302 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 37 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

The Dollar revisited - discussion 2005

By       (Page 3 of 5 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   1 comment

The initiative, while eventually successful, was strongly opposed by radical conservatives who saw it as a means of expanding government expenditures.  The lost that battle, but were successful in fighting much capital investment anyway - which is why our bridges and schools, etc. are in such disastrous condition. 

As for the assertion that US state and local governments, or even the federal government, has invested signifant funds overseas - I have never seen such an assertion before, know of no statistics supporting it, and find it lacks credibility and relationship to what I do know of the history of investment flows between the US and other counties. 

For example, it is well known that the Reagan and Bush administrations alike have funded their deficits through purchases of US debt by foreign investors and governments.  And that without such purchases, the value of the dollar relative to other currencies relative to the dollar would have fallen.

The artificially high value of the dollar which results reduces the cost of foreign goods in the US.  It increases the cost of US goods to potential purchasers in other countries.  At first it primarily benefited oil companies who made more money from maintaining demand from this backdoor subsidy of imported oil. 

But with the advent of free trade, the artificially high value of the dollar meant that the subsidy was extended to imported goods.  Naturally, US companies found it advantageous to import their products (as Nike) rather than make them in the US.  As the cycle progresses, we see US companies moving their production, and the technology they use to produce goods, to countries like China - as has been discussed here.

The artificially high value of the dollar, and the fact that goods produced overseas and sold here are so subsidized, works against the US - both its labor, and its producers who are unable to move production offshore.

The "strong dollar" may be the friend of the consumer of cheap imported goods.  But it is the mortal enemy, the viper at the heart, of the American worker and the long term health and welfare of our nation.

Posted by Jim Pivonka on Jan 22, 2005 at 7:04 PM

FROM WJB:

Jim:

Quoting you above "The artificially high value of the dollar, and the fact that goods produced overseas and sold here are so subsidized, works against the US - both its labor, and its producers who are unable to move production offshore."

The US Government administrators realized this in the 70's. They needed to diversify their investments before they implemented the change for the long run.

If you read the comments a little more closely in my original post above it will shed light on your own statements.

I can tell the figures and policy shifts I outlined above caught you off guard as it did to me when I learned for the first time 12 years ago that this was taking place.

I recommend that you get and look at several state; Retirement Fund CAFRs. They being Pension Fund CAFRs will list the individual investments, their value, when established and when they vest.

You will see that in each state billions are invested with the banks in the mortgage and credit card divisions. Government is now the "primary" investor with the banks in funding mortgages and credit card debt. It will also outline on a case by case basis the degree and scope of the shift to international investments.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

W B Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

NON / PUBLIC
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter

Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Dollar revisited - discussion 2005

A GOOD QUESTION TO ASK!

ACTION ALERT! Government Investments, 911, and the Dollar

The Rock Thrown in the Pond - Who Profits?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend