TOPICS

What Not Being Able To Buy Oil In Dollars Means

The big news this week on the financial front was the Independent’s claim that Gulf Arabs and France, Japan, Russia and Japan were planning to move from buying oil in dollars to buying it in a basket of currencies, including gold and a new universal currency shared by the Gulf nations.

Buying oil in dollars is one of the foundations of the dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve currency. Because the the dollar is the world’s primary reserve currency Americans have been able to borrow money for significantly less than other countries are able to. This has both made America more prosperous, and through the perverse incentives of cheap money, helped lead to the high indebtedness of American citizens and the financial crisis.

In addition, buying oil in dollars is one of the things which allowed strong dollar policies to drive the price of oil down. Making dollars extremely scarce in the 80’s and nineties was one key factor leading to a price per barrel under $20. Oil prices started their rise upwards after Greenspan’s Federal Reserve let loose the money spigot in the Asian crisis and the Long Term Capital fiasco. Greenspan essentially never took his foot off the pedal from that point onwards, and oil prices soared, until last year at one point they were over $150/barrel.

So one consequence of going off the dollar is that a major benefit of the strong dollar play is taken off the table, and the US loses its ability to control the price of oil. Since at this time, contrary to what the Feds are saying, a strong dollar play isn’t in the cards (the US needs to borrow way too much money) that’s not a big deal in the short run—in the long run it is.

But buying oil in dollars isn’t the only thing that underpins the dollar as the world’s reserve currency and to understand what buying oil in something other than dollars would mean we need to understand what else makes, or perhaps more accurately, made, the dollar so important.

Technological Revolutions: Remember the internet boom of the nineties? Remember the way that money flooded in from the rest of the world to buy up internet stocks? Sure, most of them turned out to be worthless, but some didn’t. When the US was the nation most likely to create the next technological revolution you needed dollars so that when it occurred you could buy in on the ground floor. Whether microcomputers in the 80’s or the internet in the 90’s, odds were that America was going to create the next big tech. So foreigners needed to be in the dollar.

At this point the US is the undisputed leader in almost nothing except military tech. As expected, US dominance of the arms sales market continues to increase, but the US can’t live on weapon sales alone. In most other fields, including telecom, the internet, large chunks of biotech, renewable energy, ground transportation and so on the US now lags other modern economies.

The structure of the US economy, with a few large oligopolistic firms dominating the market in key fields needn’t necessarily mean no technological advances, after all Japan and Korea certainly have high concentrations of large firms, but US firms such as the telecom giants essentially don’t engage in research, don’t believe in upgrading infrastructure more than they have to and are rent seeking corporations—they provide an inferior product to a captive audience (as with insurance companies) knowing that Americans have no other options. If they fail, they expect the US government to bail them out with huge subsidies.

This structure means that the US, is unlikely to be the home of the next great technological revolution. The next tech reveolution could happen in the US, with the right policies, but the Obama administration has not engaged in those policies, instead spending trillions on propping up failed business models.

Consumers of Last and Main Resort: For decades now Americans have bought a ton of consumer goods, from cars to electronics to clothes. As time went by, more and more of these goods were bought from foreign countries, and more and more of it was bought on credit. America and Americans have been the engine of development for Japan, the Asian Tigers, and most recently, China. China, Japan and Korea, in particular, used mercantalist policies—that is to say they generally used trade barriers to protect their internal economy and subsidies to help their exports. China’s main trade barrier and subsidy is its massive interventions to keep the Yuan cheap against the dollar, an intervention which has amounted to as much as 10% of China’s GDP.

That intervention has left China with a huge number of dollars denominated assets. In effect the Chinese loaned America the money to consume Chinese goods, which simultaneously made American manufactured goods uncompetitive which meant that manufacturing employment in American dropped like a rock while new factories opened in China rather than the US. In exchange for the money they loaned America, China industrialized. Even if they don’t get most of the money back (and they won’t) it was a good deal for them. As for Americans, well, Americans were able to live above their means—those who didn’t lose their jobs, anyway.

Many countries export a lot to the US. While US consumers have pulled back significantly, they still consume a lot. There is, as yet, no replacement for the US consumer. China and other countries may wish there was, but there isn’t.

The American Security Product: One of the main reasons other countries were willing to, in effect subsidize the US, for decades, is that it provided the common security product—against the Soviets, then against real rogue nations, and always against pirates.

In particular, America’s navy is as large as the next 13 navies combined. The US was responsible for keeping the world’s shipping lines open, and it was the core of the NATO hammer when a problem needed to be dealt with (for example, Serbia in the late nineties.)

