美元泡沫2000早結束了( 泡沫崩潰後的結局)

來自 證券說 黑 著 (http://ckfstock.blogspot.com/2011/05/2000_31.htmlc)

貨幣的歷史中清楚告訴我們，這世界上沒有一個無商品支持的紙幣可以長命，過去沒有，現在沒有，未來也不會有。所以美元崩潰其實是預料的事，實不應該大驚小怪，視為異端邪說。

無商品支持的貨幣，本質上並沒有問題，但現實中我們不可能找到有智慧的人長期管理它，所以最後一定會走上歷史上紙幣滅亡的相同道路──濫印和貶值。

「美元紙幣泡沫」其實和以前法國的「密西西比泡沫」是一樣貨色。就是以無真實價值的紙張替代金銀成為貨幣，然後通過大量發行造成紙幣貶值，推高資產價格，鼓動低息借貸，壓低儲蓄率，讓人民背負超高的未來債務來獲得眼前的物質滿足，給人一種富裕的美好感覺。

可當人民無法繼續再支持債務和消費的增長的時候，雖然美國葛林斯潘將利率降至1%，讓美國人民更進一步，竟然可以抵押債務（房貸）來支持消費，也只是夠苟延殘喘多幾年而已。

美國人民的透支消費，所形成的貿易赤字流入外國手中，外國又擔心自己貨幣匯率升值，所以被迫將自己賺取的美元用來購買美國資產，如債券、股票之類…達到美元循環的回流。

可根本還是在於美國承受債務的極限能力，尤其民間已經達到極點，所以至今美國貿易赤字無法回到高峰時期的6000億美元，外國央行借給美國的錢也無法恢復到高峰時期的11000億美元。

在資金不足以維持「美元紙幣泡沫」下，美聯儲才走向最後一招，自己開動印鈔機，將「債務貨幣化」，一個國家如果走到「債務貨幣化」，局勢都是非常嚴重的，只是被金融寡頭控制的媒體故意淡化它的嚴重性而已。

正常情況下的貨幣數據方面，M1大於M0，M2大於M1，M3大於M2。可目前M0竟然比M1還多上1/3，這已經不是正常的貨幣政策了，而是亂印鈔票了！

美 國國債市場的運轉基礎依然是美元將永遠保持全球基準貨幣這一假設。例如﹐商學院教給學生的仍是說﹐10年期美國國債利率是「無風險利率」﹐過去一百多年的 確如此﹐但這一切是建立在「美國時代」的基礎上。可實際上「美國時代」早就已經週身病痛了！美國問題其實比希臘還糟糕，只是因為它的美元目前還是國際貨 幣，使它能可以靠這「江湖地位」暫時維持多一段時間而已。

觀察歷史的法國「密西西比泡沫」，當其發行的Banque Royale Notes紙幣所造成的虛假繁榮破裂後，結果是什麼？

Banque Royale Notes回歸它本來的初始價值──「零」。除無法大量生產的自然資源的商品外，其餘依附紙幣上漲的東西全部貶值。

美元創造的紙幣泡沫早在1999/2000年已經破裂了，現在仍處於裂痕擴大中，可為何很多人察覺不到？

那是因為我們習慣看以美元角度作為衡量價格標準的表面資產價格，若我們轉為黃金這真正的貨幣，或者通膨的角度看，就會像照妖鏡一樣，將這泡沫破裂趨勢照得一清二楚，原形畢露。

因為這40年來，世界經濟的表面數字增長很大部分來自印鈔票的緣故，尤其美國這40年來，GDP增長13倍，股市增長15倍，債務卻增長34倍，這全拜增發40餘倍鈔票的結果。

當「美元紙幣泡沫」完全崩潰後，會發生以下情形：


1. 貨幣危機
隨著美國聯邦政府的債務像「龐氏騙局」那樣，越來越難維持，美元價值會不斷下跌，爆發「貨幣危機」。唯一解救之道就是進行超大型的財政改革和債務重組，讓美元兌黃金貶值並恢復金本位，才可穩定市場對美元的信心。

1930 年代美國大蕭條的時候，之所以沒有爆發「貨幣危機」，那是因為美國走的是金本位，美元背後都有黃金作支持的緣故。但是現在的美元完全只是靠政府信用支持， 現在的美國政府越來越沒有信用，你認為未來美元還值多少錢？換成是你，你會收這一直貶值的貨幣嗎？聰明人早就將它換成金銀或外國貨幣了！

如果任由美元崩潰，美國這個國家就完了！所以比較起痛苦的債務重組，老老實實的還錢，都好過自己國家的貨幣崩潰吧！



2.債市崩潰
孳息率暴漲，只有業務強穩，債務不多的公司債可以活下來。



3.股市崩盤
美 國股市多年來其實是靠通貨膨脹推高的，當泡沫破裂，此基礎就不在，因為債市和經濟的崩潰，股市也難于倖免。不過同樣的，業務穩健，特別擁有不少海外業務， 又債務不高，具備強大競爭力的公司可以挨過來，只是過程不輕鬆而已，尤其是面臨股價暴跌。股市中傷害最大的是金融股，可以逆勢而上的可能只有資源股。



4. 600兆衍生產品的風險
唯一難以預測的就是美國銀行業創造的600兆衍生產品，會引發怎樣的危機，美國銀行業會有不少面臨債務重組，過去作為世界金融中心的紐約會陷入長期低迷。



5. 人口老化危機
「美 元紙幣泡沫」崩潰會使美國經濟虛假的繁榮破裂，加上人口老化的加劇，7600萬「嬰兒潮」的退休，而過去美國制造大量的通貨膨脹和財政缺口，已經侵蝕這些 「嬰兒潮」的退休收入，美國會因為應付這些人的「社保系統」和「醫療保障」等問題而焦頭燗額，沒有20年經濟都難以恢復過去的活力。



6.外國被迫痛苦轉型
過去依賴美國市場的外國會受到嚴重的經濟打擊，其貨幣兌美元會出現升值，但兌黃金貶值。唯經濟結構健全者，可以擺脫對美國的依賴，被迫痛苦轉型，重新建立一個比現在更好的經濟模式。



7.國際貨幣體系瓦解
「美 元紙幣泡沫」崩潰也就是美元本位的國際貨幣體系瓦解。世界會陷入群雄割據的狀態，眼下最有可能的就是建立一個有金銀支持的聯合國貨幣，或者幾個區域的聯合 貨幣。因為「美元紙幣泡沫」崩潰也意味著信用紙幣的失敗，所以世界不可能會回到信用紙幣體系。加上崩潰所帶來的嚴重通貨膨脹，會促使世界各國以穩定物價為 第一要務，而非經濟成長，黃金就是最好的遏制通膨的工具。

