Re: dollar and universal money

[Jim Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris B. writes:
> As Jim indicates we do not have to be rigidly dogmatic about Marx's
> approach to claim that he wrote not a little about credit money and debt,
> and about capitalist crises.
>
> The point Jim makes about the hegemonic position of the US in global
> capitalism is important in current world politics. I suppose it is a small
> step towards demystifying gold.
>
> (Interesting that the price of gold has not yet risen significantly.)

gold prices rise when inflation is expected, no? if pen-l fears of
deflation are relevant, gold prices should fall. (And why does anyone
really care about gold prices? it seems more irrelevant than the Dow.)

> ... even if the majority of peoples and states of the world are not yet
> ready to abandon capitalism, they could begin to see the advantages of a
> world financial system that is a little more rational than relying on US
> hegemony.
>
> Although Marx did assume the gold standard, he analyses it as universal
> money, and one of the things that is needed now is a more rational form of
> universal money.
> To some extent capitalism is groping towards such an entity in that the
> Federal Reserve does consider to a degree its communications with other
> central banks and the overall shape of the global economy as part of its
> decisions. To some extent conceptual tools are emerging like baskets of
> currencies. There are also IMF special drawing rights.

Bancor?

> The US probably calcuates that is has several more decades before the
> dollar needs to be threatened in its role of universal money, by the renminbi.

?? the renminbi?

Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine