The US holds 17% of the total vote at the IMF

The G7 which the US is part of & made up of 7 of the largest industrialized countries totals only 45%

The number of votes is based on the the quotas of each country.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/what.htm#money

Where does the IMF get its money?

The IMF's resources come mainly from the quotas that countries deposit when they join the IMF. Quotas broadly reflect the size of each member's economy: the larger a country's economy in terms of output, and the larger and more variable its trade, the larger its quota tends to be. For example, the United States, the world's largest economy, has the largest quota in the IMF. Quotas are reviewed periodically and can be increased when deemed necessary by the Board of Governors.

These wars where not approved by the UN.

Personally, I don't care what the UN approves of or doesn't. We should kick them out of New York. Switzerland is more or less neutral, let them deal with the UN.

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

I'm not crazy about having a bureaucrats from 3rd world nations being the leaders either (Kofi).

I think we need an international organization that doesn't allow every dictatorship into it. Membership losing value when everybody is allowed to join without conditions.

I won't defend Kofi....he had some skills, but some downsides too, I agree. I don't think 3rd world status is a factor that should be taken into account.

I also don't think that style of government should be a factor to be considered for membership. The main thing is that, in a pure democracy, wealth, historical position, or military might, is not a factor.

( That's not to say that I endorse "pure democracy".)

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

I'm not crazy about having a bureaucrats from 3rd world nations being the leaders either (Kofi).

I think we need an international organization that doesn't allow every dictatorship into it. Membership losing value when everybody is allowed to join without conditions.

I won't defend Kofi....he had some skills, but some downsides too, I agree. I don't think 3rd world status is a factor that should be taken into account.

I also don't think that style of government should be a factor to be considered for membership. The main thing is that, in a pure democracy, wealth, historical position, or military might, is not a factor.

( That's not to say that I endorse "pure democracy".)

I wonder what the factors are and who exactly does the considering? It seems like they don't have very high standards as it is.

The UN could work well for everyone IF there was not an imbalance of power by the members that hold the power of veto.

It is the power of veto of certain nations that makes a mockery of the UN.

I'm not crazy about having a bureaucrats from 3rd world nations being the leaders either (Kofi).

I think we need an international organization that doesn't allow every dictatorship into it. Membership losing value when everybody is allowed to join without conditions.

I won't defend Kofi....he had some skills, but some downsides too, I agree. I don't think 3rd world status is a factor that should be taken into account.

I also don't think that style of government should be a factor to be considered for membership. The main thing is that, in a pure democracy, wealth, historical position, or military might, is not a factor.

( That's not to say that I endorse "pure democracy".)

I wonder what the factors are and who exactly does the considering? It seems like they don't have very high standards as it is.

Ultimately, the base factor is being a member of the human race.

Being a sovreign nation is obviously another factor.

Who does the considering?....employ reductio ad adsurdum, and keeping in mind the "spirit" of the concept of the UN....membership is automatic (if sought), by any nation.

I didn't say anything about the Vietnam War being good or right. I said that the anti-war protests were just a fashion at the time and mostly spurred on by people that did not want to be drafted - into any war. They had very little to do with concerns about rights or wrongs or helping the Vietnamese people.

You might notice that there are very few major protests about Iraq and Afganastan and there is also no draft.

Yeah, but the flavour of the day has changed....you're right to an extent about faddish movements.

Iraq and Afghanistan have an element that Viet Nam did not......the spin doctors had 9/11 and "patriotism" to throw into the mix.

The fact that there are few major protests is probably as a result of the "patriotism" drive of said spin doctors.

I am going to guess that you are not old enough to remember what was going on during the Vietnam War. Only a few years before the Summer of Love, almost everyone was as conservative as Beaver Cleaver. There was just as much pressure to be patriotic as there is now - actually, probably more.

I didn't say anything about the Vietnam War being good or right. I said that the anti-war protests were just a fashion at the time and mostly spurred on by people that did not want to be drafted - into any war. They had very little to do with concerns about rights or wrongs or helping the Vietnamese people.