But lately the US hasn’t been delivering the product in a way that the rest of the world appreciates. Most of “old” Europe (ie. the countries with money and power) opposed it. So did most of Asia. So did America’s allies in the Middle East. Once in Iraq, the US couldn’t be defunded for fear of Iraq splintering, but now that it’s clear the US is leaving anyway, the possibility exists.

And then there’s the Somali pirates. Because most of the US navy was occupied with the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, the Somali pirates got completely out of hand and the US Navy didn’t do anything about it for a long long time. When the issue was finally dealt with, the US navy was only one of a number of navies doing so. The US let it get out of control, and then wasn’t key to fighting it.

Now that the US no longer protects very well against the Soviets, rogue nations or pirates, and now that joint naval operations are how the Somali pirates are being dealt with, the rest of the world is wondering whether it’s worth paying for a US military which doesn’t do what they want it to do. Only the Afghan war, which has elite support in Europe (though not popular) makes some think that perhaps the US is worth keeping on as the world’s policeman.

Buying Key Technologies Required Dollars: Yet another reason folks wanted to have lots of dollars and access to dollars was that you needed dollars to buy certain goods. For decades the only good commercial jet liners were Americans. Key computer technologies needed to be bought in dollars. Intellectual property needed to be bought in dollars. The best military technology had to be (and still has to be) bought in dollars. And so on. The US wasn’t just home to the next technological revolution, it was home to all the good things you wanted to buy and which you couldn’t buy in your currency.

This is, with a few exceptions, no longer true. The Europeans and Japanese can sell you most high end capital goods. There is no real difference between Airbus and Boeing products (though both are essentially 30 year old technology). The Chinese can and will sell you middle and low end goods for less than America. You don’t need dollars to buy most of what you need and want, and if something comes up really worth buying (say General Motors) well, if you’re someone who really wants it, like the Chinese, you just won’t be allowed to buy it anyway. (The Chinese would have loved to buy GM.)

A Safe Haven For Money and For You: For decades, if you wanted a safe place to put your money and put it to work, the US was probably the best. It was the most stable, it was impossible it could be conquered even if there was a World War III, it was the largest and could absorb the most money. Likewise, if things went really bad in your country, it was a great place to flee to.

The financial crisis put the wisdom of placing your money in the US in question. Bush era immigration and travel policies, not rescinded by the Obama administration, put the utility of the US as a safe haven in question as well. And yet, to an extent, the US retains at least the first role, because there is simply no other country available. Europe did not avoid the financial crisis, China doesn’t allow that much investment in the country and is an unsafe place to put money, and so on. So the US retains some safe haven appeal. At the same time, however, foreign elites have become far more uneasy about the idea and want a different option. And for themselves, they’d rather vacation, have their second homes and educate their children in Europe.

And at last, back to oil: Of course, the final and in some ways most important reason for the dollar’s reserve currency status is that oil was sold in dollars. This is a result of a decades long understanding between the key Gulf States, Saudi Arabia and America that the US both underwrote their security and could knock them over any time it wanted. In exchange for America’s security umbrella and help in maintaining their regimes, oil was priced in dollars. When they became rich in the 70s, their money flooded primarily through US banks.

Indeed, in prior years, every time an OPEC nation talked about going off the dollar as the currency for buying oil, rumor has it that the Saudis were the ones to spike the move.

Oil is the most important commodity in the world. Ultimately all economies are underpinned by oil. Oil is also the most important military resource. With oil your army can move and fight. Without it, it can’t. In many ways WWII was fought for oil and with oil, and the powers with the oil defeated those which didn’t have it.

Which brings us back to the US military product. As long as oil is priced in dollars, the US military can always function at full capacity, because if push comes to shove, the US can always just print more dollars.

If oil is not priced in dollars, then certain US access to oil is removed—both for the military and for the civilian population. Sure, the US can still print more dollars, but if oil isn’t priced in dollars, well, print too much and you may get inflation, even hyperinflation. And if the oilarchies don’t approve of a particular military action, well, they can make it much more expensive.

Are the Dollar’s Days as Reserve Currency Over?

No. They aren’t. But they are numbered. They aren’t over because other nations still need the US consumer. Until the Chinese manage to create a domestic consumer society, both they and other countries can’t cut themselves lose from the US consumer. What they will do, and what they are doing, is trying to manage how much the US borrows and to take away the US ability control the world’s money supply. They will still have to keep the US propped up for the time being, because in so doing they are propping up themselves. And remember always that Chinese citizens aren’t like Americans. Take their jobs or their land or their hope and they get violent—very violent. They have, do and will fight both the police and the military. China’s elites know that if they don’t keep economic growth coming, their heads could literally wind up rolling.

