
Goldman warns on inflation threat to dollar as reserve currency - 0DHm2CxO7Lb3
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-28/goldman-warns-dollar-s-role-as-world-reserve-currency-is-at-risk
======
jb775
There's no risk of the USD not remaining the world reserve currency as long as
oil is being purchased.

The US spends more than 144 countries combined[1] on their military. The US
protects the middle-east oil supply, the middle-east agrees to only sell oil
in US dollars. Therefore, demand of USD remains consistent and strong.

Ask Iran and Venezuela how it's working out for them trying to skirt that
arrangement.

[1] - [https://www.nationalpriorities.org/blog/2019/07/18/us-
spends...](https://www.nationalpriorities.org/blog/2019/07/18/us-spends-more-
its-military-176-countries-combined/)

~~~
rubyn00bie
+1 I'd also like to note the, not obvious fact, that the "wealthy" have no
other meaningful choice but to put their money in dollars. No other country,
or group of countries, even comes close to providing the liquidity, safety,
and flexibility of the US dollar. The US has never halted trading, has
continuously paid its debts, and has shown zero meaningful (congressional
shenanigans aside) intention of stopping.

That's not to say one day, another country won't have the burden of being the
world's reserve currency, but for at least the next 20-30 years it's very
likely going to be the US.

~~~
effie
Wealthy people have other people who manage their money. Only part of that
money is in U.S. dollars/bonds at any given time, because it is less risky to
have money in various different assets such as land, buildings, stocks.

~~~
rubyn00bie
Yes, wealthy people do pay others to manage their funds... I'm failing to see
how that's a revelation here.

The people who manage that money, assuming they are responsible, or remotely-
qualified, have only one option; which, is going to be investing primarily in
securities/assets backed by US dollars. Land, buildings, and stock are all
assets because you can get money back for them. That money is only good if its
spendable and can be extracted from the asset... which is my point.

/shrug I'm just a bit lost at what you're trying to say...

~~~
effie
> The people who manage that money, assuming they are responsible, or
> remotely-qualified, have only one option; which, is going to be investing
> primarily in securities/assets backed by US dollars.

That may be a strategy of single person with a little money trying to not lose
it long term. But it would be foolish for the really big investors. They don't
do that. Wealthy people diversify in different asset classes, not just in US
stocks/bonds.

Real world assets such as gold, stocks, art, land, buildings, private
companies etc. are not in general "backed by US dollars". They can have value
largely decoupled from the value of US dollar or its status as top world
currency. Which is why those clever managers invest also in those assets.

------
rossdavidh
Someday, it will be true. But, it's telling that they don't even pretend that
there is another currency poised to take the dollar's position; they posit
gold returning as the world reserve currency.

Regardless of my opinion on whether or not such an event would be good (I
don't particularly have one), I don't think it's likely.

~~~
dwater
Why should there be only one? I get financial advisor emails every week that
pretty much always tell me to diversify where I put my money. If I were an
independent nation that needed reserve currency, I wouldn't want to bet it all
on the US, China, or Europe. They've all got their own risks ahead. And
there's no clear winner for the next decade or two to get on the good side of.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _Why should there be only one?_

Network effects.

Every marginal dollar spender, dollar acceptor, dollar lender, dollar
borrower, dollar investor and dollar investment makes the dollar more
attractive to use for all. That makes it more attractive to intermediate,
which results in more services around U.S. dollars which keeps the flywheel
going. As financial and trading and distribution relationships become more
complicated, these advantages grow.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I agree with this, but, I’ve become very comfortable with TransferWise, which
is kinda like Libra without the blockchain bullshit. I can move between
currencies effortlessly and inexpensively (and I don’t want an index currency
that trades a basket of currencies beneath it, an unnecessary abstraction in
my opinion). I provide charity to a friend down on their luck in CAD. I buy
SaaS services in USD and EUR. I pay an Australian mortgage for a vacation home
and investment property in Tasmania in AUD. From an iOS app!

As FinTech velocity accelerates, the value of network effects will diminish.
It’ll all be IP between fintech providers (mostly like SWIFT, but not quite).