雖然目前世界各國在探討未來國際貨幣體系的時候，說多作少，說回歸金本位也不 多，那是因為美元現在還沒崩潰的緣故。可當美元不斷貶值下，世界各國總有一天會被「逼上梁山」。而且它們也會發現建立一個無金銀的紙幣體系根本就是天方夜 譚。即使使用SDR，以各國的貨幣的若干權重集合起來的一種貨幣，也會面臨難以協調各國的貨幣政策的問題，最直接簡單的就是以金銀這些真正的國際貨幣作為 控制SDR發行量的閘門。



如果美國不大幅削減支出的話，很可能出現債務違約；而這違約將不是傳統的方式，而是通過通脹、貨幣貶值和負實際利率來違約。

美元作為全球的儲備貨幣已經接近70年了，這時間幾乎等於一生人，所以造成某些人覺得美元「萬能」的原因之一。當其他國家政府需要持有某種貨幣作為準備時，他們大多會選擇持有美元。因此，有些人說美國把世界「美元化」了。

當局勢動盪的時候，很多人不假思索就說美元會成為其避風港，可當美國發生動盪的時候呢？什麼東西可以成為避風港？你們仔細想過這問題沒有？

紙幣創造的榮景結束，這也就是為何我投資黃金白銀的原因。

1149年出版的一本名為《鑄幣論》的書中，提到中國的歷史學家馬端臨說：「紙幣絕對不是貨幣，而僅能充當存在於金屬或者產品中之價值的代表符號，政府期望將紙幣作為真正的錢幣，這種奇思妙想就是錯誤的。」

莫里斯探究了過去1/4世纪的貸款狂潮，“若錢是免费的，借錢也就没有成本了……于是，聰明的貸款人就會不斷地把錢借出去，直到無人再借為止”。 無人再借其實也就表示經濟因為背負高債務，被壓垮了！

可是債務形成的繁榮泡沫在崩潰前，很少人可以發現到，這是因為泡沫几乎总能和經濟增长挂上边。

除非奇蹟發生，美國經濟忽然恢復活力，一切回到2000年前的水平，不然美聯儲會一直印鈔票，至到通貨膨脹失控為止。

Headed for a ‘Gold Standard System' by 2014 - Ian Gordon

80 Years on from the Great Depression, Ian Gordon reckons financial cycles suggest we are due for another collapse, but this time even worse. Gold and gold stocks may provide protection. Gold Report interview.

Author: Zig Lambo

Posted: Wednesday , 25 May 2011

KENWOOD, CA (THE GOLD REPORT) -

The Gold Report: Good morning Ian. Thanks for taking the time to bring us up to date with your current thoughts about the economic situation and on specific companies you think our readers might be interested in learning about today. When you spoke with The Gold Report in January, you expressed your thoughts on where things were headed. Can you give us an idea of what you think people should do with their financial investments now in order to protect their assets? What changes do you see, and what do you think now in light of what's happened since January?

Ian Gordon: I think things are actually getting worse. Basically, the currencies of the world are under fire right now. I'm not sure that the euro will even survive this year. All it will take will be one country, like Greece, to leave it, and then the whole thing will probably collapse like a house of cards. Of course, the U.S. dollar, as the reserve currency, has been under fire, as well. So, I think things are coming to a head here, which is something we anticipated in our own work because it's based on the Long (Kondratiev) Wave Theory.

In 2011, we see parallels to 1931 because we're 80 years beyond that time. We believe 20-year cycles are important anniversaries, and this is just four twenties. In 1931, the whole world monetary system effectively collapsed. We've been long anticipating a collapse in the current world monetary system based on the collapse of 1931. However, we see that the current collapse is going to have far more significant and devastating implications than the collapse between 1931 and 1933 simply because it's the collapse of the paper-money system now. Essentially, paper money is credit money. When paper money fails, credit fails. Effectively, the economy will fail on credit.

TGR: So, given what could be a major upheaval in the way the global economic cycle works, if this all comes to pass, what sort of system will we end up with? Are we going back to the gold standard or something similar to it? How is this going to happen, how long is it going to take and what are the implications for investors?

IG: I'm pretty sure that we will go back to a gold standard system. Paper-money systems have never survived throughout history. Generally, they've been set around a one-country experiment. And when those have failed, as in France after John Law's paper-money scheme failed in 1720 or the Assignat failed in about 1798, there was tremendous upheaval. And, following these failures, the country resumed gold as the backing for its currency. So, I think we have to go back to something like that because, in essence, gold enforces discipline on governments. We've seen a complete lack of discipline in the paper-money system that's been ongoing since the 1931 collapse of the world monetary system. Paper-money printing has just gotten out of control; and now, parallel to the paper-money printing is the debt. They go hand in hand.

We've built massive debt worldwide, which, in total, is probably well in excess of $100 trillion. In the U.S. alone, the total debt is something like $57 trillion. So, that debt is starting to be wrung out of the world's economies and everybody is facing a pretty frightening depression.

As investors, we have to protect ourselves as best we can. We've long been advocating positions in gold and gold stocks. In fact, we've been 100% positioned in both of those-physical and gold stocks-since 2000 because our cycle told us that that's where we should put our assets. So, that's what we've done. I think investors have to do that and they have to be out of the general stock market because, eventually, the stock market has to reflect the realities of the economy. The current U.S. stock market has been propped up by quantitative easing (QE) with massive amounts of money injected into the banking system. That banking system is not putting that money back into the economy because consumers are completely tapped out; they can't borrow any more money. So, much of the money the Federal Reserve is putting into the banks is being used for speculation.

TGR: Can we pursue the mechanics of this a bit further before we get into more-specific investing ideas? Given the internationalization of the world economy and money being just electronic numbers on computer systems, how does the world get back on some sort of a hard-money standard without years of turmoil?

IG: When the global monetary system started to collapse in 1931, it began with the failure of the Austrian Creditanstalt Bank in Europe. Everyone was trying to bail out this large bank. The Fed was trying to bail it out, the Bank of England was trying to bail it out and JP Morgan also was in there trying to bail it out. They all knew the implications of the failure of this one bank would cause the bankruptcy of Austria and the failure of many other banks plagued with rotten paper money on their books. So, when this bank collapsed in May 1931, it was the beginning of the end of the world monetary system. A bankrupted Austria was forced out of the gold exchange standard system and was soon followed by Germany. Great Britain was forced out of the monetary system in September 1931, which effectively brought down the entire world monetary system. A new monetary system didn't evolve until 1944 when the Bretton Woods system was signed into law. It was a long hiatus. The parallels with the current evolving monetary system collapse are pretty plain to see.