In addition, while no one is happy with the US security product, the fact is that no one can really replace it. The European military is not strong enough, and their navy does not have the projection ability. Likewise with the Chinese military, who in any aren’t trusted half as much as the Europeans, though their moral flexibility is appreciated by many regimes, who still understand you don’t invite China to station large number of troops in your country if you have half a brain.

Likewise, there is simply no replacement for the US as a haven of last resort. China’s currency and investment controls make it unsuitable. Europe managed its financial affairs no better than the US over the last decade, although they seem to have learned the regulatory lessons marginally better than the US. If you need a place to store your money, and put it to work, the US may not look good, but neither does anyone else who is large enough to absorb large amounts of money.

The key break point, the end of the dollar hegemony, will come when the Chinese are able to move to a consumer economy. At that point, the Chinese will no longer need America as consumers, and they will let the Yuan float. The devastation this will wreck on the US economy is hard to overstate. Standards of living will crash. In the long run, being forced to live within its means, and no longer having to compete against massively subsidized foreign goods may turn out to be good for the US, but that won’t make you feel better as your effective income collapses or you lose your job.

This is probably two economic cycles out. We’re talking 12 to 16 years. So there’s time yet. Probably.

So what does oil not being priced in dollars mean to me now?

Less money for everything. The US will not be able to afford as large a stimulus as it should have. It will mean borrowing costs higher than they would otherwise have been and more restricted credit (sure, theoretical interest rates may be low, but can you get a loan at those rates?) Oil prices, and gas prices will be more volatile for the US than they were before, which is saying something.

And other countries will get more oil, relatively speaking. Which means they will get more growth. They will receive more investment from the oilarchies, and the US will receive less. Relatively speaking the US economy will not be as good as it was. This is a marginal effect, but marginal effects add up.

This is, in short, not good news. You won’t be able to say “I lost my job because oil isn’t priced in dollars” but it will be true for some people. Lower wages, more restricted credit, and more restricted government policy will be the price paid for the massive incompetence which lead to this moment.

And yet this does have a silver lining. Both for other countries who deserve to be able to pay in their own currencies and for America and Americans, who need to learn to live within their means, to emphasize production again rather than consumption and who need to wean off of oil as much as possible in any case.

But it will hurt.



Login or Register to post comments.

62 comments

This had been predicted for some time, and ignored by Republicans. The world has changed for the worst because of Republican greed and stupidity. Let's see how the main stream media spins this (hint--it's good for America!).

isn't MSM by any measure, though Alexander Cockburn can be almost Paglian in his contrarianism; nevertheless this is a solid counter-argument from Mike Whitney, a regular contributor:

http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney10062009.html

I need to install more shelving for laying in a supply of non-perishable food items, toilet paper, etc.

we're basically screwed.

101% ............ and it's wholly self-inflicted, though the masses are so well conditioned that they are going to blame socalism, south america and ......... hmmm gays and terrorists I would of thought.

At least it will help curtail the US's abuses in the world.

True or false?

Duhhhh I dunno let's PaRtY!

looks like the Fed is really "taking care" of the American people.

day if they really wanted to. A National STRIKE.

We are not doing NOTHING until our voice is heard.

... because if the Chinese are stuck on propping us up in order to keep propping themselves up for the next decade or two, a national strike would in effect scare the ever living piss out of President Aceveda and the spineless Dimbulbcrats simply because China -- holding roughly 1/3rd of our debt right now -- will absolutely require over the next decade or two the continued steady drip, drip, drip of "stupid Gaijin" literally pouring out of our public schools every single year to consume, consume, consume iPods, computers, gaming consoles, sneakers, and other cheap Chinese imports as mindlessly as they'd pick their posteriors.

I hardly need remind you that the Chinese are the most shrewdest of business people in the world who outright DEMAND returns on their investment, and when they own 1/3rd of your nations entire debt with the commitment to eat more of it over the next decade or two, you can bet your ass that they'll demand more and more stupid Gaijin ... and President Aceveda will roll over for them by any means necessary, including making Bush's "No Child Left Behind" look tame, deploying the National Guard to make a national workers strike go bye-bye real fast, and make cradle-to-grave schooling permanent and compulsory.