~~~
selectodude
All of those transactions are settled in USD. Just because it's happening
behind the scenes doesn't mean it's not happening at all.

~~~
toomuchtodo
But it can be settled in _any_ currency trivially. All you want in a currency
is acceptance and value stability, and the infrastructure to support rapid
changes in currency polices.

Disclosure: I work in financial services and am familiar with this
infrastructure.

~~~
selectodude
Then you should almost certainly aware of the fact that the spreads on USD
currency pairs are extremely low. Low enough where it ends up being cheaper to
go Currency A -> USD -> Currency B than it is to go Currency A -> Currency B.
If all you want is acceptance and value stability, it doesn't get a whole lot
more stable than that.

~~~
toomuchtodo
You’re missing my point (which is probably my fault). It’s not about the
financial mechanisms of currency exchange, it’s about the financial
infrastructure. How does a crypto exchange support a new coin at genesis? They
just add it to the platform. We’re arguing about the window dressing (currency
spreads), and I’m talking about the technical implementation and fundamentals
of supporting global treasury management.

Edit: @JumpCrisscross I am familiar with how TransferWise works under the
hood. The underlying settlement system is the legacy slowly being replaced.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _We’re arguing about the window dressing (currency spreads)_

TransferWise is the window dressing. It is bolted onto an international credit
and settlement system which is built on dollar settlement rails. The fact that
it's turned every other currency into, in effect, a feature, underscores the
point.

------
codeslave5
“Goldman warns the next big crash is around the corner”

“Gold warns about the end of QE in terms of effectiveness”

“Goldman warns about the rise of China”

It goes on and on. It’s all marketing, they have to say something.

The dollar has no risk, the demand for dollars is massive.

~~~
coralreef
_The dollar has no risk, the demand for dollars is massive._

As is the supply of dollars. To say it has no risk is absurd; the dollar is
created out of thin air by trading its future value.

[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2)

~~~
codeslave5
Yes it is. But the Fed is not stupid. This whole dollar losing its status fear
is similar to “the next big depression, worse than 1929” or “the next big
earthquake to knock California into the ocean”.

It’s just human nature to fear these events.

The us economy is rock solid and is basically the only economy innovating at
all. This doesn’t mean that wages aren’t stagnant or that wealth inequality
isn’t a problem.

~~~
coralreef
The Fed is run by human beings, whom have biases and flaws.

The US economy is strong, however its fiscal discipline is not. Federal debt
to GDP ratio is at an all time high, and will only go higher. Abstract this
graph out at current trends:

[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S)

Public debt growth is outpacing GDP growth, so its only a matter of time.

Do we anticipate that politicians will suddenly become conservative and start
paying down debt? Unlikely. The pressure to keep the economy going and win
elections is too strong. The power to create money (or artifically low
interest rates) is a heroin addiction, impossible to wean your economy off of.

If you had to lock your wealth in over the next 10-25 years, you're not buying
US government bonds. You're hiding out in gold, housing, and stocks. The
dollar is not an asset you want to be part of.

------
darth_avocado
I understand the fears of inflation because of the additional money printing
the fed has been up to, but what I think everyone is missing is that this time
around, everyone around the world is also printing money. As long as
eventually the economy gets up and running, the relative demand and value of
dollar should stabilize.

~~~
nugget
I'm less concerned about inflation between currencies and more concerned about
the "hyperinflation" of financial assets due to ZIRP, low debt yields, and
extreme multiple expansion for equity.

In particular, I'm curious about the domestic political consequences: if
financial assets are inflated to the point where you can only tap a 1% yield
in retirement (versus the 3-4% today), what does the typical middle/upper
middle class family do? What happens to newcomers in the FIRE movement? High
housing costs can be escaped by moving to a LCOL area, but if/when the idea of
a privately-funded retirement floats out of reach, how does the overall
electorate respond?

~~~
Ancalagon
No pensions, no (worthwhile) 401k's. We all become indentured servants renting
for the rest of our lives.