You might notice that there are very few major protests about Iraq and Afganastan and there is also no draft.

Yeah, but the flavour of the day has changed....you're right to an extent about faddish movements.

Iraq and Afghanistan have an element that Viet Nam did not......the spin doctors had 9/11 and "patriotism" to throw into the mix.

The fact that there are few major protests is probably as a result of the "patriotism" drive of said spin doctors.

I am going to guess that you are not old enough to remember what was going on during the Vietnam War. Only a few years before the Summer of Love, almost everyone was as conservative as Beaver Cleaver. There was just as much pressure to be patriotic as there is now - actually, probably more.

Well, you'd know better than I would....maybe because of age, but certainly because of your upbringing.

I do have early memories of B&W TV news footage of VN.

I do suspect that the "Summer of Love" image as commonly portrayed, though likely based on truth, is yet another scapegoat.

I don't know about that, but it sure was fun (although I was very young myself).

I don't know about that, but it sure was fun (although I was very young myself).

From your music choices on another thread, I guessed you were simmilar in age to me.

I was born in '64.

1956. Like most people my age, I thought that rock was through after the 60s and early 70s, but when I was about 25, I had a younger girlfriend who got me to listen to New Wave and after that, I never stopped listening to new music.

A few days back I posted that it seemed pretty stupid for teh US to be selling arms to Taiwan given it would piss off the folks who buy most of the US debt...

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Afghanistan-...78#entry3305878

Well..........

China PLA officers urge economic punch against U.S.

BEIJING (Reuters) - Senior Chinese military officers have proposed that their country boost defense spending, adjust PLA deployments, and possibly sell some U.S. bonds to punish Washington for its latest round of arms sales to Taiwan.

Full article at link above...........

Does make one wonder what they were/are thinking....6Billion in arms sales.....One very unhappy creditor

China has the world's biggest pile of foreign currency reserves, much of it held in U.S. treasury debt. China held $798.9 billion in U.S. Treasuries at end-October.

Does make one wonder what they were/are thinking....6Billion in arms sales.....One very unhappy creditor

China has the world's biggest pile of foreign currency reserves, much of it held in U.S. treasury debt. China held $798.9 billion in U.S. Treasuries at end-October.

$798.9 billion! Skip the stimulus package and buy it all back! Anyone know what percentage of US treasury debt that ~$800 billion is? I know some people go on about all the oil the US imports from the Saudis but the reality it is only about %15 of our total imports. Twenty-five years ago you would hear how Japan was buying America! When in fact the Europeans owned much, much more (and still do).

If China tries to dump the dollar, it's going to make what they have worth less. Like I heard someone say on TV today, "If you owe the bank $1 million, you're in trouble. If you owe the bank $1 billion, the bank is in trouble".

If China tries to dump the dollar, it's going to make what they have worth less. Like I heard someone say on TV today, "If you owe the bank $1 million, you're in trouble. If you owe the bank $1 billion, the bank is in trouble".

True....but you are still in the poo yourself.

If China tries to dump the dollar, it's going to make what they have worth less. Like I heard someone say on TV today, "If you owe the bank $1 million, you're in trouble. If you owe the bank $1 billion, the bank is in trouble".

True....but you are still in the poo yourself.

That story is repeated often about how China better not dump the USD because the Yuan is pegged to the dollar.

Well yes & no IMHO

Yes it is pegged & they could de-peg

After all if you ran a business & let folks pay in IOU's how long would you continue?

Yes it was a nice ride for them selling tons through Walmart etc.

But you have to know when to hold them & when to fold them

What is the point of being pegged to the USD if the USD is turning into an anchor sinking in a bottomless ocean?

Of course they would not dump all at once as then even the USD they hold becomes worth even less & less.

But still.........diminishing returns is one thing...arming their possible enemies totally another. Like I said in my original post about it...The US would not stand for it if it were reversed ...period

So back to the original question....How stupid was it for 6 billion to do so?

.......

So back to the original question....How stupid was it for 6 billion to do so?