After 1931, America was pretty self-sufficient, had all the oil and food it needed and became very isolationist. Great Britain traded within its then-empire. World trade collapsed following 1931 and 2011 may well be a repeat of that tragic year, with the collapse of the euro and the unraveling of the entire global monetary system. It could be a long hiatus before a new system is developed. It goes back to that 20-year anniversary cycle I mentioned. The pure gold standard system that had evolved initially in Great Britain in 1821 collapsed in 1914 because the combatants in World War I couldn't remain on a gold standard system and print the money they needed to fight the war. So, I would say that we will likely return to a gold standard in 2014-100 years after the gold standard collapsed in 1914.

TGR: So, you're saying investors have a two- to three-year window to position themselves and their investments to profit from what's going to happen when this is all turns around.

IG: Right.

TGR: We've had all this volatility in the metals prices over the past year and some substantial gains. How is this affecting companies in the mining business?

IG: For the main part, I've positioned myself in either new producing companies or companies that have gold assets in the ground. I'm principally more disposed to investing in gold than I am in silver. I think these assets are going to be extremely valuable. I met with one of my website subscribers just yesterday and said it's quite possible that there won't be enough physical gold available on the market to supply the demand. We produce only 80 million ounces (Moz.) of gold a year from existing mines. I think, eventually, the demand for gold will become so extreme that the producers won't want to be paid in paper money because the paper system is collapsing. So, gold may well be taken out of the market, that's why it is important to get the physical bullion now rather than later. Of course, gold company stocks that produce physical gold are going to be extremely valuable, as well.

TGR: Obviously, you're quite selective about which companies you decide to invest your own money in and suggest that other people do the same with their money. What criteria do you use in selecting companies for your portfolios?

IG: First, I have to meet with management before I ever put my money into a company. I realize that a lot of investors can't do that, but they can certainly talk to management. On the junior side, management is usually very disposed to talking with perspective shareholders. It's just a matter of picking up the phone and asking the president of a company why it is a good investment, and then listening to the answers. I have to feel confident that a company's management will be able to produce what they say they're going to produce on behalf of the shareholders.

Another criterion that I use is geopolitical risk. I want to invest only in companies that I am confident are in politically secure jurisdictions. I have been bitten in the past by investing in companies in countries that I thought were politically secure, which became insecure. In Ecuador, the rules changed and mining almost ceased to function in that country. So, I particularly like companies that have assets in Canada, which I think is a very safe jurisdiction. Many of the companies that I've selected for my own portfolio have assets in Canada. I also like Mexico.

I think the U.S. is ok, but I'm a bit worried about what might happen when the whole system starts to collapse. After 9/11, I remember when an unnamed Federal Reserve spokesman said in an interview that it looked at many ways to avert a panic. One of the things he mentioned was buying gold mines. If the U.S. doesn't have the gold it purports to have, it could well be that the country could nationalize gold companies. I do have investments in companies that are exploring for gold in the U.S., but not a lot. I particularly like companies in Canada.

TGR: There was a little fear recently about the possibility that the New Democratic Party (NDP) may be coming back into power in British Columbia. Its administration had a devastating effect a generation ago, when it caused the whole BC mining industry to retrench. I guess that's probably not going to happen at this point; but if something like that was to happen, would that possibly have a negative effect at least on BC?

IG: Well, it might. If the NDP does win in British Columbia, I think it probably learned from past experience. Under recent governments, there's been a tremendous amount of exploration and a lot of companies going into production in the Province. It's going to be very hard to shut those down because they're all permitted under present mining laws. So, if the NDP was to win in BC, it's not something that I would be in favor of because I live in the Province and know what negative effect it had on the region's mining not long ago. I think most of the companies in BC now are sufficiently advanced in terms of their exploration, and some have gone into production. So, all the permitting is in place and it's going to be very difficult to rescind it.


TGR: Did you have any last thoughts about the future of the economy you'd like to share?

IG: Unfortunately, I'm very pessimistic about the economy. If paper money, which is credit money, collapses, then, essentially, credit collapses and the economy grinds to a halt. Quite a scary scenario could evolve from a collapse in the paper-money system. We almost had a major credit failure in 2008. What happens if credit does that again? Everything stops-trucking stops, the movement of goods stops and it becomes a very difficult time for everyone. I think people have to prepare for the worst.

TGR: We've certainly gotten used to a system that is automated and electronic. People press buttons and expect results. If things start falling apart as you predict, we could see some real turmoil-financial and possibly even physical.

IG: Investors need to keep those possibilities in mind and protect their assets as best as they can. I'm a little reluctant to admit it, but one of the things I keep on hand is a one-year supply of food. It's a relatively inexpensive way of protecting your food source. If the system falls apart, as it could, you won't be able to run down to the store and get what you want when you need it.

TGR: Thank you very much, Ian, for your valuable insights and recommendations.

IG: Thank you very much.

A globally renowned economic forecaster, author and speaker, Ian Gordonis founder and chairman of the Longwave Group, comprising two companies-Longwave Analytics and Longwave Strategies. The former specializes in Ian's ongoing study and analysis of the Longwave Principle originally expounded by Nikolai Kondratiev. With Longwave Strategies, Ian assists select precious metal companies in financings. Educated in England, Ian graduated from the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. After a few years serving as a platoon commander in a Scottish regiment, Ian moved to Canada in 1967 and entered the University of Manitoba's History Department. Taking that step has had a profound impact because, during this period, he began to study the historical trends that ultimately provided the foundation for his Long Wave theory. Ian has been publishing his Long Wave Analyst website since 1998. Eric Sprott, chairman, CEO and portfolio manager at Sprott Asset Management, describes Ian as "a rare breed in the investment-advisor arena." He notes that Ian's forecasts "have taken on a life force of their own and if you care to listen, Ian will tell you how it will all end."

Article published courtesy of The Gold Report - www.theaureport.com

http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page72068?oid=127849&sn=Detail&pid=110649

Interview: Jim Sinclair on Gold and the World Financial System

By Ron Hera04/20/2011

The Hera Research Newsletter (HRN) is pleased to present an in-depth interview with Jim Sinclair, Chairman and CEO of Tanzanian Royalty Exploration and founder of Jim Sinclair’s MineSet, which hosts his gold commentary as a free service to the gold investment community.

Jim Sinclair is primarily a precious metals specialist and a commodities and foreign currency trader. He founded the Sinclair Group of Companies in 1977, which offered full brokerage services in stocks, bonds, and other investment vehicles. The companies, which operated branches in New York, Kansas City, Toronto, Chicago, London and Geneva, were sold in 1983.

