De facto Power of the Dollar

["John Gelles" <indexed-savings@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"As long as there are sovereign nations who
choose to issue their own currencies rather than
agree to a world-wide standard currency, we can-
not expect to avoid those problems [i.e., problems
associated with a de facto standard, like the US$,
-- and how it may favor its sovereign controller].
The political hurdles to achieve a world bank with
a single currency are too high [to be contemplated
by]... any but the most optimistic."
        -- William Hummel

The power of the sovereign nation controlling the
US$, to monetize its dollar debts -- if it must -- is
singled out by Henry Liu as evidence of weakness
of the rest of the world to finance local prosperities.

Yet annual surveys reveal that higher living stan-
dards than its own, prevail outside the USA. And
we know the day will come when international
trade will largely be financed by non-US$ money.

Hummel may imply that an "eartho" might some
day be better money than a $, yen or euro. This,
in turn, implies that central banking can be di-
vorced from the sovereign strategic interests of
continental super-powers -- and that a United
Nations organization could inform such interests
on behalf of the world's people.  Maybe so.

Meanwhile, the US crusade, to reduce world
terrorism and the threat of Islamic fascism, has
raised the budgetary spending needs of the USA
well beyond its power to tax and borrow money.

It is compelled to monetize, today, tomorrow's
war (crusade) production.  It appears unwilling
to do so.  So it waits.  The result will most
likely be political instability within the USA.
Constancy of strategic purpose will be lost.

In that event, the crusade will have to find
other sponsors, or the need for it may even dis-
appear.  After all, other continental super-powers
may easily see the need to minimize terrorism
and to help Islamic fascism go away, more or
less, the way red fascism did in the recent past.

John Gelles