the visible hand

it is the theory which decides what can be observed – einstein

Archive for the ‘opinion’ Category

Caveat emptor: deceptive credit card terms and conditions

Posted by ecoshift on July 31, 2007

It does seem that the ethical basis of solicitations coming to my mailbox, both analog and digital, have been in decline for a number of years. It is no longer safe to assume that there is a moral baseline, or regulatory environment, that ensures even minimal protection of customer interests.

As far as the credit card companies go, they can change the terms that apply to an existing balance at whim. Read the fine print. Here’s the line from the most recent offer to cross my desk: Rates, fees and terms may change: We reserve the right to change the account terms (including APRs) at any time for any reason, in addition to APR increases that may occur for failure to comply with the terms of your account.

Given the level of revolving debt that many people carry and diminished access to bankruptcy protections for ordinary citizens that line is really quite cheeky. Imagine loaning your buddy 10k and asking him to sign an agreement that allows you to change the terms of the agreement on the outstanding balance any time you feel like it.

Caveat emptor indeed…

Credit Card Buyer Beware – New York Times Editorial
Published: July 31, 2007

The federal agencies that are supposed to regulate the banking and credit card industries have failed utterly to keep pace with deceptive and unfair practices that have become shamefully standard in the business. As a consequence many hard-working Americans who pay their bills are mired in debt — and in danger of losing whatever savings they have, and perhaps their homes. Congress, which sat on its hands while the problem got worse and worse, needs to rein in this sometimes predatory industry…

A bill introduced by Senator Levin would limit “penalty” interest rates to an additional 7 percent above the previous rate. It would also prohibit retroactive penalties and double cycle billing, and it would limit the amount of fees companies could charge customers who exceed their credit limit.

Passing the Levin bill would be a good start. But Congress needs a comprehensive approach to this problem. Lawmakers need to ban deceptive card offers outright, strengthen federal oversight and toughen truth-in-lending laws.

Posted in credit, opinion, policy | 1 Comment »

A Chinese dilema, US initiatives

Posted by ecoshift on July 29, 2007

I’m puzzled by US policy initiatives vis a vis China. They seem poorly thought out and downright insulting with quite a lot of whining poor-loser thrown in.

I realize that China is still a communist state. While I’ve been only a little surprised at corporate willingness to throw democratic ideology to the wind in pursuit of competitive advantage I do somehow expect a bit more coordination in overall foreign policy objectives.

Imagine you are a Chinese leader in the previous decade.

The US, in hopes that your participation in the global economy will turn you into a Republican, or at least a Democrat, wants to invest in your economy. Okay, okay. The US really hopes to make some serious money on the deal. The intention is to exploit your cheap labor and your lax environmental standards to lower production costs while maintaining US distribution channels and marketing savvy. They intend to make a killing. You know it. They know it. You let them invest. You work hard. You watch carefully. You learn. Your domestic companies start offering to provide components, products and services to US companies. Soon your domestic firms are exporting directly into US markets in various partnerships with US firms. Fast forward 10 or 15 years.

Chinese success

Your economy is kicking butt. The quality of your products is increasing. Money from sales to US markets is pouring into your economy. You own massive amounts of US debt in order to maintain access to US markets and to keep US markets viable. You are financing US foreign wars, tax breaks for wealthy US stockholders and anything else the US government can’t afford to buy.

Real US values falter

But, the US stock market has been in decline against basket of global currencies for five years. The US Fed is desperately printing money while US investment bankers, money managers and corporate executives squander it on stock buybacks and speculative asset bubbles. Smart money in the US continues to flow to overseas. US manufacturing capacity is in decline. Sophisticated (well, at least complicated) and perhaps fraudulent leveraged financial machinations keep US asset bubbles appreciating in dollar terms. US companies struggle to compete in the global economy and US consumers are dependent on low-cost imports to maintain debt-driven lifestyles. You know this.

A Chinese dilema

The US appears more than willing to allow the value of US currency to steadily fall. Every 5% decline in the dollar’s value drops the value of your foreign reserves 65 billion dollars against that same basket of currencies. As the Yuan follows the dollar down you loose additional purchasing power in global markets. The interest rates you are earning on your US bonds don’t even come close to making up the difference. Other holders of US currency reserves are starting to let go. You need export sales to the US, but you are wondering how long you can continue to support failing US economic strategies. You are carefully evaluating the aggregate strength of global markets without US growth: Europe, India, Brazil, Japan, your own domestic economy. IS it time to change your strategy?

You hold the value of US currency in your hand. If you sell dollars the dollar will tank, US inflation will go through the roof and take interest rates with it. The US consumer will succumb to his credit cards amid rising fuel costs and a crashing housing market. You know this. You are looking at your options. Direct investment in US assets? Purchase US equities? Creation of a sovereign wealth fund for overseas investments? Can you afford to let the US dollar down? How badly do you need faltering US markets?

US initiative

It’s a delicate situation: liquidity drying up, housing prices falling, bridge loans desperately in need of buyers and globalization backfiring on the US economy. US leaders confidently step up to the plate with a sophisticated negotiation strategy:

  1. They angrily complain that you aren’t playing fair. That you win too much and that US manufacturers can’t compete in their own domestic markets. They demand that you allow your currency to appreciate… closing the door long after a herd of US manufacturing horses have been reallocated to ranches far away from the barn.
  2. As US credit markets begin to seriously falter the champions of multilateral investments float legislation that will not allow foreign (this means you) direct investment in strategic US assets.
  3. Then someone comes sidling up to the side door, opens up his trench coat, and offers to sell you an assortment of toxic mortgage backed securities.
  4. Finally the financial guys come forward and managers start to offer you equity stakes in their operations.

Seems like an inconsistent slap in the face to country that understands face. With stock market drops of over 700 points in week I can imagine China is sorely tempted to sell treasuries and drop any plans to participate in or support collapsing US asset bubbles and credit markets.

If the US plan is to somehow rebuild a strong US manufacturing component based on new found competitive advantage in export markets from a declining dollar, US companies and senators may want to look carefully at the percentage of imported commodities, parts, components and even finished products in US exports. After two decades of outsourcing, downsizing and reallocation of US manufacturing offshore I believe that horse will need a significant influx of capital to realize any advantage…. capital that no one will want to invest in a popping bubble… unless they happen to be burdened with 1.3 trillion in dollar denominated reserves.

If I’m missing something here, let me know…

Posted in china, dollar, market, opinion, policy | Leave a Comment »

Enough is Enough

Posted by ecoshift on July 24, 2007

Wow. It’s gotten to the point that investment analysts are recognizing that both Bubba and Joe 6pack are completely tapped out… come ‘on Bubba Joe you jus’ gotta keep spending… and the market’s off 226 points today.

PIMCO Bonds – Investment Outlook
Bill Gross – August 2007

Enough is Enough

Wealth has always gravitated towards those that take risk with other people’s money but especially so when taxes are low. The rich are different – but they are not necessarily society’s paragons. It is in fact society’s wind and its current willingness to nurture the rich that fills their sails.

What farce, then, to give credence to current debate as to whether private equity and hedge fund managers will be properly incented if Congress moves to raise their taxes up to levels paid by the majority of America’s middle class. What pretense to assert, as did Kenneth Griffin, recipient last year of more than $1 billion in compensation as manager of the Citadel Investment Group, that “the (current) income distribution has to stand. If the tax became too high, as a matter of principle I would not be working this hard.” Right. In the same breath he tells, Louis Uchitelle of The New York Times that the get-rich crowd “soon discover that wealth is not a particularly satisfying outcome.” The team at Citadel, he claims, “loves the problems they work on and the challenges inherent to their business.” Oh what a delicate/tangled web we weave sir.

Far better to admit, as has Warren Buffett, that the tax rates of the wealthiest Americans average nearly 15% while those of their salaried and therefore less incented assistants just outside their offices are nearly twice that. Far better to recognize, as does Chart 1, that only twice before during the last century has such a high percentage of national income (5%) gone to the top .01% of American families. Far better to understand, to quote Buffett, that “society should place an initial emphasis on abundance but then should continuously strive to redistribute the abundance more equitably.”

Buffett’s comments basically frame the debate: when is enough, enough? Granted, American style capitalism has fostered and encouraged innovation and globalization which are the fundamental building blocks of wealth. That is the abundance that Buffett speaks to – the creation of enough. But when the fruits of society’s labor become maldistributed, when the rich get richer and the middle and lower classes struggle to keep their heads above water as is clearly the case today, then the system ultimately breaks down; boats do not rise equally with the tide; the center cannot hold.

Of course the wealthy fire back in cloying self-justification, stressing their charitable and philanthropic pursuits, suggesting that they can more efficiently redistribute wealth than can the society that provided the basis for their riches in the first place. Perhaps. But with exceptions (and plaudits) for the Gates and Buffetts of the mega-rich, the inefficiencies of wealth redistribution by the Forbes 400 mega-rich and their wannabes are perhaps as egregious and wasteful as any government agency, if not more. Trust funds for the kids, inheritances for the grandkids, multiple vacation homes, private planes, multi-million dollar birthday bashes and ego-rich donations to local art museums and concert halls are but a few of the ways that rich people waste money … When millions of people are dying from AIDS and malaria in Africa, it is hard to justify the umpteenth society gala held for the benefit of a performing arts center or an art museum. A thirty million dollar gift for a concert hall is not philanthropy, it is a Napoleonic coronation.

Posted in opinion, policy | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul is Bill Maher’s New Hero

Posted by ecoshift on June 7, 2007

Okay, one more on Ron Paul. I’m not giving my endorsement. But, this is an interesting development. Democrats: take notes.

Ron Paul is Bill Maher’s New Hero

Posted in dollar, opinion, policy | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul on easy money and the true cost of petrodollars

Posted by ecoshift on June 6, 2007

I’m not a republican, nor am I a libertarian. But, there’s something about the willingness of Ron Paul to say clearly what he believes to be true, in conflict with republican party doctrine, that has caused me to look a little closer. His analysis of the 35 year bi-partisan attack on the integrity of the dollar is worth a read. After reading this I went back and read Williams Jennings Bryan’s Cross of Gold speech just to remind myself of the justifications for inflationary monetary policy. Yet current monetary policy is creating easy money for the heavily leveraged investment gambles that have been driving the stock market through the roof — not necessarily protecting the American citizen whose paycheck’s global purchasing power is taking the hit.

Check out this graph of the growth in US money supply (M3)since the ’70’s. Then read Ron Paul.

The End of Dollar Hegemony (excerpt)
Ron Paul: Republican presidential hopeful…
February 15, 2006

The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to “rule” the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can’t last.

Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble– generated by easy money– has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world’s rejection of the dollar. It’s bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979-1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.

Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually they will fail.

Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged—as it already has been.

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein– though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.

It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.

In 2001, Venezuela’s ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.

After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.

It’s become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.

Now, a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the “axis of evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.

Most Americans forget how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of evil didn’t do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries. Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, doesn’t seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there’s little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us. But that didn’t stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she’s made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.

It’s not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein’s connection to 9/11, were false. The dollar’s importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel’s influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting “our” oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.

But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That’s not so today. Now, more than ever, the dollar hegemony– it’s dominance as the world reserve currency– is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.

For the most part the true victims aren’t aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the “tax” that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world’s reserve currency.

Posted in credit, dollar, econ, opinion, policy | Leave a Comment »

Kudos to Hank Sims

Posted by ecoshift on May 30, 2007

Kudos to Hank Sims for recognizing that the forces driving real estate prices outside of Humboldt County may actually impact local affordable housing…

North Coast Journal May 10, 2007 : THE TOWN DANDY
Hank Sims

The Humboldt County housing market is part of an immensely complicated national and international economy, affected by all sorts of factors — for example, the desirability of real estate as an investment vehicle as opposed to the stock market. Someone’s buying those unaffordable houses. And if Humboldt County officials are to blame for rising home prices here, why have home prices boomed out of control all across the country?

Posted in housing, opinion, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Environmental Idols

Posted by ecoshift on May 24, 2007

Curtis White gives an interesting perspective on the nexus of environmental activism, Cartesian logic and corporate malfeasance. He points to inconsistencies, at the philosophical level, that leave environmental advocates unable to change the “very fabric” driving the continued degradation of ecosystems world wide. He’s right. Perhaps in a few years he will write an equally articulate article describing how fundamental critiques are professionally marginalized, excluded from the political process and of negligible impact on how capital motivates corporate resource allocation. What to do?

The Idols of Environmentalism | Curtis White | Orion magazine

“The problem for even the best-intentioned environmental activism is that it imagines that it can confront a problem external to itself. Confront the bulldozers. Confront the chainsaws. Confront Monsanto. Fight the power. What the environmental movement is not very good at is acknowledging that something in the very fabric of our daily life is deeply anti-nature as well as anti-human. It inhabits not just bad-guy CEOs at Monsanto and Weyerhaeuser but nearly every working American, environmentalists included.It is true that there are CEO-types, few in number, who are indifferent to everything except money, who are cruel and greedy, and so the North Atlantic gets stripped of cod and any number of other species taken incidentally in what is the factory trawler’s wet version of a scorched-earth policy. Or some junk bond maven buys up a section of old-growth redwoods and “harvests” it without hesitation when his fund is in sudden need of “liquidity.” Nevertheless, all that we perceive to be the destructiveness of corporate culture in relation to nature is not the consequence of its power, or its capacity for dominating nature (“taming,” as it was once put, as if what we were dealing with was the lion act at the circus). Believing in powerful corporate evildoers as the primary source of our problems forces us to think in cartoons.”

Posted in environment, opinion, theory | 2 Comments »

The Poverty Business

Posted by ecoshift on May 23, 2007

The Poverty Business – Business Week

In recent years, a range of businesses have made financing more readily available to even the riskiest of borrowers. Greater access to credit has put cars, computers, credit cards, and even homes within reach for many more of the working poor. But this remaking of the marketplace for low-income consumers has a dark side: Innovative and zealous firms have lured unsophisticated shoppers by the hundreds of thousands into a thicket of debt from which many never emerge.Federal Reserve data show that in relative terms, that debt is getting more expensive. In 1989 households earning $30,000 or less a year paid an average annual interest rate on auto loans that was 16.8% higher than what households earning more than $90,000 a year paid. By 2004 the discrepancy had soared to 56.1%. Roughly the same thing happened with mortgage loans: a leap from a 6.4% gap to one of 25.5%. “It’s not only that the poor are paying more; the poor are paying a lot more,” says Sheila C. Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Once, substantial businesses had little interest in chasing customers of the sort who frequent the storefronts surrounding the Byrider dealership in Albuquerque. Why bother grabbing for the few dollars in a broke man’s pocket? Now there’s a reason.

Armed with the latest technology for assessing credit risks—some of it so fine-tuned it picks up spending on cigarettes—ambitious corporations like Byrider see profits in those thin wallets. The liquidity lapping over all parts of the financial world also has enabled the dramatic expansion of lending to the working poor. Byrider, with financing from Bank of America Corp. (BAC ) and others, boasts 130 dealerships in 30 states. At company headquarters in Carmel, Ind., a profusion of colored pins decorates wall maps, marking the 372 additional franchises it aims to open from California to Florida. CompuCredit Corp., based in Atlanta, aggressively promotes credit cards to low-wage earners with a history of not paying their bills on time. And BlueHippo Funding, a self-described “direct response merchandise lender,” has retooled the rent-to-own model to sell PCs and plasma TVs.

Posted in credit, housing, opinion | Leave a Comment »

California Provides Cautionary Tale to Eco-Elite

Posted by ecoshift on May 21, 2007

The Unbearable Whiteness of the Green Movement
By Van Jones, Grist Magazine

California Provides Cautionary Tale to Eco-Elite

The idea for Prop 87 was brilliant in its simplicity: California would start taxing the oil and gas that we extract from our soil and shores. And those dollars would go into a huge, “clean-energy” research and technology fund.

Many states and nations have similar excise taxes. But California would have been alone in dedicating the revenues to inventing alternatives to carbon-based energy sources. Had it passed, money from oil would have been used to find a replacement for oil.

It was a brilliant idea. And at first, the measure was polling off the charts.

But in the end, Californians voted the measure down. Why? Because big oil convinced ordinary Californians that the price tag for them would be too high for them to bear.

Posted in energy, environment, opinion, policy, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

US vows to punish China and others for undervaluing their currencies

Posted by ecoshift on May 15, 2007

While the US prepares to punish China for pegging the Yuan to the dollar and China telegraphs a response regarding the risks that would pose to their economy it might be worth reading an outside of consensus perspective . I’d take the last article, the outside perspective, with a grain of salt. Seems like gold dealers see a percentage in increasing fears of US economic weakness, but absent hyperbole there are a few comments there that seem worth reviewing…

A few excerpts:

Congress to press China over its undervalued currency – Los Angeles Times

Legislators target nations that manipulate their money. Critics say it’s the wrong approach.
By Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Times Staff Writer
May 10, 2007

WASHINGTON — Democrats in Congress have been pushing an ambitious trade agenda, promising to assist displaced American workers and reduce the trade deficit. Now they’re taking on the global currency market — vowing to pass legislation to punish China and other Asian countries for undervaluing their currencies.

China: No Currency Change Ahead of Talks
Tuesday May 15, 10:25 am ET
By Joe Mcdonald, AP Business Writer

China Rules Out Major Currency Moves Ahead of Washington Talks

BEIJING (AP) — Chinese officials on Tuesday ruled out major changes demanded by U.S. lawmakers in Beijing’s currency controls ahead of a high-level meeting and called on critics in Congress not to politicize trade disputes.

Beijing is making progress in allowing its currency to trade more freely, but acting on U.S. appeals to move more quickly could disrupt the economy, said the officials. They briefed reporters on next week’s meeting in Washington on condition they not be identified by name.

A senior Finance Ministry official said China wouldn’t permit a backlash against financial markets and its “harmonious society,” using Beijing’s term for efforts to spread China’s new prosperity to its poor majority.

The Russian Bear, Chinease Dragon, and US Dollar :: The Market Oracle :
By Jim Willie CB
Editor of the “HAT TRICK LETTER”

Russia and China have become a major problem. Everywhere one turns, there is Russia & China at odds with the United States . We have the Great Bear in a conflict over energy, Iran , military installations, and central bank policy. We have the Great Dragon in a conflict over currency reform, banking reform, copyright enforcement, trade matters, human rights, and central bank policy.

Armed with a combined account of almost $1600 billion, these two giants are in a Battle of Titans with the United States for geopolitical control. With the financial shift to developing nations comes a natural push toward geopolitical control. The USEconomy and USDollar have never been in a weaker position. The bear and dragon know it well, and have taken steps to wrest more power and influence.

NEW KIDS ON THE FOREX RESERVES BLOCK

In 2000, all changed. Russia and China hit the scene. The ill-fated decision during the Clinton Administration to grant Most Favored Nation status to China opened the door to a labor arbitrage. The result was over three million US manufacturing jobs sent to China . US corporations justify their abandonment of US workers, shedding fringe benefit costs at the same time, by claiming the low-cost solutions benefit both their financial structure and the USEconomy. The trade gap would next grow even while the USDollar would be devalued by 25% to 30% in the next few years…

China captured a large slice of that exported US-based inflation. Moronic economists actually claimed that the USEconomy was exploiting the Asian lower labor costs, as we sold them our high-grade debt. China began to accumulate its MOUNTAIN OF US $-BASED DEBT in its FOREX account. Foreign reserves held in the land of the Great Dragon enjoyed a head start, measured at $160 billion in the year 2000, having grown to $1202 billion by early 2007. Now the sleep walkers running US policy regard the Chinese yuan and gigantic FOREX mountainous reserves account as a problem…

The cooperation identified by constructive contracts between US corporations to build Chinese factories took a respite in 2002 and 2003, but clearly resumed to surpass $15 billion annually in 2004 and 2005 each year. If one needs to point fingers at the new problems with China, look no further than US corporate executives who plowed tens of billion$ into China, killed off US jobs, and have fed the dragon. However, the end of the rigid yuan currency regime was removed in July 2005 with little progress to show in a yuan upward revaluation. A relatively small 7% rise in the yuan since then pales by comparison to the 55% rise in the euro currency (versus US$) since 2001, and 15% rise in the euro in roughly the same time frame as the yuan has been relaxed, but not freed. The ineptitude of USGovt leaders has been exposed, when dealing on the economic and financial chessboard with patient and crafty Beijing leaders.

Posted in dollar, opinion, policy, the rest of the world | Leave a Comment »