U.S. Currency Exchange Control... G20 London Summit 2009

Submitted by SadInAmerica on Sat, 09/26/2009 - 7:53pm.

Could President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner suddenly impose currency exchange controls on the United States and the U.S. dollar? This report will explore this notion and its possible consequences. March 31, 2009 - Patrick Wood

World leaders have been begging for a global currency for several weeks now. With global trade falling apart and national economies in continued meltdown, these leaders view the resurgence of global trade as the only salvation for economic recovery. Within that demand is the realization that the only enablement is a new global currency that everyone can agree on.

Today, China is calling for the SDR (Special Drawing Right, or some variation) to replace the dollar as the globe's primary reserve currency. Russia is also calling for the SDR and some type of gold peg to add further legitimacy. Other leaders around the world are calling for a global currency without suggesting exactly what it should be.

The SDR is exclusively issued and controlled by the International Monetary Fund.

The August Review has previously presented reports on the International Monetary Fund, the Bank for International Settlements, and the World Bank, all of which have a stake in global currency exchange and control.

Note: It is strongly suggested that you read or re-read all three of these papers (written in 2005-2006) if you want to understand the issues of global currency. If implemented, any scheme for a global currency would be a major stepping stone to global economic and political governance.

In the paper, Global Banking: The International Monetary Fund, this writer concluded the section Currency, Monetary Roles and Gold by stating,

"Suffice it to say that if so many organizations have conspired to keep "gold as money" out of the public mind, then gold is not dead but just temporarily on the shelf. When fiat currencies have been drained dry by the global cartel, gold will likely be brought back by the same people who told us it was forever a dead issue."

In the paper, Global Banking: Bank for International Settlements paper, this writer further stated,

"There is no doubt that the  BIS is moving the world toward regional currencies and ultimately, a global currency. The global currency could well be an evolution of the SDR, and may explain why the BIS recently adopted the SDR as its primary reserve currency."

Bankers and heads-of-state that comprise the G20 London Summit 2009 this week will very likely produce some resolution to the global currency debacle. At the very least, the SDR will be offered as the stepping-stone to global currency because it is already in place and in use throughout the world.

The dilemma will be how can the holders of dollars (e.g., China) convert them into SDR's?

Since the dollar is already part of the basket that makes up the SDR, it will be easy enough for China to turn over their dollars to the  IMF to get SDR's in exchange. But, they will have to take some hit for doing so. To overcome their resistance, adding a gold component to the SDR might be just the carrot that assures a China (and others) buy-in.

But, what will the IMF do with all these dollars? This could be the big rub. They can't just return the excess dollars to the U.S. Treasury because it would cause massive hyperinflation at home. They can't just burn them, either. So legislating them to be part of the SDR would make some sense, but that may not be enough to control the slush.

This writer's conjecture is: Could Obama/Geithner, without any advance notice, slap currency exchange controls on the U.S. that would prevent the repatriation of these excess dollars, and effectively land-lock the dollars already here?

Such a move would immediately set up a two-tiered system of currency for the U.S.: Internal and External.

The pain this would put on America would be sacrificed for the greater global good. Otherwise, it could simultaneously solve several problems:

  1. Currency manipulation - countries like China would be hard-pressed to manipulate the Yuan without the dollar
  2. Currency fluctuations - the SDR would be buffered by component currencies that usually trade in the opposite direction to each other
  3. Global trade - international partners would have an agreed-upon medium of exchange monitored by the IMF
  4. Trade financing - the SDR would have the support of the  World Bank and the Bank for International Settlements to resuscitate and facilitate global shipping

While good for global trade, the impact could be potentially devastating to wealthy and semi-wealthy Americans who have sought financial safety by spreading their assets around the world via currencies, foreign gold deposits, Swiss bank accounts, etc., because they might not be able to get their assets back into the United States or U.S. assets out of the country.

For globalists like Jim Rogers, the billionaire former partner of George Soros (a major Obama financier), he could live in any part of the world he desired. Rogers recently told the  BBC that "There will probably be exchange controls in the US in their (his children) lifetime. I have given up on the US dollar and sterling." This is long-range thinking, but he is thinking it nonetheless.

In November 2007, John Dizard wrote in The Financial Times,

"Within the stream of coded language and doubletalk coming from officialdom these days, you can find louder signals of preparations for exchange control regimes in the developed world. This is bad news for almost everyone, but in particular for the investment community. When exchange controls - no doubt in another name - are imposed in Europe or the US, the official targets will be "speculators" or financial manipulators lurking in the shadows."

Indeed, the speculators are now the likes of the hedge fund industry and the manipulators are countries like China who have manipulated their currency for years.

The greatest danger of exchange controls is that there is never advance notice. Rather, they are just suddenly announced and then you are trapped for the duration.

The G20 leaders are desperate for some political solution to the global economic crisis. Both PM Gordon Brown and President Obama are grasping at straws in an attempt to maintain their leadership roles and keep globalization alive. With 20 very opinionated countries trying to reach some ordinary consensus (very unlikely), the presentation of a "shock and awe" solution could break the log jam. 

In light of this possibility, investors, exporters and businesses would do well to rethink their domestic and overseas strategies.

In the meantime, keep a sharp eye on the G20 meeting in London.

Patrick Wood - March 31, 2009 - source AugustReview 

Tag this page!
Submitted by SadInAmerica on Sat, 09/26/2009 - 7:53pm.