From 1981 to 1984, Mr. Sinclair served as a Precious Metals Advisor to Hunt Oil and the Hunt family for the liquidation of their silver position as a prerequisite for the $1 billion loan arranged by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker.

He was also a General Partner and Member of the Executive Committee of two New York Stock Exchange firms and President of Sinclair Global Clearing Corporation (a commodity clearing firm) and Global Arbitrage (a derivative dealer in metals and currencies).

In April 2002, shareholders of Tanzanian Royalty Exploration (formerly Tan Range Exploration) approved the acquisition of a Sinclair managed private company, Tanzania American International, and its exploration assets in Tanzania. Subsequently, Mr. Sinclair became Chairman of Tanzanian Royalty and now leads its efforts to become a gold royalty and development company.

He has authored three books and numerous magazine articles dealing with a variety of investment subjects, including precious metals, trading strategies and geopolitical events and their relationship to world economics and the markets. He is a frequent and popular commentator on financial and market related issues in various news publications and has been profiled in the New York Times.

In January 2003 Mr. Sinclair launched, Jim Sinclair’s MineSet, which now hosts his gold commentary and is intended as a free service to the gold community.

Hera Research Newsletter (HRN): Thank you for speaking with us today. You are one of very few people who have tried to warn investors about OTC derivatives. Why are OTC derivatives a problem in your opinion?

Jim Sinclair: Over the counter (OTC) derivatives are the reason we are going through what we are going through now. An OTC derivative is a kind of wager on what something will do. Up until 2009, most of these wagers had very little, if any, money behind them and, if the direction you bet on didn’t come to fruition, the amount of leverage resulted in extraordinary losses. There was a major rollover in derivatives tied to real estate in 2008, as well as in other types, such as those tied to sub-prime auto loans.

HRN: Did OTC derivatives destabilize the financial system in 2008?

Jim Sinclair: Absolutely.

HRN: Don’t financial institutions use risk cancellation models to hedge risks using OTC derivatives?

Jim Sinclair: Before the failure of Lehman Brothers, OTC derivatives losses would have almost netted out to zero. You can consider derivatives like a string in a circle with various knots representing all the derivatives transactions. When Lehman went broke, the string broke. When Lehman couldn’t meet its obligations on derivatives, they could no longer be netted out to zero. That’s why the banks went down, and that’s why you had the government bailouts and quantitative easing (QE).

HRN: OTC derivatives are the real reason for the bank bailouts?

Jim Sinclair: That is a fact which can in no way be argued away.

HRN: Hasn’t the problem been cleaned up by the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act?

Jim Sinclair: The pile of OTC derivatives is over $1 quadrillion. After 2008, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) adopted a new method of valuing them called value to maturity. Value to maturity assumes all of them will function, which is a cartoon. The derivatives pile hasn’t contracted. Basically, it has expanded, but value to maturity reduced the notional value from over $1 quadrillion to under $700 trillion. The amount outstanding is the same as it was in the first place.

The flavor of the present moment is credit default swaps against the solvency, or lack thereof, of sovereign nations. New derivatives have some margin behind them, but they only work if they are not called upon. If a nation’s debt was in fact to default, it would happen very quickly without a great deal of run up before. Most people would expect a rescue to be coming. Let’s say a rescue didn’t come, those credit default swaps would simply not be able to function and down again would come the banking system.

HRN: Are you saying that the financial system is less stable today than it was in 2008?

Jim Sinclair: It appears more stable but that’s only an appearance. The entire equity rally took place almost to the day from when the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) relaxed the mark to market rule. It allowed financial institutions to make up whatever value they wanted for their worthless pieces of paper. If they used the real values, the banks would have come down.

HRN: Wasn’t the FASB change a temporary measure to halt the decline in mortgage-backed securities?

Jim Sinclair: It wasn’t just mortgage-backed securities. It was all the paper on bank balance sheets. The balance sheets of banks appear to be in good shape but they’re not. In fact, they will need a lot more funds.

HRN: Then the financial system is still vulnerable?

Jim Sinclair: They’ve kicked the can down the road. The purpose of QE, in other words the printing of money, is to maintain some degree of integrity in the financial system. Bear in mind that the grease for the wheels of equity markets is liquidity, meaning that if you create a lot of money, it goes into the hands of banking institutions and international investment houses. So, the equity out of thin air market has been sustained by QE.

HRN: What can the government do to prevent another crisis?

Jim Sinclair: You can assume that what’s been done already will be done again. There are no other tools in a practical sense. The idea that there won’t be a continuation of QE is nonsense.

HRN: Can the government bail out the banks again?

Jim Sinclair: The central banks will buy the government debt. That’s called quantitative easing.

HRN: Doesn’t QE undermine the dollar?

Jim Sinclair: The dollar is an exercise in psychology. It’s a piece of paper with a promise to pay but there’s nothing in which it can be paid. It’s legal settlement for debt but there’s nothing that it’s convertible into. To maintain confidence, it’s necessary to maintain the stature of a currency. In an arithmetic sense, if you go into a market to sell a supply of apples, and if you’re the only seller, you can get a nice price. If more sellers, meaning more apples, come into the market, there goes the price of apples. QE creates more dollars, which increases the supply.

HRN: If the dollar is loosing value because of QE, what about the Euro?

Jim Sinclair: If you look at the dollar or the Euro or the Yen, or even the Swiss franc, it’s a race to the bottom amongst all currencies. All countries everywhere are creating more paper every day. It’s a relative valuation, rather than a valuation based on an objective reference. What happens in the European Union immediately affects the dollar.

HRN: You mean the sovereign debt crisis?

Jim Sinclair: There’s too much focus on the Euro countries. There’s no difference between the economic union of Europe and the union of the states in the United States. The states of Europe have been revealed to be insolvent. How about the states of the United States? Out of New York, Illinois, California, etc., how many are solvent? The focus of the media has been on the Euro. The U.S. should stand in front of a mirror. The states of the economic union of America are in no better shape.

HRN: The news media is ignoring the U.S. sovereign debt crisis?

Jim Sinclair: In George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, there were loud speakers constantly teaching the people what Big Brother wanted. The loudspeakers today are financial television. How much attention has financial TV put on the insolvency of U.S. states? It’s been mentioned, but not like the solvency problems of Portugal, Greece, Spain and Ireland, which have gotten hours, days, weeks and months of constant coverage. The solvency of New York, Illinois and California has been brought up but fleetingly at best.

HRN: So, the solvency problems of U.S. states are like an elephant in the room that no one is talking about?

