Breaking that barrier has long been viewed by analysts and markets as a key turning point in solidifying the euro’s position in global currency markets, and will provide more impetus for it to be the reserve currency of choice — a position long held by the now-weakening U.S. dollar.
[…]
David Jones, chief market analyst at CMC Markets in London, said the euro’s rise is not likely to abate in the coming days, particularly later Thursday when traders wait to hear what U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson say about the U.S. mortgage market in testimony before the U.S. Congress.
[…]
The dollar also fell against other currencies, dipping against the British pound to $2.0073 compared with $2.0025 late Wednesday, after U.K. retail sales in August rose by 0.6 percent from July.
Back to the BBC story:
Analysts have said that the impact of the plunging dollar on European consumer and businesses may be mixed.
Eurozone consumers may benefit from cheaper prices for some imported goods.
At the same time, there is some good news for eurozone companies because oil, metals and many raw material prices are quoted in dollars, meaning that the strength of the euro should dampen firms’ input costs.
However, while the strong euro may cut some import costs, it could also have a negative effect on exports as European-made goods become more expensive.
The US the Europe’s largest trading partner.
It could also hurt growth in Asia, with the US being the largest market for China, Korea, and other Asian exporters.
Currency fluctuations such as we see between the U.S. and the euro and among all countries or monetary unions around the world are wasteful, risky, and unnecessary.
What is needed is a Single Global Currency, managed by a Global Central Bank within a Global Monetary Union. (See www.singleglobalcurrency.org)
If the euro can be used successfully by 13 nations, soon to be 15, and later 22 nations, why not move to a currency to be used by all 191 members of the United Nations for international transactions AND for internal transactions such as the payment of taxes. Led by the example of Europe, regional monetary unions are being created and expanded around the world. However, as good as such regional unions may be, they still exist in an expensive multi-currency world. Their benefits will be dwarfed by the benefits of a Single Global Currency.
The implementation of a Single Global Currency will save the world approximately $400 billion in foreign exchange transaction costs, and will eliminate currency crises and balance of payment problems and eliminate all the currency fluctuations which bedevil our globalizing world. Also, a Single Global Currency would increase the values of assets in countries where currency risk is presently high, and the citizens of those countries would be less likely to send their money to safer financial centers.
The goal of the Single Global Currency Assn. is a Single Global Currency by the year 2024, which is only 17 years away. Daunting as that goal may seem, please remember that in 1985, when the euro was still 17 years away from the pockets of Europeans, the prospects for ever abandoning the deutschmark, franc and guilder were low. Also, the Berlin wall was still standing and the Soviet Union loomed large.
We need to start researching and planning now for a Single Global Currency to be managed by a Global Central Bank within a Global Monetary Union.
Interesting article–Peet’s, by the way makes a hell of a cup of coffee. Unlike Starbucks, they actually work the espresso machines. Their Americanos are exceptional.
Comment by Ratoe — Wednesday, September 19, 2024 @ 4:11 pm
Only 29 percent of Americans gave Bush a positive grade for his job performance, below his worst Zogby poll mark of 30 percent in March. A paltry 11 percent rated Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14 percent in July.
My word, 11%–that is remarkable.
But, I suppose it all stands to reason. Bush’s 29% would appear to represents his hardcore base that it radically unlikely to abandon him no matter what. Congress is having problems because a) Congress always suffers in the polls (we like our Congressman, but usually dislike the rest) and the fact that the pro-GOP respondents are already going to be predisposed to respond negatively about the Congress and the Democratic base believes that the Congress hasn’t done enough in terms of Iraq and oversight of the administration.
It is noteworthy that the Petraeus/Crocker report did not buy the President even a small bump in approval.
And there are these happy numbers as well:
The national survey of 1,011 likely voters, taken September 13 through September 16, found barely one-quarter of Americans, or 27 percent, believe the country is headed in the right direction. Nearly 62 percent think the country is on the wrong track.
Hidden among the porcelain fox hounds and Burberry tablecloths on sale at eBay.be this week was an unusual item: “For Sale: Belgium, a Kingdom in three parts … free premium: the king and his court (costs not included).”
The odd ad was posted by one disgruntled Belgian in protest at his country’s political crisis which reached a 100-day landmark Tuesday with no end in sight to the squabbling between Flemish and Walloon politicians.
[…]
EBay was happy to take Six’ advertisement.
“It was a really fun listing made by a Belgian,” Peter Burin, PR manager of eBay Belgium. “This person, in a very funny way, reminded the Belgians what a great country Belgium actually is and it would be a shame to sell it.”
However, the company decided to pull the add Tuesday after receiving a bid of euro10 million ($14 million)
We decided to take it down, just to avoid confusion,” he told APTN.
Too funny.