Translation: See ya in the Gulag!

I first linked this on the 5th here.

Again here. the Max Kaiser video is of interest.

Subsequent counter views on the Fisk article, in particular see the Mike Shedlock link can be found in my previous comment here

---

The question is not whether the meeting took place as described, it likely did. These meetings have happened before.

What is in doubt, is whether 1) - it would be in their interest to abandon the dollar, especially those that hold our debt in dollars and 2) - even if they did so desire, could they cause it to happen. Mike Shedlock says no.

The dollar will be history eventually but not because a group decrees it.

His piece is also in my previous links which is why I suggested following them.

Though thank you.

Doh.

I'm not sure which way the wind blows...because, ta dah, I'm no expert!

Just making the point that it's a complex issue....

And the folks at Zero Hedge.

I follow all of these people's writings, but only for their views on the capitalists running amuck.

I am a socialist and there is almost nothing from a social standpoint we ever have in common.

Different ends of the human condition spectrum.

Even so, some the zero master guys come up with some great one liners, particular in chasing after the banksters as they do.

What Not Being Able To Buy Oil In Dollars Means

The title is a misnomer. Even if a group decreed they would not take dollars, a currency trader can purchase any substantial amount of another currency instantaneously 24/7.

Robert Fisk is a journalist of impeccable repute but he does not generally report on economic or financial matters per se.

There is a possibility that he was unknowingly given a plant.

I have not heard this said but it is a world of manipulation and nothing is out of bounds.

The administration in Washington cannot be seen as devaluing the dollar. Yet they would not necessarily object to it happening.

Alice, did you happen to see Fisk's interview on RT? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFi1KlUh5PI&fe...

He expected the denials.

Thank you, I will watch it.

I have considerable respect for Fisk, he is marginalized in this country because his middle east reporting would show what a sham our foreign policy is.

was that it was designed to destabilize the US economy so as to lead to the Arab nations changing the basis of oil currency from the dollar.

They pretty much knew what Bush/Cheney would do...declare it was a war against our freedom...thus spending a trillion dollars on pointless wars.

Maybe it's time to seize the oil in Iraq and Afghanistan and ensure that the dollar is still valuable there. That's a fifth of the oil reserves, correct?

for oil. (Snark)

.

. .

I dispute that The American general public isn't aware of this stuff.

"Now would be a great time for the US to overthrow the ban on industrial hemp and put hemp to use."

The doomsday imagination.

Another consequence of going off the dollar for reserve currency is hyper-inflation. Borrowing has become a necessity in this economy. The cost of that borrowing will go up rapidly. The only counter to this is to print more via the FED. Thus, inflation.

We are poised to regain at least some of our technological edge in the so called "green industries". Not only will these decrease the importance of oil imports, but it could become a major industry both domestically and for export. This has to be propped up by our government without big-oil control before that happens.

Dear All,

I am keeping this comment post simple. No fear. No anxiety. The USA can "retract" into isolationism and will most certainly come out the better for it.

Re-populate our state-side bases, invest in "our" national military security, protect "our" national resources, etc.

Default on international debt...turn every ship of cheap, low quality Chinese goods around and let them sell them elsewhere...we once made the best products in the world...and we shall do so again...even if it is only for our US state-side consumption....

We have the resources, the intelligence, and the desire to implement the elements of a US state-side based viable, locally based economy...

Retract from the global economy!!

The main problem I see is that our corporate masters are globalists. You might have a difficult time getting our "leaders" to go along with this idea.

whole problem right there. "Globalism" which is nothing but a code word for exploit cheap labor at will.

I think we just need to limit the power of the corporation. That could help a lot!

where do you plan on "retracting" all our oil from? Or are we going to run cars and trains on coal again?

the dollar is going to be devalued--we can't escape it.
a dollar devalue makes us just another debtor nation--essentially we would become a bed and breakfast for the world.
we would produce nothing and just become a tourist nation.

to stop the devalue of the dollar and save the dollar
would require something we can't do.
slashing city state and fed budgets.
budgets would have to be cut over 40% to send a message to the world that we were serious about saving the dollar.

slashing budgets will never and can't be done. its political suicide and too many groups (government unions) are too entrenched to do it.

its inevitable---see fall of roman empire, british empire.

be cheapened. This will continue until everything we once knew in this country is destroyed.

sorry for posting off topic, but why are there ads for campus reform and ann coulter on this site?

All (US)money is green. But see the site policy if you want a more detailed explanation.