From this layman's POV...quite silly.

But then, I am only a layman.

One has to wonder if it was part of a much more complex global politicing....China's position re N.Korea for example.

If China tries to dump the dollar, it's going to make what they have worth less. Like I heard someone say on TV today, "If you owe the bank $1 million, you're in trouble. If you owe the bank $1 billion, the bank is in trouble".

True....but you are still in the poo yourself.

That story is repeated often about how China better not dump the USD because the Yuan is pegged to the dollar.

Disclaimer - I make no claims to being a financial whiz so what follows is likely wrong. Judging by the other posts I've read here, I don't think I'm alone. Anyway, here it goes...

I thought it was often repeated because China can't sell unless someone wants to buy. And if the market of any commodity starts to flood the market, the value is going to drop.

For the sake of this example, let's cut off a bunch of zeros. China has $800 currently valued at 570 Euros (at 1.40:1, USD:EUR). If buyers even believe dumping will occur ("dumping" doesn't mean slowly selling) the dollar will drop in value fast. Say it drops to 1.60 to the Euro, then China's dollars reserve in terms of Euros drops to 500 Euros. Now put back those zeroes and in this example China loses 70 billion Euros or around $100 billion. Would it be worth it to them? It would also cause other countries to lose a lot as well as the value of their dollar reserves start to tank. But someone still has to buy. Wouldn't other countries intervene to keep the value of the dollar (and their reserves) from hitting bottom? So what am I getting wrong?

What we all prefer not to see is that China is not an idiot. There will certainly be method in their madness, no matter what they do.

Hey....this is the Afghan thread....we seem to be talking to the China thread!

All interconected perhaps?

I thought it was often repeated because China can't sell unless someone wants to buy. And if the market of any commodity starts to flood the market, the value is going to drop.

For the sake of this example, let's cut off a bunch of zeros. China has $800 currently valued at 570 Euros (at 1.40:1, USD:EUR). If buyers even believe dumping will occur ("dumping" doesn't mean slowly selling) the dollar will drop in value fast. Say it drops to 1.60 to the Euro, then China's dollars reserve in terms of Euros drops to 500 Euros. Now put back those zeroes and in this example China loses 70 billion Euros or around $100 billion. Would it be worth it to them? It would also cause other countries to lose a lot as well as the value of their dollar reserves start to tank. But someone still has to buy. Wouldn't other countries intervene to keep the value of the dollar (and their reserves) from hitting bottom? So what am I getting wrong?

It is all based on faith isn't it? I mean when the world moved to fiat currency. At the end of the day it is just faith based on paper IOU's. They say so right on them...Federal Reserve Note

Yes value drops but in the end how far will each side go?

It is not China relying at this time on the US buying their debt....but buying their products

China actually still produces somethings that yes ...the US as the worlds greatest consumer buys tons of....on credit.

because if china was not buying their debt they would have no purchasing power.

But like I said in my last post if your in business at what point do you fire your customer?

In your example China takes less than full value but it is better than 0. It is not different than a creditor at a bankruptcy.

Which in my opinion the US is in the process of. Of course not a normal bankruptcy like you or I would do. Where we throw our hands up & say sorry we cannot pay. No the US will pay but with deflated dollars.

Yes US is a big consumer but is not the whole world of consumers. Yes any serious dumping converts China's reserves to less & less. But should they buy more & more in the hopes that it will all be better? Or cut their losses at some point?

Again I think of creditors who at some point say enough.

Yes someone has to buy the US debt & it has become more & more obvious that the US has been buying their own debt recently. Scary thought in itself.

Then again you know those two little skirmishes in the ME costs $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ultimately I think China will tolerate the uneasy alliance for some time ........

But again all that aside with all that at risk......Is/was it a good idea for the US to be provoking their creditor?

What we all prefer not to see is that China is not an idiot. There will certainly be method in their madness, no matter what they do.

Hey....this is the Afghan thread....we seem to be talking to the China thread!

All interconected perhaps?

http://costofwar.com/

Yes kind of....You know if we did not spend money we do not have.....We would not have creditors capable of toppling our economy....