Jim Sinclair: How can you say that the Euro is a disaster based on the financial condition of the states of the economic union of Europe, when the states of the economic union of the United States are in equally bad shape and in some cases worse? There’s no difference. If you want to analyze the Euro based on the weakness of its member states, how can the dollar be strong when the states of the United States are as weak or weaker?

HRN: So, the Euro could rise against the U.S. dollar, despite the European sovereign debt crisis?

Jim Sinclair: Sure it can. The question is, can the dollar go lower? The Euro could go to $1.50 or higher.

HRN: But the U.S. dollar is the world reserve currency. Doesn’t that guarantee its value?

Jim Sinclair: Only by default. It remains so because central banks own dollars. If central banks could exchange them for gold or other currencies without a major dislocation, they would.

HRN: Then, as a practical matter, central banks can’t get out of the dollar?

Jim Sinclair: The only one that’s gotten out of it is China. They’ve made deals all around the world for metals, materials, energy and manufacturing. If you add it all up, China is no more stuck in the dollar than the man in the moon.

HRN: Doesn’t the U.S. maintain a strong dollar policy?

Jim Sinclair: The strong dollar policy has only been a moderate, long-term downtrend that continues lower.

HRN: Don’t central banks manage currency exchange rates to prevent disruptive changes, like the recent Japanese Yen intervention?

Jim Sinclair: In the Japanese yen intervention, the central banks intervened but how long can they intervene? They have to create money to intervene, which comes back to QE.

HRN: Do you mean the overall affect of currency interventions is to create new money?

Jim Sinclair: Anything that happens around the world, for instance, the Bank of Japan’s response to the horrible disaster in Japan, was to go straight to QE. Money is being created everywhere without any discipline but the problems of financial institutions remain because they have make-believe balance sheets with improper values for their OTC derivatives.

HRN: Doesn’t the suspension of the FASB mark to market rule buy time for banks to repair their balance sheets?

Jim Sinclair: There are five million homes for sale in the United States if you include the off-market shadow inventory, which is a real inventory. There’s no repair coming in the real estate market, therefore, there’s no repair coming in the OTC derivatives based on that. That means there’s no repair coming in the underlying paper that the banks now value at much higher levels than they could possibly sell them for, if they could sell them at all.

HRN: Will bank balance sheets eventually get better?

Jim Sinclair: As long as confidence remains in place, which depends on the equity market and that comes back to QE.

HRN: Are you saying that the U.S. stock market rally is driven by QE?

Jim Sinclair: There’s an inability to stop QE without the whole house of cards coming down on itself. There’s no other choice. It’s the only tool left. The Federal Reserve can’t take a hawkish position on monetary policy and interest rates without this whole thing rolling over. They can talk about it constantly and might have more back door QE than front door QE.

HRN: If QE doesn’t stop soon, what will happen?

Jim Sinclair: The end game is a virtual reserve currency linked to gold. It will be based on an average of major currencies, which will slow down the movement in the index. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is moving in that direction with Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). The dollar will be just another currency. The dollar’s not going to zero. It could loose a significant part of its buying power, which it already has and could again.

HRN: How would a virtual currency work?

Jim Sinclair: There would have to be a broad measure of the money supply, such as M3 used to be for the U.S. dollar, but on an international basis. The price of gold would be related to that measure. Central banks would have to value their gold according to their contribution to or extraction of international liquidity, so the price of gold would rise or fall on its own.

HRN: Wouldn’t that be a gold standard?

Jim Sinclair: There’ll never be a return to a gold standard in my opinion. The end of all hyperinflations has been a commodity currency. That’s exactly what happened in Germany, for example. Gold has the capacity to give confidence to people if there’s some relationship between the currency and gold. The virtual currency will be linked to gold but not convertible into gold.

HRN: So, a gold component will restore confidence?

Jim Sinclair: The answer is a commodity currency. That’s what happened every time there was this type of situation in monetary history. The rentenmark, which ended the German hyperinflation in 1923, was supposedly backed by all the real estate in Germany, but the government didn’t own that real estate. The point is that it wasn’t true. There was no great commodity backing for the rentenmark, but it was enough. It was a period when people were searching for anything to restore confidence in the currency.

HRN: Do you expect high inflation in U.S. dollar terms?

Jim Sinclair: The deed is done. Inflation is a pregnancy. The conception has already taken place. There’s a delayed effect but if you do the crime, you do the time. The Federal Reserve could stop QE tomorrow and it wouldn’t stop what’s going to happen because of what they’ve already done.

HRN: Won’t inflation reduce the real value of debt and help to repair bank balance sheets?

Jim Sinclair: Inflation is the way debt will be taken care of. The value of the currency will be so reduced as to reduce the debt load. It will also change the political scene. Whoever has power going into this will not have power coming out of it.

HRN: In other words, inflation is politically destabilizing?

Jim Sinclair: People really haven’t seen the big picture. Currency induced cost push inflation is already here. Look at what’s going on right now in the Middle East. We are moving from order to lack of order.

HRN: Would you say that inflation in food prices is indirectly driving oil prices higher?

Jim Sinclair: Oil goes right through from fertilizers to farm equipment to transportation and to food prices. The price of food is going to go even higher than we are seeing this year. The price of oil is headed decidedly higher. Peak Oil was a concept of the future. Now it’s a concept of now. A car getting 25 miles per gallon will probably be too expensive for the average person to drive.

HRN: How will high oil prices affect the prices of other things?

Jim Sinclair: There will be dislocation in the means of delivery of products. There may be shortages of goods, not because there are no available goods but because the means of distribution breaks down. It’s not that there won’t be corn or wheat, but the fuel needed to deliver it will be too expensive and people who work in transportation will demand higher pay so they can live. That’s where hyperinflation comes in.

HRN: And money to maintain the distribution of goods will be printed out of thin air?

Jim Sinclair: Every nation that has ever done this has turned into a banana republic. People can live in banana republics but there will be few wealthy people. There will be a few super wealthy people and an enormous amount of poverty. You can see it across the border in Nogales, Mexico, where people continue to live in extreme poverty.

HRN: America is becoming like Mexico?

Jim Sinclair: The standard of living is going much lower. People have to realize that the damage is already done. It’s not a question of whether the U.S. can be pushed over the edge. We are over the edge. We are watching the consequences play out now.

HRN: What can people do to protect their wealth from inflation?

Jim Sinclair: People have to try to maintain their buying power. Each person can become their own central bank and, to the best of their abilities, focus on the assets that benefit from the disorder that’s taking place and that will continue to take place.

HRN: Do you mean buying precious metals or commodities?