Does this sort of "ads for things that are completely opposite the general ideology of the web site posters" happen on sites like redstate etc...? If it does what is the response there? Just curious.

The situation of using US Dollars for oil was compared to Salvador Dali's chequebook by Rob Newman.
Dali used to take his friends out for a good meal and deny themselves nothing. At the end, out came the chequebook (from an account with little or no money in it). The cheque would be written, but then Dali would do a sketch on the back and sign that. The restauranteur could now display the drawing, or cash the cheque. Dali always ate for free this way.
By using US$ for oil, loads of currency has been floating around in OPEC countries banks for years, making the US economy more bouyant.

I heard the same thing about Picasso, though his signature on the check sufficed to make it worth more uncashed than cashed.

What will we use, pesos?

Naw - we can still use the greenback.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Greenbackcu...

I read this essay during the run up to the war in Iraq and now it seems like it was on the mark: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar...

The answer is simple. We have to think in terms of energy, not oil. Energy can come from oil, but it can come from a ton of other sources too. Making our current electricity consumption more efficient would be the easiest way to liberate lots of energy that will offset the tighter supply of oil.

"So one consequence of going off the dollar is that a major benefit of the strong dollar play is taken off the table, and the US loses its ability to control the price of oil." Bullshit. The US loses the ability to artificially manipulate the price of oil using currency tricks, but we are still the biggest consumer. We use less and the price goes down.

True, the manufacturing base has eroded significantly in this country, and we are borrowing a lot of money from the Chinese. But you can't step in the same stream twice. Oil was yesterday.

every single barrel of oil we save in consumption, the Chinese would buy with aplomb (and hence have better growth.) The Afghan, and moreso the Iraq war, was as much about squeezing the oil pipe going to China as anything else. It worked for a spell, until Iraq spiraled out of control and building a safe pipeline in Afghanistan suddenly involved 3 trillion dollars and fighting in Pakistan too.

I do agree in what you are saying in general (using less oil for the US is a VERY good thing), but I'm disagreeing that it would lower world demand/prices.

Make plastic out of "energy". Make fertiliser out of "energy". Make pharmaceuticals out of "energy".

Oil is unique.

The price will only go "down" if the rate of consumption is lower than the rate of production. Considering production has been essentially FLAT since 2005, we are on the cusp of oil (and shortly after that, natgas) depletion.

That's why I think they will pull the rug out from under the USA sooner than later, because they (the rest of the world) will need the oil and are tired of the USA hogging it all up.

Read:

Resource Wars by Michael T Klare
Peak Everything by Richard Heinberg
GeoDesitinies by Walter Youngquist

that'll get you started.

Would also be nice if we didn't have the orgy of commodities trading going on which drives up oil (along with food stuffs and basic resources), since speculation doesn't usually bring down the cost of anything ...

Matt Taibbi had a great piece on the private exemptions to the commodities trading regulations which helped the price of oil skyrocket.

"In many ways WWII was fought for oil and with oil".

As WWIII will be.

Predicted this 4 years ago.

Just sayin'.

Ian, your analysis is so yesterday. The only thing that matters today is keeping up with technological innovation. For all its ignorance, much of the US is behind and falling more so and will continue to do so. But the US is still way king in Universities. Knowledge acquisition and acceleration is all that matters today - it is the new oil. Oil has at best 10 years of dominance left, maybe not even that much. Anyone basing their future on oil is doomed to be yesterday's news.
.

Our technological society is predicated on oil. Cheap oil at that.

Knowledge acquisition without computer chips will be, how shall I say it, very yesteryear.

Technology without energy is nothing.

As noted we are cusping at Hubbert's peak.

The Oildrum is a good source of continuing discussion here

Robert Newman illustrates this in a very comic way in the History of Oil

Apparantly, it wasn't Archduke Ferdinand, but the Berlin to Baghdad railway. The first British deployment he says, was to Tikrit.

World War I began in 1915?

When the war began, all of the armies involved relied on horses and steam power. The French used Paris city buses to move troops to the front during the Battle of the Marne in 1914, and the Brits introduced the first tanks in 1915 (though the first successful use of tanks en masse didn't happen until the Battle of Cambrai, which began on November 20, 1917).

But the Brits didn't need to take Tikrit(though they did in early November of 1917) - or any of what is now Iraq- to meet their petroleum needs. They had been getting their oil from Persia(for use by the Royal Navy) before the war, under the exclusive contracts of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. The Mesopotamian Campaign began defensively, in that the Brits attacked to give the refineries in Persia some breathing room, becoming offensive in nature when the Ottomans started pulling troops to fight at Gallipoli and in the Caucasus, and truly intensively offensive only after the Brits had begun making headway in Palestine and the Arabian Peninsula.