If when a country wanted to go to war they had to produce the funds first...Very few would unless it was truly a case of defending their very existence As they would really think hard about whether or not they wanted to spend all that hard earned tax money they already collected on some non-descript mission.

But as it stands now they just ask the FED Reserve to create it ....Which then has corresponding govt. bonds/treasuries to be sold as a deficit to give it.... the newly created currency/debt power.

So on the flip side.... many hope folks like China will stop funding our wars

I thought it was often repeated because China can't sell unless someone wants to buy. And if the market of any commodity starts to flood the market, the value is going to drop.

For the sake of this example, let's cut off a bunch of zeros. China has $800 currently valued at 570 Euros (at 1.40:1, USD:EUR). If buyers even believe dumping will occur ("dumping" doesn't mean slowly selling) the dollar will drop in value fast. Say it drops to 1.60 to the Euro, then China's dollars reserve in terms of Euros drops to 500 Euros. Now put back those zeroes and in this example China loses 70 billion Euros or around $100 billion. Would it be worth it to them? It would also cause other countries to lose a lot as well as the value of their dollar reserves start to tank. But someone still has to buy. Wouldn't other countries intervene to keep the value of the dollar (and their reserves) from hitting bottom? So what am I getting wrong?

It is all based on faith isn't it? I mean when the world moved to fiat currency. At the end of the day it is just faith based on paper IOU's. They say so right on them...Federal Reserve Note

Yes value drops but in the end how far will each side go?

It is not China relying at this time on the US buying their debt....but buying their products

China actually still produces somethings that yes ...the US as the worlds greatest consumer buys tons of....on credit.

because if china was not buying their debt they would have no purchasing power.

But like I said in my last post if your in business at what point do you fire your customer?

In your example China takes less than full value but it is better than 0. It is not different than a creditor at a bankruptcy.

Which in my opinion the US is in the process of. Of course not a normal bankruptcy like you or I would do. Where we throw our hands up & say sorry we cannot pay. No the US will pay but with deflated dollars.

Yes US is a big consumer but is not the whole world of consumers. Yes any serious dumping converts China's reserves to less & less. But should they buy more & more in the hopes that it will all be better? Or cut their losses at some point?

Again I think of creditors who at some point say enough.

Yes someone has to buy the US debt & it has become more & more obvious that the US has been buying their own debt recently. Scary thought in itself.

Then again you know those two little skirmishes in the ME costs $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Ultimately I think China will tolerate the uneasy alliance for some time ........

But again all that aside with all that at risk......Is/was it a good idea for the US to be provoking their creditor?

China is the US's largest creditor but still hold less than 25% and not much more than Japan. I'm not sure how much China could accomplish on their own.

I always hear this argument of the US being the largest economy.

My question is: In terms of what?

The GDP number is made up of so many strange items and calculations, that it really does not reflect common sense.

For example: Country X produces bombs. These bombs are then used to blow up bridges and stuff. Some contractors from Country X are then rewarded with contracts to rebuild the destroyed infrastructure. A lot of it payed by the taxpayer from country X.

And all of this adds up to GDP.

I don't get it, please explain what is right or wrong with this.

China is the US's largest creditor but still hold less than 25% and not much more than Japan. I'm not sure how much China could accomplish on their own.

Ultimately the USD would probably be the last currency to fall. Only because the world still...even now view it as the safe haven.

Whether that is due to the military or a perceived value who knows but most in a crisis still run to it.

As for China being able to cause a topple....As I said I do not think they truly want to break the unholy alliance But if any of the large creditors stop buying what becomes of that debt that cannot be sold? Again the FED will send in straw men to buy paper that has no power with more paper that has no power. A ponzi or a shell game?

Remember the history of the USD ...why it became what it is & why folks run to it feeling secure.

At one time the dollar slogan was..._"Good As Gold" Because it was.

Then in the 1933 Roosevelt confiscated ( called in ) all the privately held gold in the US & made it illegal for citizens to own. Because he neeeded to revalue it in order to pay the bills or default.