(And for the handful who get the title reference, I hope you enjoyed it.)
UC Irvine Chancellor Michael V. Drake and Erwin Chemerinsky have reached an agreement that will return the liberal legal scholar to the dean’s post at the university’s new law school, the university announced this morning.
With the deal, they hope to end the controversy that erupted when Chemerinsky was dropped as the first dean of the Donald Bren School of Law.
Drake traveled over the weekend to Durham, N.C., where Chemerinsky is a professor at Duke University, and the two reached an agreement about midnight Sunday, sources told The Times.
Must’ve been some meeting.
I was figuring that it would end up like this, as Drake had a great deal of PR damage to fix, and if the school had to start all over again, the law school’s opening might have been delayed—not to mention that Drake’s job and career path were being significantly threatened.
On that latter point, Drake’s judgment certainly will remain under public scrutiny. If anything the fact that he allowed this situation to threaten the law school’s Fall 2024 opening is enough to question Drake’s managerial skills.
220 years ago today the US Constitution was completed and signed by a a majority of the Philadelphia delegates. It is a key day in the development of both the United States of America and democracy as a form of modern governance.
I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions… But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the same coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.
On this day that celebrates our nation’s foundational document, it strikes me as a worthy issue to consider whether we don’t sometimes try to make the boy’s coat fit a country that has clearly grown. What immediately comes to my mind is the electoral college, an institution that a) was designed for a far different time to address very specific political needs, and b) never really worked as the Founders intended (short version of that: it was thought that it would be common for the House to have to choose to President on account of no one receiving a majority of the electoral vote). However, despite these two facts (and that fact that it currently makes many voters in a number of states almost irrelevant) we seem reticent to keep it because it is “in the Constitution.”
The interesting thing is that not only does Jefferson’s quote above indicate that many of the founding generation would have found such doctrinaire adherence odd, so, too would have Madison, the Father of the Constitution.
Other issues aside from the EC could be raised, but I will leave it at that for the moment.
Indeed, it is odd that we ascribe dogmatism to the ultimate non-conformists. If you’d like to see how we can make the Electoral College a moot formality and ensure that everyone has an equal vote, check out nationalpopularvote.com and fairvote.org.
Comment by Paul — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 8:32 am
It’s not just because it’s in the Constitution. We can change the Constitution as we have a number of times. The issue is that we can’t change it because of the internal politics involved. There are enough states that believe that they have a better deal in the EC than they would in a straight national vote to block change. I don’t think that it’s a reverence to tradition. Otherwise we’d have, among other things, appointed senators.
Comment by R. Alex — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 9:08 am
This “coat” that may not fit anymore can be amended at any time. The EC can be changed along with many other outdated requirements. The only problem is we may not want to change them.
Change may be good but changing for the sake of fashion or trend is foolish. We have amended the constitution many times for a total of 27 amendments over 220 years. The system works fine as it is and should work fine in the future.
Comment by Steve Plunk — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 10:44 am
Clearly, the politics of the day are at issue, I certainly understand that.
However, we are reluctant to even discuss these things.
And to argue that th system works well makes my point, as I would argue that it doesn’t, and I don’t mean because of 2024 (although those events should have sparked more debate than it did).
I say it doesn’t work because it eliminates the significance of millions of voters. For example, Alabama will go for a Republican in 2024 and CA will go for a Democrat in 2024. As such, of what ultimate significance are Democratic voters in AL and Republicans in CA?
Why should Wyoming voters count more than California voters (or, indeed, most voters in the US)?
What it is the possible democratic justification for either?
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 11:28 am
Madison barely even mentioned the Electoral College in the Federalist Papers. I would not say it was even “designed.” It was the product of a logroll. Actually, so were the key institutions of the Constitution as we know it–especially the Senate. The difference is that, whereas Madison, in Federalist 51, offered a post-hoc theoretical justification for the Senate and a separate Presidency (which he also did not originally support and which contradicts his pre-Convention theory in Fed 10), he never attempted any such theoretical defense of the electoral college.
Jefferson, a founder, though not a member of the Convention, later wrote about the folly of leaving the choice of method for appointing electors to the states, having recognized that (1) appointing/electing them in bloc was a bad idea, and (2) that states faced a collective action problem in that each state maximizes its influence by delivering them in bloc (as indeed most have throughout US history).
The National Popular Vote compact win the only way I can see to overcome this collective action problem, and returning to the real democratic and republican spirit of Madison and Jefferson.
Comment by MSS — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 12:40 pm
However, we are reluctant to even discuss these things.