Europe has done exceptionally well in this crisis.
We no longer have the bad paper floating around here, it was forced to be written off the books last year and this year we are clear of what the US corps are still hanging on to.

We didn't have as much of it on our books to start with.

Our economy has shown itself far more stable and resilient than the US economy throughout this US created fiasco.

We still have manufacturing here, something you shipped out of country decades ago.

AND our currencies are stronger and have been for over 5 years.

All in all Europe is well positioned and in far better shape than the US.
I don't think we really need you all that much as consumers either, after all you aren't buying all that much from us right now as is and we are still doing better than you are.
Your US bias is showing there guy, it must be tough as hell to let go all those years of conditioning.

that oil became important because the British Navy converted from steam to internal combustion to increase power and efficiency. Had they converted to something else, then that would have been the go to fuel.

Of course there is more to it than that. The author forgot the impact of the perennial dollar on the economies of this hemisphere. Why do you think coffee, bananas and other agricultural products are still so cheap? Because for decades the dollar to local currency ratios in South America have gone from between 3:1 (dollar to whatever) to as much as 100:1. Money which was then funneled to European born/decedent elites who then kept it for themselves or re-invested in American companies and cities (Miami, New York, Chicago) while allowing American (Neo-Mercantilism) practices to go unchallenged (extremely low wages, no taxes, complete control of the ways of production).

If there is a shift in away from the dollar (signaled not only by China but by Iran and Venezuela) the power from this exchange ratio evaporates.

The article also ignores how the U.S. finances/underwrites the military forces of entire nations (Colombia/Israel for example) which it do in dollars. Again, if the dollar loses it's dominance the cost of buying control off corrupt governments through military "aid" increases and the Sword of Damocles that is the debt incurred in these purchases dwindles down to a dull knife.

"In effect the Chinese loaned America the money to consume Chinese goods, which simultaneously made American manufactured goods uncompetitive which meant that manufacturing employment in American dropped like a rock while new factories opened in China rather than the US. In exchange for the money they loaned America, China industrialized."

I believe that is the clearest, most focused explanation I have read of China's willingness to give what appears to be something for nothing all these years. They have benefited from the capital investment as dollars flowed through their system.

Holding all those dollars has presumably also helped China buy oil.

Another benefit of being the proprietor of the world's reserve currency has been, I think, that demand for dollars simply to use in ordinary transactions grew steadily for many decades. We printed the money, spent it overseas, received got goods from all over, and the world gained liquidity. What a great deal!

for the US. Cheap Chinese manufactured goods aren't the problem. Chinese currency manipulations to maintain a relatively strong US dollar are. They do this not merely to support exports but to use US dollars to compete for raw material purchases, including oil, around the world. Stopping this would be a good thing.

The real problem for the US in having oil (and other commodities) priced in something other than the USD is the flow of funds through the US banking system. A move away from the dollar means that the demand for dollars will fall, and so will the price. This will drive up the cost of goods for Americans, since so much of what is on sale there is made elsewhere.

The other big problem is that the US will be under great pressure to balance its trade, or see the value of the USD fall further. Any fall in the value of the dollar will drive up the cost of living in the US, and so impoverish its residents.

The good news is that a falling dollar will make US goods more competitive, and so increase the number of jobs available there. However, the chances are that the bad news will outweigh the good for many years to come if the project change to oil pricing goes ahead.

"Because the the dollar is the world’s primary reserve currency Americans have been able to borrow money for significantly less than other countries are able to"
-really? could you back this up with a source, and how much less at a particular time?

Interestingly dollars buying oil led to Eurodollars
which are dollar denominated deposits in any any currency
since there were not enough dollars relative to oil needing to
be paid for in dollars...so in a way the 'alternative' has existed for around 20 years being used...buying oil in some other 'currency' than dollars perhaps involves other motives...perhaps 'resentimente' would better account for this latest rumbling more than any financial reason...why you have the European Union etc.

A recent CNN television broadcast gave the impression that Esperanto aims to be a single global language. The comparison was with a global reserve currency instead of the US dollar.

See http://jeffreyhill.typepad.com/english/2009/0...

May I put the record straight? Esperanto intends to be an auxiliary language, or a second language for all. Please see http://www.lernu.net for confirmation.

62 comments

Login or Register to post comments.