------
nbs_tar
This isn’t really a criticism, and I get that the article’s purpose was to
focus on gold price as a signal for potential debasement…BUT…it seems like a
miss to not even allude to or link out to commentary on the tremendous
political power being the reserve currency affords the US, and the long term
incentive for others to provide an alternative.

~~~
AndrewUnmuted
More information on this topic can be found on the Wikipedia article for
Exorbitant privilege. [0]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege)

------
danhak
The dollar has been weakening precipitously, with the dollar index declining
nearly 10% over the past few months.

I’m curious to hear tomorrow how the Fed intends to address this.

~~~
mpalczewski
That's not much perspective. It's down 10% but part of the reason why is that
it was up quite a bit earlier this year. There was a dollar shortage and the
fed opened swap lines to alleviate. It's not that weak, and would need quite a
bit of weakening to get to where it was in 2018, further weakening to get to
where it was in 2013, not to mention 2011.

~~~
jeffbee
Versus what? USD has been in a steady decline vs. CHF over the past year. USD
is in fact at a five-year low vs. CHF. It's also at a 2-year low versus the
Euro.

~~~
mpalczewski
Was looking at DXY. The dollar currency index which looks at a basket of
currencies, but weighs heavily towards the euro. Still hasn't dropped even to
early 2018 levels against the Euro.

------
coliveira
The US is making lots of steps typical of falling empires. This includes blind
belief in the strength of its currency. Even big investors are starting to get
worried about the sustainability of what the Fed is doing.

~~~
gentleman11
I believe you are referring to Rome? In the west, they debased their currency
in order to pay for wars, which wreaked havoc on the economy and Supply chain.
I’m not aware of it being a factor in Alexander’s empire, the Russians in
1918, Napoleon, the Japanese after wwii, or the decline of the British empire.
Most came from exhaustion or defeat from to war. Debasing the currency is not
something that only falling empires do. Look at Venezuela or Zimbabwe

~~~
hogFeast
Japanese did it. Their model for economic growth was late 19th century
Germany, which was largely based on financial repression.

The British did it. The UK had a huge stock of foreign assets at the start of
the 20th century. They had to be sold to pay for war, and that crushed the
currency (they also had to do a huge amount of financial repression). The
exchange rate in the mid-20s was $5, $2.50 after WW2, and is now closer to $1.

The Russians didn't have an Empire. The extent of their ambition was
interfering repeatedly in the Balkans/Turkey for no reason, and (briefly) in
Europe with the Prussian/Austrian war (and then having to dial back once
Prussia gained in strength/Germany appeared/etc.)

The point about "debasing currency" is, however, nonsense and based on a
misunderstanding of almost everything at play here. Perhaps most important:
the US isn't an empire, having a large army doesn't mean you are an empire (if
that were true, North Korea would be a world power), the role of the US is and
has always been collaborative (this hasn't changed with Trump either,
observing that Europe pays almost nothing into NATO seems quite fair).

~~~
coliveira
> the US isn't an empire, having a large army doesn't mean you are an empire

An empire is a political unit that controls vast parts of the world and
dictate their policies through military and economic means. This fits well on
how the US operates. Unlike any other country, the US has military deployed
practically in all continents and major oceans. The only difference between
the US empire and the British empire is that the US likes to propagandize
about the apparent freedom of their vassal states. In many part of the world,
elections are only uphold if the elected support US policies (mainly through
economic coercion), and when this doesn't happen the country is a target of
coups, "regime change", or enters the "black list" of sanctions. For this
reason, the US has several foreign spying and "regime changing" institutions,
including the most famous CIA and NSA. All of this supported by mainstream US
media, which has international reach and influence media in other countries.
This is obvious with what happens at Venezuela, Iran, and Russia. More
recently, China is entering the black list because it is increasingly seen as
a threat to the US political hegemony.

------
fallingfrog
Look: the stock market is in a massive, unprecedented bubble and has been for
years. But, every time asset prices try to fall, the fed jumps in and does
_whatever it takes_ to keep that from happening. So asset prices no longer
have any relation to reality. Where does that end? It’s just the gamblers
paradox writ large: the perfect gambling strategy is that every time you lose,
you double down. You have to win eventually, right? Wrong, because in reality
your cash supply is limited and you will at some point go bankrupt. This is
the same. They are doubling down, doubling down, doubling down.. there’s only
one way that ends. If asset prices cannot fall, then the whole economy
eventually implodes under its own weight and we lose the reserve currency
status. Any seismic event _feels_ impossible right up till the moment that it
happens. None of us thought that nationwide stay home orders were possible
until one morning, it happened. A big enough crisis makes the impossible
suddenly inevitable. All the things people are saying are reasons it can’t
happen- oil prices in dollars, no better alternative- at some point they just
won’t matter.

Trump and the rest of the political establishment consider that a stock market
crash can not be allowed to happen while they are in office. So they are 100%
willing to just keep kicking the can harder and harder just to hold things
together until November. It’s a cycle of short term thinking. If the smaller
crises are not allowed to happen, then the big crisis that wipes out the whole
economy eventually _willl_.

------
gnicholas
Can anyone game out what would happen if the dollar dropped dramatically? My
understanding is that would be a very good thing for American exports, which
would become cheaper and increase sales. And it would be bad for Americans
traveling/spending abroad, as their purchasing power would decline.

What else would happen, and what would the interactions between these effects
be? It seems like the boon for American exports would mediate the effect of
the drop in the dollar.