We are? California, North Carolina, Colorado, National Popular Vote organizations…
The reason it wasn’t discussed as much after 2024 as one might have predicted was I think because there were other issues involved, like whether or not Bush should have even won the EC. It was an extremely contentious time where the entire debate had a huge partisan spin and the country was anxious to move on from it. Had Bush had a clear EC victory and Gore a clear popular vote victory, I think it would have actually gotten more discussion than it did. Had Kerry picked off Ohio and still lost the national vote by a million or two, it would have gotten more discussion there as well. That’s my take on it, anyway.
Comment by R. Alex — Tuesday, September 18, 2024 @ 1:25 pm
the violence and fear in Basra takes place mostly outside the sphere of Sunni-Shiite killings. Al Qaeda is not a factor.
Basra is a predominately Shiite city, yet it is still imbued with fear of kidnappings, assassinations, and being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.
This instability reveals that the violence in Iraq is not only sectarian or the result of insurgent activity, but is also caused by deep-seated political and tribal rivalries and an intense scramble for power.
Basra has long been touted, second only to the Kurdish regions, as the “good news” part of Iraq–where post-Saddam (and pro-US) governance was going to be relatively easy. However:
Billboards glorify Mahdi militiamen who died fighting the British. Streets carry their names. Upon the British departure, the Mahdi Army claimed victory. It had been leading the fight against the occupation since its early days. On Sept. 8, thousands of militiamen roamed the city center in vehicles and on foot brandishing Mr. Sadr’s posters in what they billed as a “victory parade.”
[…]
The militia is said to number 17,000 in Basra alone and is divided into 40 company-size military units, according to a senior Iraqi security official
[…]
They control multiple units in the 14,500-strong police force, and hold sway in hospitals, the education board, the university, ports and oil terminals, and the oil products and electricity distribution companies, says a Basra-based, Iraqi researcher.
This is a situation that has nothing to do with AQI and will not be remedied by the surge or similar policies. It is certainly a situation that underscores the lack of a central state run out of Baghdad and the general lack of control over the use of force by that chimeric state.
And if one thinks that there aren’t possible conflicts with Baghdad on the horizon, please note the following (emphasis mine):
Amid this chaotic and dizzyingly complex picture in Basra, the central government has attempted to wrest control in this vital province which, with its oil exports, accounts for nearly 90 percent of Baghdad’s revenues.
Basra also underscores the influence of Iran in Shiite areas of Iraq.
The piece is worth reading in full, especially the box at the end of the piece (click and scroll down) which details the major political players in the region.
Our blog, at any rate, has been rather skeptical of the British “softly softly” approach in Basra.
So was a certain gent named Steven Vincent whom we used to cite pretty often who write something called In the Red Zone. You may recall Juan Cole writing reams of “he got what he deserved” pieces on him.
Oddly, other than Kurdistan, the palces thaty seem to be getting most nationalistic in a good way, are those where there has been lots of fighting. Basra seems a nest of gangsters, not as bad as Gaza, but somewhat like the West Bank or the worse bits of Egypt, or TV charicatures of of Russia.
Comment by Honza P — Monday, September 17, 2024 @ 1:38 pm
You are still disgusting. Can’t take anything the military says - too hung up with your view of Vietnam and military exagerations I guess.
Wayne Elkins
Comment by Wayne Elkins — Monday, September 17, 2024 @ 5:46 pm
Currency fluctuations such as we see between the U.S. and the euro and among all countries or monetary unions around the world are wasteful, risky, and unnecessary.
What is needed is a Single Global Currency, managed by a Global Central Bank within a Global Monetary Union. (See www.singleglobalcurrency.org)
If the euro can be used successfully by 13 nations, soon to be 15, and later 22 nations, why not move to a currency to be used by all 191 members of the United Nations for international transactions AND for internal transactions such as the payment of taxes. Led by the example of Europe, regional monetary unions are being created and expanded around the world. However, as good as such regional unions may be, they still exist in an expensive multi-currency world. Their benefits will be dwarfed by the benefits of a Single Global Currency.
The implementation of a Single Global Currency will save the world approximately $400 billion in foreign exchange transaction costs, and will eliminate currency crises and balance of payment problems and eliminate all the currency fluctuations which bedevil our globalizing world. Also, a Single Global Currency would increase the values of assets in countries where currency risk is presently high, and the citizens of those countries would be less likely to send their money to safer financial centers.
The goal of the Single Global Currency Assn. is a Single Global Currency by the year 2024, which is only 17 years away. Daunting as that goal may seem, please remember that in 1985, when the euro was still 17 years away from the pockets of Europeans, the prospects for ever abandoning the deutschmark, franc and guilder were low. Also, the Berlin wall was still standing and the Soviet Union loomed large.
We need to start researching and planning now for a Single Global Currency to be managed by a Global Central Bank within a Global Monetary Union.
Comment by Morrison Bonpasse — Friday, September 21, 2024 @ 6:47 am