Jim Sinclair: I’ve spoken to people who, over the last ten years, have had this perspective. They have done very well. Even doing it now could protect your wealth.

HRN: What about gold? Do you see gold as a currency that can’t be debased?

Jim Sinclair: What is real money? Gold is a currency that has no liability attached to it. It’s a measure of value and a store of wealth that’s universally acceptable.

HRN: So, gold is an alternative to dollars or Euros?

Jim Sinclair: Physical gold is the answer. An individual who holds gold will have more time and ability to function.

HRN: How much higher do you think the price of gold could go?

Jim Sinclair: What’s the exchange rate of a currency with no liability attached to it? Gold is going much higher. We could see shocking gold prices, maybe Alf Fields’ target of $10,000 per ounce or Martin Armstrong’s target of $12,000 per ounce. I think that my price target of $1,650 per ounce gold is going to be so low it will be considered silly.

HRN: Thank you for your time today.

Jim Sinclair: It was my pleasure.

(http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/ron-hera/interview-jim-sinclair-on-gold-and-the-world-financial-system)

Now Zimbabwe talks of a gold standard while warning of U.S. dollar devaluation

Zimbabwe's Central Bank governor has gone on record as warning about the fall in value of the U.S. dollar while suggesting that his country should move towards a gold backing for its own currency.

Author: Lawrence Williams
Posted: Monday , 16 May 2011

LONDON -

The southern African state of Zimbabwe, where President Robert Mugabe's dogmatic pursuit of white controlled farms, and now the mining industry, coupled perhaps with a serious degree of ineptitude and corruption, brought the country's economy to its knees, is now doubting the future value of the U.S. dollar - a currency which it has relied upon to end its disastrous hyperinflationary episode.

According to New Zimbabwe.com - a U.K.-based Zimbabwe news portal - the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe's Governor, Gideon Gono, is reported as saying:

"There is a need for us to begin thinking seriously and urgently about introducing a gold-backed Zimbabwe currency that will not only be stable but internationally acceptable," Gono said in an interview with state media. "We need to rethink our gold-mining strategy, our gold-liberalisation and marketing strategies as a country. The world needs to and will most certainly move to a gold standard and Zimbabwe must lead the way."

Gono reportedly said the inflationary effects of United States' deficit financing of its budget were likely to impact other countries, leading to resistance of the greenback as a base currency.

"The events of the 2008 global financial crisis demand a new approach to self-reliance and a stable mineral-backed currency, and to me gold has proven over the years that it is a stable and most desired precious metal," Gono said. "Zimbabwe is sitting on trillions worth of gold reserves and it is time we start thinking outside the box, for our survival and prosperity."

When a country like Zimbabwe, which has experienced one of the worst hyperinflationary episodes ever with multi-billion Zimbabwe dollar notes being virtually worthless (the country even printed a 100 trillion dollar note at its inflationary peak), starts casting doubts on U.S. dollar inflation, perhaps we should start to worry a little, although one has to say Gono's financial credentials are shaky, to say the least. He presided over an inflationary period when at one time Zimbabwean inflation was said to be running at over a billion percent a month!

But he may have a point. Zimbabwe does have excellent gold reserves, although the country has seen its annual production decimated due to its financial policies and, at one time, withholding payment to its gold mines which have to sell to the Central Bank. As a consequence Zimbabwe's gold production dropped over a period of years to a low of 4 tonnes in 2008. At peak the country's gold output neared 30 tonnes. Since 2008, a relaxation on gold sales allowing mines to sell at global market prices has led to a revival, but still remains at less than half peak production levels.

Gono and Mugabe's money printing policy in Zimbabwe is the prime cause of the country's descent into the world's second worst ever hyperinflationary episode, so he has a strong personal knowledge of what can happen to a currency if the Central Bank keeps on churning out more and more paper money. Maybe he recognises in Ben Bernanke a man after his own heart!

Source: http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page72068?oid=127101&sn=Detail

投資或成為通漲的犧牲品

2011-04-29 09:45:36 張化橋的Blog

上周，我到澳大利亞度假。按照老習慣，我買來兩份報紙：金融評論（AFR), 和澳大利亞人。一看價格，我大吃一驚：分別3澳元和2.60澳元（澳元比美元略貴）。1991－1994年，我在坎培拉大學當金融學講師時在那裏"爬過格子"。這兩份報紙我太熟悉了。它們當時都是70到80分錢的報紙。我當時的年薪大約4.2萬澳元，現在同樣職位的人賺8.4萬澳元。但今天的講師可比二十年前的講師窮多了。

國人對通脹相當熟悉，每個人都會講幾個有趣的故事。通脹也是一個全球的現象。當然，中國過去三十多年的通脹超過世界上絕大多數國家。可笑的是，我們一直到八十年代底甚至九十年代初還在堅守"社會主義國家不會出現通脹"的舊棺材。

我們的通脹究竟會有何等結局呢？在我斗膽做幾個長期的，模糊的和方向性的猜測之前，我想回顧過去三十多年中國通脹。

在一個理想的世界，通脹是沒有利或弊的：把一元的鈔票變成一元七角或者五元三 角，就好象上市公司最愛玩的遊戲一樣，把股票拆細，一拆五，甚至一拆十。這都不影響任何人的利益（正面負面影響都沒有）。當然，送紅股也是完全一樣，把公 司的資本儲備轉變為股本之類的小把戲也屬此類。以後，股數太多了，大家的算術不夠好，還可以再把股數縮小，比如每七股合成一股，等等。

對於政府來說，通脹就是把紙幣拆細。等到通脹太嚴重時，大家買一斤大蔥要支付幾百萬元時，對大家的算術水準要求太高了，我們還可以刪掉後面幾個零，美其名曰"貨幣改革"。舊中國和世界上很多國家都幹過這類事。不過，遺憾的是，通脹和"貨幣改革"不象股票數量的增減那樣中性，可能會導致利益轉送，巨痛，恐懼，社會不公平，乃至動亂。為什麼？

過去三十多年，中國的通脹是信貸高速擴張的直接結果。銀行業作為一個系統（特 別是包括中央銀行）在沒有錢的情況下也是可以貸款的，當然也可以在錢少的時候貸很多的款。在背後的支撐是公眾對政府和銀行的信任。還是讓我們看看結果。過 去三十多年，中國的廣義貨幣供應量每年的複合增長率超過20％。貨幣供應量是什麼？它就是所有中國企業和家庭的存款總和加上流通中現金。這也就是購買力。這些錢是怎麼來的呢？

