PDA

View Full Version : Wrong Again



RWGR
04-04-2015, 04:57 PM
Some of Soonet's resident economists gleefully opined, nay stated, over the last few years that the US dollar was in irreversible decline, and its swan song was nigh,

Tsk, tsk, gentlemen...never bet against the U.S.A.!!



Soaring dollar puts the world on sale for Americans

Americans have long complained that the dollar doesn't buy much anymore. Suddenly, the dollar's problem may be that it buys too much — a change that has huge implications across the global economy for consumers, businesses, investors and governments.

The U.S. currency's value has surged over the last nine months, reaching levels against some world currencies last seen more than a decade ago. In Europe, it now costs just $1.09 to buy one euro, down from $1.37 a year ago and almost $1.50 four years ago.

To put it another way, an American tourist strolling the streets of Paris this April can buy 25% more croissants, cafe au laits or mini Eiffel towers than a year ago with the same dollars.

The greenback's advance has been even more dramatic against some rivals. With its latest rally, one buck buys 30% more Swedish kronor than a year ago, 40% more Brazilian reais and 61% more Russian rubles.

The breadth of the rally has taken Wall Street by surprise. The dollar "has gained ground against every single major currency and most emerging-market currencies," said Camilla Sutton, a foreign-exchange strategist at Scotiabank in Toronto.

The basic explanation for the return of the almighty dollar is that the U.S. economy is in better shape than most of the rest of the world

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-king-dollar-20150405-story.html#page=1

riggs
04-04-2015, 06:31 PM
It's great to see your dollar rebound and people are getting back to work, but how will that help your irreversible debt?

RWGR
04-04-2015, 07:58 PM
It's great to see your dollar rebound and people are getting back to work, but how will that help your irreversible debt?

The dollar has little to do with that. That is a problem of reckless spending in Washington. That will be large or small, regardless of how strong or weak the dollar is.

Barry Morris
04-04-2015, 08:14 PM
The dollar has little to do with that. That is a problem of reckless spending in Washington. That will be large or small, regardless of how strong or weak the dollar is.

Really??

I suppose there are some who believe that.

But maybe others know better.

RWGR
04-04-2015, 08:42 PM
Really??

I suppose there are some who believe that.

But maybe others know better.

By all means, take the stage!

RWGR
04-04-2015, 08:43 PM
(pssst...I think someone is confusing "deficit" with "debt")

Barry Morris
04-04-2015, 10:45 PM
(pssst...I think someone is confusing "deficit" with "debt")

Possibly. Maybe you could explain.

Economic warfare. If China, now the BIGGEST economy in the world, said, "Pay your debts to us NOW, or we will cut off all exports to the USA!", What would happen?? They ARE a communist country, known for not caring much about their people.

Wouldn't that be interesting.

Bluesky
04-04-2015, 11:09 PM
I beleive that would set off a chain reaction that would affect the global economy and China herself would not be able to withstand that shock. And yes, actually, China does care a lot more about her people than she used to.

Official Cat of Soonet
04-04-2015, 11:23 PM
Quite the crazy " what if" Barry. What if China decides to change it's name to Nancy and start all over from scratch? What then?

Barry Morris
04-05-2015, 04:36 AM
I beleive that would set off a chain reaction that would affect the global economy and China herself would not be able to withstand that shock. And yes, actually, China does care a lot more about her people than she used to.

Let's hope you're right, and I'm wrong.

RWGR
04-05-2015, 07:31 AM
Possibly. Maybe you could explain.

Economic warfare. If China, now the BIGGEST economy in the world, said, "Pay your debts to us NOW, or we will cut off all exports to the USA!", What would happen?? They ARE a communist country, known for not caring much about their people.

Wouldn't that be interesting.

China owns 8% of US debt. China also relies heavily on the U.S. for its sale of exports, which account for 18% of all its exports (in contrast, the entire EU is at 17%). Your scenario is a non-starter. China is not going to screw China in order to screw over the US, just because they "don't care about their people". Way, way too simplistic, Barry.

And China SHOULD be the world's largest economy. For every American citizen there are four Chinese citizens. There is nothing out of the ordinary about China having the world's largest economy. What was out of the ordinary was the fact the U.S. had the world's largest economy since the administration of Ulysses S. Grant. A country barely one hundred years old takes on that title, and holds it until last year. That is beyond extraordinary, it's practically miraculous.

Barry Morris
04-05-2015, 10:30 AM
China owns 8% of US debt. China also relies heavily on the U.S. for its sale of exports, which account for 18% of all its exports (in contrast, the entire EU is at 17%). Your scenario is a non-starter. China is not going to screw China in order to screw over the US, just because they "don't care about their people". Way, way too simplistic, Barry.

And China SHOULD be the world's largest economy. For every American citizen there are four Chinese citizens. There is nothing out of the ordinary about China having the world's largest economy. What was out of the ordinary was the fact the U.S. had the world's largest economy since the administration of Ulysses S. Grant. A country barely one hundred years old takes on that title, and holds it until last year. That is beyond extraordinary, it's practically miraculous.