So he did default in a sense on his own citizens. By ending their right to cash in their dollars for gold as had always been the case. Because after all currency was just a note garunteeing that you could at any time take it to the bank & get your money

( gold & silver)

Then in 1971 Nixon did the same thing but this time he did it internationally when President Richard Nixon "closed the gold window" and denied foreign governments the right to turn in paper dollars for gold. The only good thing is it allowed US citizens to once again (legally) own gold.

For those reasons I am still amazed that the world will run to the USD as the perceived safe haven. I tend to think it is more based on the military. I believe they just think in a real SHTF scenario the US would be the last to fall.

I always hear this argument of the US being the largest economy.

My question is: In terms of what?

The GDP number is made up of so many strange items and calculations, that it really does not reflect common sense.

All you need to know Alex is 70% of the US GDP is made up of Consumer Spending.....How well do you think that will work now?

No reason to jump off a bridge. Economies go up and down. That is their nature. Right now no one is doing too well, but there is a very good chance that things will improve in the long run.

No reason to jump off a bridge. Economies go up and down. That is their nature. Right now no one is doing too well, but there is a very good chance that things will improve in the long run.

Hence my signature

But we have been given a gift of time. Anyone not independently wealthy who has not taken this time to prepare

in some way for what lies ahead is just wasting precious time.

As for a very good chance that things will improve in the long run.....That remains to be seen. We are not only not out of the woods but we increase the distance into the woods to places no country has been before. As it stands now they take us deeper & deeper & we are in no way nearing a clearing as there is no map. Historically only a large war changes things that get this bad & most would agree that is not the hope & change most were hoping for.

China is the US's largest creditor but still hold less than 25% and not much more than Japan. I'm not sure how much China could accomplish on their own.

you are forgetting the cash USD that China holds which are U.S. national debt as much as U.S. treasuries.

People have been predicting soon-to-come catastrophes since I was a young boy and long before and they always have all kinds of "logical" reasons why. However, the world just keeps on turning and - so far - eventually proves them wrong. I think that I will just wait and see what happens instead of getting too worried about things that I can't change anyway.

Yeah, there'll still be a world without the US the same as it went on after the Romans and the British Empire.

Yeah, but it might be like the lastest installment of the "Mad Max" series.

China is the US's largest creditor but still hold less than 25% and not much more than Japan. I'm not sure how much China could accomplish on their own.

Ultimately the USD would probably be the last currency to fall. Only because the world still...even now view it as the safe haven.

Whether that is due to the military or a perceived value who knows but most in a crisis still run to it.

As for China being able to cause a topple....As I said I do not think they truly want to break the unholy alliance But if any of the large creditors stop buying what becomes of that debt that cannot be sold? Again the FED will send in straw men to buy paper that has no power with more paper that has no power. A ponzi or a shell game?

Remember the history of the USD ...why it became what it is & why folks run to it feeling secure.

At one time the dollar slogan was..._"Good As Gold" Because it was.

Then in the 1933 Roosevelt confiscated ( called in ) all the privately held gold in the US & made it illegal for citizens to own. Because he neeeded to revalue it in order to pay the bills or default.

So he did default in a sense on his own citizens. By ending their right to cash in their dollars for gold as had always been the case. Because after all currency was just a note garunteeing that you could at any time take it to the bank & get your money

( gold & silver)

Then in 1971 Nixon did the same thing but this time he did it internationally when President Richard Nixon "closed the gold window" and denied foreign governments the right to turn in paper dollars for gold. The only good thing is it allowed US citizens to once again (legally) own gold.

For those reasons I am still amazed that the world will run to the USD as the perceived safe haven. I tend to think it is more based on the military. I believe they just think in a real SHTF scenario the US would be the last to fall.

Pretty much all of that has been said by Glenn Beck on Fox News.

Since you are discussing failure of currencies, take a look at this link:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100208_ge...6df174fd245427b

It seems currencies other than the US$ might be in jeopardy as well.