China has become understandably nervous over the past few weeks. Obama’s massive spending will contribute to inflation, thereby reducing the value of the more than one trillion U.S. dollars China holds in its reserves. On Tuesday (March 24), China and Russia proposed greater use of Special Drawing Rights, a unit of account comprised of a basket of world currencies including the euro, pound, yen, and dollar. This suggestion underscores China’s lack of confidence in the dollar and a desire to hedge its risk by diversifying its currency portfolio. This is also a clear vote of no-confidence in Obama’s recovery plan.
Later that day, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann asked Secretary Geithner if he would “categorically renounce the United States moving away from the dollar and going to a global currency as suggested this morning by China and also by Russia?” “I would, yes,” he replied. She posed the same question to Ben Bernanke, who offered a similar response. The story should end here, but it doesn’t.
On Wednesday (March 25), Geithner was asked a similar question at a CFR meeting in New York. Instead of defending the dollar, he said he was “quite open” to the idea. The dollar immediately fell on world markets, prompting Geithner to shift to damage control and “clarify his remarks.”
The left castigates the “one world government conspiracy theorists” from time to time. I tend to reject conspiracies, but Geithner is giving me pause. Could it be that the Obama administration is simply using the current economic downturn to justify a quick and heavy dose of Marxism? I believe so. In this instance, I just find it hard to believe that Geithner simply misspoke or inadvertently mangled a few words.
Consider other recent developments on the economic front. The National Center for Policy Analysis projects that Obama’s budget would more than double the national debt over the next decade, while even the socialists in Europe are refusing to join in his massive spending spree. Obama also seems fixated on regulating CEO pay and procuring the right to seize control of companies under certain circumstances. He’s even proposed limiting the deductibility of charitable contributions for high wage earners, arguing that their current tax breaks are too high because of their higher tax bracket. Just ponder the twisted logic here.
So what’s the connection among the notion of a global currency, massive government spending, regulating executive pay, taking control of private companies, and punishing charitable giving? All of these proposals would transfer power from individuals and firms to the public sector. They limit individual liberty, violate property rights, and compromise national sovereignty at the expense of the global Marxist ideal.
Perhaps you think we just need to give Obama and Geithner a chance to fix the economy. I’ve already seen enough. Obama’s proposals must be defeated and Geithner should be dispatched before he does any more damage. Fortunately, a number of Democrats are starting to express concern about the huge deficits, cap and trade proposals, tax hikes, and even gun control. Maybe there’s hope after all.
There is no excuse for this. The dollar must remain the premier global currency. Geithner is either incompetent or a Marxist, probably some of both. We have to live with Obama for 4 years, but Geithner has to go.
What I do not like is how Obama explained his charitable deduction decision in the news conference. He once again mentioned fairness. He believes that if I make a donation and Bill Gates makes a donation that we should be able to write off the same amount on our taxes so it is fair. My point is that if I donated $100 but Gates donated $1 million, don’t you think he deserves more benefit than I do? I certainly believe so.
This comes down to two main ideas in my opinion:
1. Obama wants to equalize the outcome even though the input is not equal (in the above example, myself & Gates do not donate equal $ but the outcome is the same). This is collectivism at its core.
2. I believe he is doing this so the next thing government can control after banks is charities. I can see it now in the news, “charitable giving down 60%, receiving government funds.” After that, government now controls charities.
Steve: I think you’re right on both points. Obama’s logic to support this proposal gives you insight into his world view. First, we punish high wage earners by requiring them to pay a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of their income in taxes. Then, when they want to give some of it away, we tell them that they can only deduct the percentage they would have paid if they were not high wage earners. You have to be a socialist at the core to see it this way. I doubt seriously that this provision will pass, but if it does, charities will have to beg the government for help, which would give Washington more control over their affairs. It’s all about the transfer of control and power away from individuals to the government.
Obama is throwing good money after bad money….
Europeanization of the USA… Welcome to the land of Karl Marx….
Time to change name of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to Karl Marx Avenue 666 ???
About europeanization of the USA…
This is what had happen lately in europe.
France wants a global financial regulator
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6005810.ece
“In the old days, one would have sent soldiers there. But that is not possible any more.”
German Social Democratic Chairman Franz Müntefering, about low-tax countries like Luxembourg.
It probably says a lot more about Socialists than about Germans.
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/zeitung/Fragen-des-Tages;art693,2755498
But there is also hope (keep on mind his name)…
Daniel Hannan Rips Gordon Brown a New One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc9TVlzdEsc
Dr. Parnell, you are a giant among men. You stand upon logic and principal amidst the sycophant, liberal, leftist, socialist univeristy system.
You are absolutely correct in your estimation of the affect upon charaties. The United Way, American Red Cross, St Judes Children’s Hospital and others will all be upon bended knee before the government. Say hello to a fedreal comptroller, just a glorified Soviet-style political commissar.
Keep up the fight good sir and Godspeed!
As I understand it, what we are really looking at is the possible end of “Dollar Hegemony” if Mr. Geithner/President Obama get their way. Beginning with President Taft, who created the policy as a way to increase investment in Latin America and Asia,(1) our leaders have pushed and cajoled the dollar to be the world standard in currency; therefore, if Mr. Geithner wants the dollar thrown into a basket of world currencies, won’t that create a national security issue for the U.S.? The amount of dollars that are being horded by foreign countries would be flooded onto the world currency market, which would cause the value of the dollar to decrease significantly. Evidently Mr. Geithner does not have working knowledge of “Petrodollar Warfare.”
(1) “The End of Dollar Hegemony” Ron Paul