park
News Associate

http://www.cnbc.com/id/32657466

The list of failed bank continues to grow as the FDIC’s troubled bank list currently stands at 416 troubled banks. Wilbur Ross, chairman and CEO of WL Ross & Co. explained that he expects to see further trouble ahead for banks.

“I’m not surprised that the [FDIC’s] list is continuing to grow,” Ross told CNBC. “I think there’s going to be at least 500 more banks fail between now and end of next year.”

Ross said commercial real estate is the currently the biggest problem for banks as opposed to residential.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (8 September 2009)

Unless there is a run on a bank that no other bank is willing to support, then I see no reason for a bank to fold. Banks are profitable businesses regardless of liabilities.


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Unless there is a run on a bank that no other bank is willing to support, then I see no reason for a bank to fold. Banks are profitable businesses regardless of liabilities.




Runs have already begun in the US Snake!

It looks like competition to a great degree has been reduced in the US.

Look for more stimulus packages, then we will see less US banks and less competition within the US Banking sector.


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 September 2009)

I wonder if the guy who wrote this has a tin foil hat. :dunno: 

How on earth did he get a job at a major newspaper?  

*UN wants new global currency to replace dollar*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ts-new-global-currency-to-replace-dollar.html

By Edmund Conway, Economics Editor
Published: 6:45PM BST 07 Sep 2009

The dollar should be replaced with a global currency, the United Nations has said, proposing the biggest overhaul of the world's monetary system since the Second World War. 

In a radical report, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has said the system of currencies and capital rules which binds the world economy is not working properly, and was largely responsible for the financial and economic crises.

It added that the present system, under which the dollar acts as the world's reserve currency , should be subject to a wholesale reconsideration.


----------



## Nyden (8 September 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> I wonder if the guy who wrote this has a tin foil hat. :dunno:
> 
> How on earth did he get a job at a major newspaper?
> 
> ...




I'd be happier with a few continental currencies instead. The Euro, the Amero, the Australasio p?


----------



## satanoperca (8 September 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> I wonder if the guy who wrote this has a tin foil hat. :dunno:




He must have as that doesn't make sense. A world economy shackled to a single country that elected George Bush for two terms and within that country a single company that can cause a global meltdown. 

A world without America thinking it is superior to everything that inhabitants this incredible planet, the only conclusion is war is imminent. 

Tin hat all the way.


----------



## Ato (8 September 2009)

Largely agree with TA & Wayne in post #12.



GumbyLearner said:


> China has 7% of World GDP and Euro/US has 70%!
> 
> Collapse? NO
> 
> Faith in currency? MAYBE




I'm not sure if China is as low as that. Also while the US does have currently a large %, it is mainly all borrowed money (from China), if I'm not mistaken. That is very, very different from if it was US own savings.


----------



## Macquack (8 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Unless there is a run on a bank that no other bank is willing to support, then *I see no reason for a bank to fold*. Banks are profitable businesses regardless of liabilities.




How then do you explain the 104 US banks that have failed in the last 12 months?



> It seems that banks failures related to subprime mortgages are cooling down and *banks are failing for the age-old reason in the banking industry …  loans that go bad*, especially construction loans.




Bank Failures 0f 2009
http://wallstnation.com/banks-bankrupt-sept-09072009

Bank Failures in Brief  
http://www.fdic.gov/BANK/HISTORICAL/BANK/index.html


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (8 September 2009)

Macquack said:


> How then do you explain the 104 US banks that have failed in the last 12 months?
> 
> Bank Failures 0f 2009
> http://wallstnation.com/banks-bankrupt-sept-09072009
> ...




The word was "unless".


----------



## Macquack (9 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> The word was "unless".




Unless the bank that folds is a 'ponzi' scheme that the other 'ponzi' schemers dont want to support. 

'Ponzi' schemes are also very profitable businesses regardless of liabilities (until they are exposed).


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 September 2009)

The collapse of the USA is more than possible.

Many are drug or alcohol addicted.
Many are very obese.
Many are godbotherers.
Many are poor.
Many are indecently and undeservedly rich.
Much of their industry is around syphilitic entertainers, celebrities,  comedians and commentators.

The true workers of the USA are marginalised

And their air hostesses are rude and not as attractive as ours.

In fact their air hostesses are downright rude and **** (rhymes with snugly)

However the rest, the forgotten, "silent majority" are good hardworking people

So although it is possible, I think it is not probable and they will pull through.

I like Americans.

gg


----------



## jono1887 (9 September 2009)

Macquack said:


> Unless the bank that folds is a 'ponzi' scheme that the other 'ponzi' schemers dont want to support.
> 
> 'Ponzi' schemes are also very profitable businesses regardless of liabilities (until they are exposed).




arent banks essentially legal ponzi schemes :
take your money, lend out 95% of it.. gets redeposited to them... lend out 95% of that 95% and round and round the credit goes..


----------



## alwaysLearning (9 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> That has basically been my view... economic hegemony handed to China on a silver platter.
> 
> There are a few dynamics at play in the US however that make a collapse *possible* (though I still think... hope, improbable).
> 
> I'm always one to account for possibilities... prepare for the worst but hope for the best. But don't ever underestimate the Yanks - If they face reality (and I believe they will sometime soon), they will pull a rabbit out of a hat.




A lot of people mention China as the next super power. What about India? Do you guys think they could be a bit of a dark horse through all of this?


----------



## Uncle Festivus (10 September 2009)

The Senate must move legislation to raise the federal *debt* limit beyond $12.1 trillion by mid-October, a move viewed as necessary despite protests about the record levels of red ink.

The move will highlight the nation’s *record debt*, which has been central to Republican attacks against Democratic congressional leaders and President Barack Obama. The year’s deficit is expected to hit a *record* $1.6 trillion.           
 ..................

Congress has little choice. *Failing to raise the cap could lead the nation to default in mid-October, when the debt is expected to exceed its limit*, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said. In August, Geithner asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to increase the debt limit as soon as possible.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/57493-senate-must-raise-debt-ceiling-above-12t


----------

