[deMolay]

This story tells me all hell is about to break loose...............................................................UN: US dollar crash must be avert to sustain global economic growth


In order for current world economic growth rates to continue, it is crucial to keep the United States dollar from falling rapidly while also avoiding a recession, says a United Nations report.
NEW YORK, US, June 1, 2007 - In order for current world economic growth rates to continue, it is crucial to keep the United States dollar from falling rapidly while also avoiding a recession, says a United Nations report.

"We call for a coordinated strategy that would think about how to adjust these global imbalances while avoiding recessionary tendencies in the global economy," Rob Voss, Director of Development Policy and Analysis at the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, told reporters as he launched the report at UN Headquarters.

According to the report, the World Economic Situation and Prospects mid-year update, the world economy is still strongly tied to US fortunes, and the slowdown in the country's housing market is already a major factor in slowing world growth to 3.4 per cent for 2007, down from the 4 per cent achieved in 2006.

Growth in other developed economies, such as Europe and Japan, remains strong, but their role is limited as major engines of global growth, the report says.

The report says the performance of the world economy over the past few years was remarkably broad-based, with 96 out of 159 countries for which data was available increasing per capita output by 3 per cent or higher.

Robust growth was experienced not only in East Asia, which zoomed above 8 per cent in 2006, but also in countries of the former Soviet Union, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean.

Growth in all regions is expected to moderate in 2007 and to stabilize in 2008, barring a major decline of the dollar, the report projects.

Unfortunately, however, the report notes that even continued growth does not guarantee achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, the targets for reducing extreme poverty by 2015, because 44 individual countries, many in Africa, failed to achieve growth of over 3 per cent, despite the regional average.

In addition, in many developing countries growth has been fuelled by exports of commodities, such as oil, and not increased employment, according to the report.

"In order to meet the Millennium Development Goals, there's a major policy challenge to improve the employment effects of the positive growth we see around the world," Voss said. (UN News)

[Jack]

So the world gets to continue subsidizing the American lifestyle - all under the seal of the UN.

I like it!

[deMolay]

I think maybe they were more worried about the US total public debt, the trade imbalance, the collapsing housing market, and the end of an era. It could be a very dangerous time of transition.

[mmasters]

Similar to how New York was the cornerstone of the US financial market before the great depression, the US is now the cornerstone of the global financial market. History will repeat itself, except this time the recovery will be marginal at best due to peak oil.

[Jack]

I agree - it could be a very dangerous, chaotic time.

But it also seems that the report indicates that the world recognizes that and will strive to defer the day of reckoning. On the bad side, that seems to suggest a harder crash - but on the plus side, it defers it for a time.

So, which is better - soft landing soon, or much harder landing later?

[deMolay]

The most fortunate thing that ever happened in the history of the world was the smooth transition from the rule of The British Empire almost seamlessly to the New American Empire. This transition to the Chinese will not very pleasant or very long. The Chinese will not be in the drivers seat for very long at all. The world I fear will become very chaotic. The cost of projecting power has escalated dramatically for the great powers and become as cheap as a throwaway cell phone for the insurgents. It will be very brutish indeed. As the American power declines the Africans will starve to death in the millions. They will still curse the Americans tho. Even tho the Americans are struggling themselves. Does anyone really think a Communist country like China which oversaw the brutal murder of over 100 million of their citizens under the animal Chairman Mao will give a rat's ass about subhuman in their eyes starving Africans. The Africans will have to find a new sugar daddy.

[Gerben]

You seem to imply that China will be the next leading nation in the world. Although you might be right, you should realize that China is not in a position for that now and will not be for decades more to come. China is still a developing country that is more worried about feeding its poor than conquering the world.
If China gains a world leading position, I think it will keep that position for about a century, like most other empires, although China has a nasty track record with empires lasting thousands of years.
In the mean time there is an interbellum with lots of instability. Important players will be the US, Europe, Russia and China. Note that Europe could already be more powerfull than the US, but is hopelessly devided internally. The new treaty agreed upon yesterday will keep it that way for a few decades more.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')oes anyone really think a Communist country like China which oversaw the brutal murder of over 100 million of their citizens under the animal Chairman Mao will give a rat's ass about subhuman in their eyes starving Africans. The Africans will have to find a new sugar daddy.

[mmasters]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('deMolay', 'T')he most fortunate thing that ever happened in the history of the world was the smooth transition from the rule of The British Empire almost seamlessly to the New American Empire.