首先，中央銀行可以無錢放款（印鈔票）。貸款會直接轉成受貸人的存款，他如果使用這筆款項，另外的人就有了存款，銀行又可以以此存款為基礎發放下一筆貸款（當然要先扣除一點存款準備金）。然後，某些人又有了存款，銀行又可以再放更多的貸款。如此迴圈。

這麼多年，政府在扶持經濟發展的名義下，把銀行利率人為地壓低，低於通脹水 準，所以真實利率為負數，也就創造了對受款人的一種補貼。同時人為地刺激了對貸款的需求。三種人獲得的補貼最多：企業主，負債投資者，負債投機者。誰吃虧 了呢？存款人，老老實實拿固定工資的人們，沒有資格或者沒有關係獲取貸款的人們。當然，社會的公平公正成了犧牲品。

很多人憑直覺認為，通脹期間企業的名義利潤被誇大，所以股票市場應該走好。我 認為這種一個錯誤。錯誤的根源在於它有一個隱含的假定：市盈率會保持不變。但是市盈率可以再跌一半或者更多。為什麼？在通脹期間，即使中央銀行不做貨幣緊 縮，資金也會更加短缺：工廠和商店為了完成同樣多的經濟活動，需要更多的鋪底資金，地產商需要更多資金做土地儲備。居民腰包裏也需要更多的周轉金。在資金 緊張時，資本市場首當其衝。當然，不管中央銀行是否緊縮，名義利率也會上升。而股市的市盈率不過是利率的倒數而已。1968年到1982年，美國的通脹很高，道鐘斯指數幾乎跌了一半，如果考慮到通脹因素，它實際下跌了80％。雖然公司整體上名義的利潤還算可以，但是市盈率從18倍跌倒了6倍。這15年讓美國股民痛苦萬分，雖然1982年以後股市又經歷了17年的大牛市。

在看中國。2000到2004年，股市不聽政府的話，連跌了五年。雖然官方的通漲資料不很高，但是你想想吧，煤炭，礦石，銅，鋁，鋼鐵，糧食和土地價格在那五年漲得空前劇烈。雖然貨幣供應量每年增長20％以上，但是資金還是很緊張，股市奄奄一息。即使每一個股民都是傻瓜，他們合起來一定是不傻的。

大家再想想中國從1992年以來市盈率的下降的趨勢吧。中間雖然有幾次短暫的牛市，但估值水準的下降趨勢是很明顯的。你也許會說，這種下移主要是因為股票供應量的增加，但我敢預言未來十年市盈率下移的推動力會是過去十年建立起來的貨幣供應量的高臺階，通漲，以及中央銀行未來的信貸控制。

如果未來通脹確實難免，那麼我們如何自保呢？很多人似乎直到最近兩年才發現過 去三十年來的嚴重通脹，所以，急不可耐亂抓機會，以規避通脹。這是不理智的。我認為，股市很可能成為通脹的犧牲品。債券市場更是如此。債券價格與名義利率 成反比。房地產市場也許好一些，但是未來幾年內情勢不妙，投資者必須有長遠的眼光才行。

通脹是國難，也是人禍。控制通脹會需要付出很大的代價：緊縮信貸，提高利率，放慢經濟增長，犧牲大量的就業機會。政府會猶豫和徘徊，政策會隨著失業壓力和銀行壞帳的增加而反復。

如果說過去的通脹年代裏，中國人寅吃卯糧，那麼可以預見未來幾年的緊縮可能需要把虛假的"財富"還給未來。金融市場的減肥會很痛苦，更多的投資機會可能在金融市場之外，即在實體經濟。

我給我弟弟的投資建議如下：

（1）買一塊農地，種蔬菜和瓜果；

（2）參股隔壁阿三大叔的汽車修理站，並且晚上和週末多去幫忙；

（3）支持他失業多年的老婆辦一個幼童上學和放學的接送服務社。再請幾個幫手。工商局肯定會刁難，但是，多忍耐吧。我也沒辦法。

（4）投資他老同學的棉花採購站。

（5）如果有餘錢，買點銀行的股票，準備持有十年以上。

通漲是國難。國難當頭，大家只圖保值和日子過得去，不要妄想有很大的利潤。 （本文不代表作者的雇主的觀點。）

美國猶他州正式確立金銀幣為法定貨幣

2011/04/01 22:42

據報導稱，美國猶他州參眾兩院已經通過金銀幣法案，正式確立金銀幣為該州的法定貨幣。 鹽湖城的商店很快就將開始接受水牛金幣和雄鷹金幣。
猶他州州長上週簽署這項新法案，成為該州稅典的一部分，確立聯邦發行的金銀幣為該州法定貨幣。 該州州議會的委員會也受命研究“ 其他形式法定貨幣”的可能性。
報導指出，此舉對美聯儲(Fed)有點諷刺，因為保守派人士憂心美聯儲向市場注入數以萬億美元，已經永久性地令美元價值縮水。 猶他州是美國保守派茶黨的大本營之一，在反對美聯儲主席伯南克(Ben Bernanke)方面，也居於領導地位。
保守遊說團體美國原則項目(American Principles Project)政策總監Jeff Bell表示，“他們一直都是災星。自從本伯南克入主美聯儲以來，一直致力於抵禦通縮，並將利率壓低到極限水平。”
保守派智庫美國企業研究所(American Enterprise Institute)的前美聯儲官員Vincent Reinhart表示，“目前美聯儲面臨著很大的公憤，政客們在努力疏導​​這種憤怒，不過他們不是始終能做到前後一致。 ”
當然，猶他州的行動並非是孤獨的，已經有其他幾個州正在考慮是否也通過這一法案，讓金銀復本位回歸。
美國聯邦發行的金銀幣，本來就已經是法定貨幣，但實際上並沒有人真正把它們當成貨幣或硬幣來使用，而將之視為投資工具或財產。 面額50美元金幣，目前市值約為1400美元，但就純貨幣的交換價值而言，它仍然只值50美元。

因此，這項新法律的真正意義，在於它讓金銀幣從此在猶他州成為“通貨”而非“資產”，因此當交易轉手時，就可以免除稅收。 不過，仍要繳納聯邦稅。
帶頭促成猶他州州議會通過這項新法的律師Larry Hilton也表示，並不認為大家會真的用金銀幣去一般商店買東西。 但他稱，去除交換這些硬幣時的稅負，將讓這些硬幣等同於紙幣，則銀行就可能創設以金銀幣為擔保的賬戶。

Gold Investments Market Update (2011/05/12)

Thu, May 12 2011, 13:48 GMT by Mark O'Byrne - GoldCore

Gold and silver’s recovery in recent days proved to be temporary and further falls were seen yesterday (sharply in silver) prior to a tentative recovery overnight and then more falls again this morning. The euro has stabilized after recent sharp falls and euro gold at €1,050/oz remains comfortably above €1,000/oz after a period of correction and consolidation. Euro gold looks like it is set to break above record highs of €1,072/oz (12/28/10) and target €1,100/oz as the European debt crisis deepens.

