No comment from Washington yet about Chinese President Hu Jintao’s explicit linking of help for the financial crisis to the question of Taiwan. However, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed chief Bernanke did engage this morning in somewhat public international consultations on the crisis with their counterparts from “Group of Seven” industrial nations.
This is interesting from a couple of perspectives. The “G7” is a quite idiosyncratically composed (and completely unaccountable) grouping of what are described as “the world’s leading industrial countries.” Until recently, it was known as the “G8”, but there was a proposal to kick Russia out because of the Georgia conflict; and it looks as if that has happened already.
But whether 7 or 8, this “G” grouping notably doesn’t include China– though it does include Japan, the US’s other mega-creditor on the international scene.
Today’s statement about the actions the various G members have taken has the air of a slightly self-congratulatory group hug:
- We strongly welcome the extraordinary actions taken by the United States to enhance the stability of financial markets and address credit concerns… We also strongly welcome the measures taken by other G-7 countries…”
But unless they can find a way to include China and Russia in the planning for the stabilization program, it probably can’t get very far.
This crisis is not US internal crises, its worldwide crises although the consequences might differ from US internal affects but still this crisis internationally demented and international crises.
So the solutions here should be internationally. The question here who have to be G7 or G8, Russia China… all these should be involved whatever politics / view you like them or not it’s a reality here, they should have their say with their help, don’t forget this cries not can go away fast it need two to three years recover time, there is no quake fix here so its really long term engagement and long term cooperation with others to achieve this.
I can extend the involvement members to big oil producers as these countries will have affect within money market and cash flow. with oil revenues sky rocketing and the amount of cash/investments if moved west or east will makes some turbulence in the world markets.
Vadim commented that he hadn’t seen a dollar collapse a few days ago.
No sooned said than done.
http://tinyurl.com/3g6zp5
Frank that’s really not much of a collapse. The dollar is exactly where it was on August 26th (right before it experienced one of its biggest one day gains ever.)
A true collapse (as in the ruble, baht or argentine peso) would involve sustained double digit losses. We’re nowhere close to that, and US sovereign rates are still well under those in Europe or Japan (5 year US govt. yields are 2% lower than gilts or bunds.)
It is shameful that the financial press is hyping a valid crisis of confidence in i-banking as a broader problem demanding some kind of publicly funded relief.
Another con game. And its disgusting all the more so in this day and age when the whole world is finally in on what transpires in the nerve centers of New York and DC.
Both Paulson and Bernanke are aware of what happened to Gov. Eliot Spitzer when back in Feb 14, 2008 he testified before a Congressional Committee that the US faced a “financial tsunami”. Days later he was known as client #9, One wonders what numbers Paulson and Bernanke must hold..
Whats amazing is that amid such clear signs of impending trouble that those in charge of billion of dollars of other people’s money, and supported by high-priced research, did nothing.. Its symptomatic of dishonesty and/or dereliction of duties.
And should serve as the basis for their dishonorable discharge rather than as a platform for further malfeseance by those two gentlemen and I am using the term quite loosely.
If congress goes along with this charade then America has advanced to a lower level than the socalled “banana republics”.
i