[savethehumans]

One of these days, my brother is going to decide my late aunt's house is ready to sell. It's likely to sell--it's in an area where the bubble hasn't burst yet--but I think he's not gonna get what he thinks he's gonna get for it.

There are 5 of us who split the estate. He wants to combine his share in the IRA that also belongs to all of us. He wishes we would, too--after all, the thing is still earning more money! He doesn't have a clue as to what's about to happen, and I haven't the heart to tell him. Especially since money ain't gonna be worth much soon, anyway.

I (and our three relatives, I think) am gonna be asking for my share immediately upon sale. IF there is a sale. For however much or little my share will be. I simply want to have this money soon, and have it available for use while it's still worth something. It makes me very nervous to think that my brother's gonna demand why. I have enough inheritance money (even after Uncle Sam gets his claws on his share next year) to get by fine--for the time being. Why not let the money grow? If he insists on an answer, he's not gonna like it--or me--very much.

Of course, millions of Americans (and tens of millions of world citizens) aren't gonna like what's gonna come down on them when the economy collapses. I'd just rather not be the one who has to break the bad news. Especially as it hasn't happened yet. But it will. All too soon, it will. . . .

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gerben', 'Y')ou seem to imply that China will be the next leading nation in the world. Although you might be right, you should realize that China is not in a position for that now and will not be for decades more to come. China is still a developing country that is more worried about feeding its poor than conquering the world.
If China gains a world leading position, I think it will keep that position for about a century, like most other empires, although China has a nasty track record with empires lasting thousands of years.

[mkwin]

There is a lot of talk about the rise of China but I think it’s premature. Yes if china had 50 years of strong growth and it developed an internal middle class market and spent huge quantities of money on its military it could compete with the US. However, despite its recent economic success it wouldn't stand a chance against NATO today or in the foreseeable future. NATO could deploy up to 15 carrier battles groups to the coast of china that would decimate the country in a matter of days.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', 'T')here is a lot of talk about the rise of China but I think it’s premature. Yes if china had 50 years of strong growth and it developed an internal middle class market and spent huge quantities of money on its military it could compete with the US. However, despite its recent economic success it wouldn't stand a chance against NATO today or in the foreseeable future. NATO could deploy up to 15 carrier battles groups to the coast of china that would decimate the country in a matter of days.

[eXpat]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', 'T')here is a lot of talk about the rise of China but I think it’s premature. Yes if china had 50 years of strong growth and it developed an internal middle class market and spent huge quantities of money on its military it could compete with the US. However, despite its recent economic success it wouldn't stand a chance against NATO today or in the foreseeable future. NATO could deploy up to 15 carrier battles groups to the coast of china that would decimate the country in a matter of days.

[Twilight]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('savethehumans', 'I')f he insists on an answer, he's not gonna like it--or me--very much.

[Valdemar]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')Carriers are useless against nuclear weapons.
Dont fool yourself - any open military conflict between NATO and China would quickly escalate to use of those.
For China to run affairs in open contest of US/NATO it is enough to build up nuclear arsenals to several thousands of warheads on ICBM and submarines.
Then, I bet nothing whatsoever will be done, once Taiwan is taken over and both Koreas subdued.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Valdemar', '.')..
By the time China has anything like that sort of arsenal, the NATO forces will be well ahead with ABM systems, thus raising the bar for entry into the nuclear club. Nukes are no good if half of them get shot down en route while the US turns your whole nation into one giant self-lit glass parking lot with impunity.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Valdemar', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '
')Carriers are useless against nuclear weapons.
Dont fool yourself - any open military conflict between NATO and China would quickly escalate to use of those.
For China to run affairs in open contest of US/NATO it is enough to build up nuclear arsenals to several thousands of warheads on ICBM and submarines.
Then, I bet nothing whatsoever will be done, once Taiwan is taken over and both Koreas subdued.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Valdemar', '.')..
By the time China has anything like that sort of arsenal, the NATO forces will be well ahead with ABM systems, thus raising the bar for entry into the nuclear club. Nukes are no good if half of them get shot down en route while the US turns your whole nation into one giant self-lit glass parking lot with impunity.

[Scactha]

And this "my dad is stronger than your dad" thread has to do with Peak Oil how? Mods?

[Valdemar]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'h')a ha ha you're still thinking conventional warfare aka WW2 style. Who needs ICBM's when you can just smuggle a nuke aboard a container ship? ABM systems have NOTHING to do with defense......it's just a taxpayer funded sweetheart deal between the politicians and defense contractors who decided to get into bed together.