Cross Currency Rates at 1030 (London AM Fix)

The massive disconnect between the COMEX spot and futures prices and the physical market continues with leveraged, powerful players on Wall Street (primarily hedge funds and Wall Street banks) able to effect short term sell offs in the paper market despite the very strong supply, demand fundamentals in the physical bullion market.

Euro Gold – 1 Year (Daily)

Simplistic assertions that gold and silver are asset bubbles and that silver’s bubble has burst continue.

Those who have been wrongly calling gold and silver bubbles in recent years fail to realize that gold and silver are no ordinary assets, indeed many contend that they are not assets at all, rather they are money. The precious metals were demonetized in the second half of the 20th century as unbacked paper currencies (fiat money) became accepted globally.

USD Gold – 1 Year (Daily)

Those continuing to call gold a bubble do not understand monetary economics and the growing trend towards the gradual remonetisation of gold. This is due to the unstable nature of the global financial system and markets and growing concerns about all fiat currencies including the international reserve currency, the U.S. dollar and major reserve currencies such as the British pound, the Japanese yen and the euro.

Ultra loose monetary policies and global currency debasement renders confident assertions of gold and silver being bubbles simplistic and naïve.

Indeed, with growing calls for a return to the Gold Standard, the latest from billionaire media magnate Steve Forbes (see news), gold looks set to at least rise to its 1980 adjusted high of $2,400/oz.

Forbes said in an interview that “people know that something is wrong with the dollar."

“What seems astonishing today could become conventional wisdom in a short period of time,” Forbes said. He concluded that "you cannot trash your money without repercussions.”

He thus echoes long term gold standard advocate Representative Ron Paul and the recent advocation of a return to some form of Gold Standard by World Bank President Robert Zoellick.

A return to a Gold Standard would likely see gold revalued to thousands of dollars per ounce.

(http://www.fxstreet.com/fundamental/analysis-reports/gold-investments-market-update/2011/05/12/)

Forbes Predicts U.S. Gold Standard Within 5 Years

by Paul Dykewicz

05/11/2011

A return to the gold standard by the United States within the next five years (i.e. 2016!) now seems likely, because that move would help the nation solve a variety of economic, fiscal, and monetary ills, Steve Forbes predicted during an exclusive interview this week with HUMAN EVENTS.

“What seems astonishing today could become conventional wisdom in a short period of time,” Forbes said.

Such a move would help to stabilize the value of the dollar, restore confidence among foreign investors in U.S. government bonds, and discourage reckless federal spending, the media mogul and former presidential candidate said. The United States used gold as the basis for valuing the U.S. dollar successfully for roughly 180 years before President Richard Nixon embarked upon an experiment to end the practice in the 1970s that has contributed to a number of woes that the country is suffering from now, Forbes added.

If the gold standard had been in place in recent years, the value of the U.S. dollar would not have weakened as it has and excessive federal spending would have been curbed, Forbes told HUMAN EVENTS. The constantly changing value of the U.S. dollar leads to marketplace uncertainty and consequently spurs speculation in commodity investing as a hedge against inflation.

The only probable 2012 U.S. presidential candidate who has championed a return to the gold standard so far is Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Tex.). But the idea “makes too much sense” not to gain popularity as the U.S. economy struggles to create jobs, recover from a housing bubble induced by the Federal Reserve’s easy-money policies, stop rising gasoline prices, and restore fiscal responsibility to U.S. government’s budget, Forbes insisted.

With a stable currency, it is “much harder” for governments to borrow excessively, Forbes said. Without lax Federal Reserve System monetary policies that led to the printing of too much money, the housing bubble would not have been nearly as severe, he added.

“When it comes to exchange rates and monetary policy, people often don’t grasp” what is at stake for the economy, Forbes said. By restoring the gold standard, the United States would shift away from “less responsible policies” and toward a stronger dollar and a stronger America, he said. “If the dollar was as good as gold, other countries would want to buy it.”

An encouraging sign for Forbes is that key lawmakers besides Rep. Paul are recognizing that the Fed is straying well beyond its intended role of promoting stable prices and full employment with its monetary policies.

Forbes cited Rep. Paul Ryan (R.-Wis.), who, he believes, understands monetary policy better than most lawmakers and has shown a willingness to ask tough but necessary questions. For example, when Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke appeared before the House Budget Committee in February, Ryan, who chairs the panel, asked Bernanke bluntly how many jobs the Fed’s quantitative-easing program had helped to create.

Politicians need to “get over” the notion that the Fed can guide the economy with monetary policy. The Fed is like a “bull in a China shop," Forbes said. “It can’t help but knock things down.”

“People know that something is wrong with the dollar," Forbes concluded. "You cannot trash your money without repercussions.”

(http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=43439)

IMF calls for dollar alternative

By Ben Rooney, staff reporter February 10, 2011: 4:37 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The International Monetary Fund issued a report Thursday on a possible replacement for the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

The IMF said Special Drawing Rights, or SDRs, could help stabilize the global financial system.

SDRs represent potential claims on the currencies of IMF members. They were created by the IMF in 1969 and can be converted into whatever currency a borrower requires at exchange rates based on a weighted basket of international currencies. The IMF typically lends countries funds denominated in SDRs.

While they are not a tangible currency, some economists argue that SDRs could be used as a less volatile alternative to the U.S. dollar.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the IMF, acknowledged there are some "technical hurdles" involved with SDRs, but he believes they could help correct global imbalances and shore up the global financial system.

"Over time, there may also be a role for the SDR to contribute to a more stable international monetary system," he said.

The goal is to have a reserve asset for central banks that better reflects the global economy since the dollar is vulnerable to swings in the domestic economy and changes in U.S. policy.

In addition to serving as a reserve currency, the IMF also proposed creating SDR-denominated bonds, which could reduce central banks' dependence on U.S. Treasuries. The Fund also suggested that certain assets, such as oil and gold, which are traded in U.S. dollars, could be priced using SDRs.

Oil prices usually go up when the dollar depreciates. Supporters say using SDRs to price oil on the global market could help prevent spikes in energy prices that often occur when the dollar weakens significantly.

The dollar alternatives

Fred Bergsten, director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said at a conference in Washington that IMF member nations should agree to create $2 trillion worth of SDRs over the next few years.

SDRs, he said, "will further diversify the system."