I remember just how much other communist countries care about their people.

If your comparison of the population were true, China would always have been the largest economy. It was not.

Taken in its entirety, your post is kinda funny!!

Official Cat of Soonet
04-05-2015, 10:53 AM
I remember just how much other communist countries care about their people.

If your comparison of the population were true, China would always have been the largest economy. It was not.

Taken in its entirety, your post is kinda funny!!

Ya it's his post that is funny.

Official Cat of Soonet
04-05-2015, 10:57 AM
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ccoVuu_uovw/maxresdefault.jpg

RWGR
04-05-2015, 12:15 PM
I remember just how much other communist countries care about their people.

So what do Chinese leaders have to gain by sabotaging their own economy?

If your comparison of the population were true, China would always have been the largest economy. It was not.

Barry, really? Larger populations automatically mean larger economies??

China has over a billion more people than the U.S. The population numbers are easy to find. The US had the larger economy because it produced more, was more dynamic, energetic, and advanced.

Bangladesh has a population five times that of Canada, yet Canada has the larger economy by far. See how population size does not automatically equate to a strong economy?

Taken in its entirety, your post is kinda funny!!

Hoping we can keep this a mature discussion.

The Voice
04-05-2015, 02:00 PM
What was out of the ordinary was the fact the U.S. had the world's largest economy since the administration of Ulysses S. Grant. A country barely one hundred years old takes on that title, and holds it until last year. That is beyond extraordinary, it's practically miraculous.

I would agree that post Civil War The US certainly was on an Epic Economic Expansion. But I would have to think that It's economy did not surpass that of Great Britain until WWI.

So The Economy of GB which had been the largest in the World From The Reign of William and Mary and the Glorious Revolution Right through WWI is truly the Epic Miracle.

RWGR
04-05-2015, 02:09 PM
I would agree that post Civil War The US certainly was on an Epic Economic Expansion. But I would have to think that It's economy did not surpass that of Great Britain until WWI.

So The Economy of GB which had been the largest in the World From The Reign of William and Mary and the Glorious Revolution Right through WWI is truly the Epic Miracle.

You forgot the part where I said the US took on the title and yet had barely been a country for a century. How long had GB been a country by the time of Wm and Mary? And, GB was an empire.

Apples to oranges.

Regardless, the US held the title from post-Civil war until last year. Basic fact, easy to check.

The Voice
04-05-2015, 02:24 PM
You forgot the part where I said the US took on the title and yet had barely been a country for a century. How long had GB been a country by the time of Wm and Mary? And, GB was an empire.

Apples to oranges.

Regardless, the US held the title from post-Civil war until last year. Basic fact, easy to check.

They probably don't take the whole Economy of GB into account. It is probably broke down into countries in the facts you are quoting.

I would hardly think it is apples to oranges when the British Economy is an entity. In the same vein as the American Economy is an entity.

Barry Morris
04-05-2015, 09:58 PM
I remember just how much other communist countries care about their people.

So what do Chinese leaders have to gain by sabotaging their own economy?

What did Stalin have to gain by starving millions??


If your comparison of the population were true, China would always have been the largest economy. It was not.

Barry, really? Larger populations automatically mean larger economies??

You said it first


China has over a billion more people than the U.S. The population numbers are easy to find. The US had the larger economy because it produced more, was more dynamic, energetic, and advanced.

Bangladesh has a population five times that of Canada, yet Canada has the larger economy by far. See how population size does not automatically equate to a strong economy?

Taken in its entirety, your post is kinda funny!!

Hoping we can keep this a mature discussion.

:) :) :)

RWGR
04-06-2015, 07:39 AM
What did Stalin have to gain by starving millions??

The imposition of communism on millions who did not want it.

China already has communism.



You said it first

China is not a third world country. Their economy has always been relatively strong over the last few decades. As such, it should have been the world's largest economy long ago, but was not.

Also, you need to understand "largest" does not mean "strongest"

Barry Morris
04-06-2015, 09:31 AM
What did Stalin have to gain by starving millions??

The imposition of communism on millions who did not want it.

China already has communism.



You said it first

China is not a third world country. Their economy has always been relatively strong over the last few decades. As such, it should have been the world's largest economy long ago, but was not.

Also, you need to understand "largest" does not mean "strongest"

And someday you'll learn that "strongest" does not mean "everlasting"!!!

RWGR
04-06-2015, 11:20 AM
And someday you'll learn that "strongest" does not mean "everlasting"!!!

Now that you've totally went off course we'll consider this one done.

Barry Morris
04-06-2015, 11:52 AM
Now that you've totally went off course we'll consider this one done.

Post 3 did that!! Thanks again!!!

RWGR
04-06-2015, 12:51 PM
Glad to be of service...all this, for free!! :) :) :)