~~~
rossdavidh
It's not really even that much of a problem, long term, and it might help out
certain sectors of the U.S. economy, given that we produce a fair amount of
our own raw materials so that we don't suffer as much from a weaker currency
in buying raw inputs. It would make our exports more price competitive.

HOWEVER, the effects of a rapid, uncontrolled fall would be quite disruptive,
and a lot of people who had their savings in $$ would now have no savings, and
that could be very bad, especially since most of those with their savings in
currency would be small time investors, retirees, etc. who cannot afford an
advisor to help them diversify.

It should be mentioned that many nations have, at various times in the past,
intentionally devalued their own currencies. We have at various times in the
past accused Japan, China, Germany, etc. of intentionally preventing their
currency from appreciating. But, major swings in short periods of time can be
painful.

------
pjdemers
Gold goes up when interest rates go down. The interest rate on gold is always
negative - there is cost to storing it. But usually you can find someone who
will pay interest on dollars. So there is a cost to holding gold over dollars,
the lost interest plus the storage cost. Right now that number is close to
zero. It may become negative, that is, cheaper to store gold than hold
dollars. That's why gold is going up.

~~~
starbugs
On the other hand, gold has historically kept up with inflation. So it's also
going up when interest rates are high. Just look at its performance in the
2000s before 2008.

Also there have been periods where it has been going down even though interest
rates were low (e.g. after 2011).

I would much rather argue that the value of gold is loosely correlated with
money supply over the long run.

The current short term surge in gold prices seems to be driven by fear and
lack of other secure investment opportunities.

------
erentz
The dollar index is 50% or more Euro and there’s been a big shift there,
probably driven by the fact that the EU appears to be making progress towards
a fiscal union - in the mean time supporting (hopefully) a rescue package that
transfers funding from the wealthier to less wealthy states. (Something we
don’t think about much but happens in the US as normal course, think CA taxes
going to AL.)

Combine that with the absolutely incompetent response to the pandemic and
economic situation, whereas Europe has handled it well and managed to keep
everyone on payrolls the US went down the massive unemployment and potential
evictions route and is now squabbling over what’s the least amount of money we
can give all these people. Even Wall St knows we need to give these people
more money, the extra unemployment benefits have been keeping retail sales up,
and keeping evictions down.

In the longer term the USD not being a reserve currency is probably good for
everyone including the US.

~~~
JPKab
Agreed. US dollar being propped up has undermined manufacturing sector by
making exports artificially expensive, and imports artificially cheap.

~~~
prionassembly
Where I live, undergrads have to present their capstone graduation paper to a
committee, much like PhD students do. I've had a handful opportunities to ask,
after a presentation about this very subject: why is this bad?

I never got good answers. Maybe the PhDs did, but PhD committees draw from
their own discipline.

~~~
thoughtstheseus
It’s not bad in the short-term. You trade stamped paper for complex goods and
services. The problem is when people don’t want to make that trade anymore.
One side is left with the ability to print stamped paper, the other has the
means of production for goods and services desired. The U.S. “allowed” many
domestic industries and supply chains to leave/fail/etc. because it was
“better” to print paper.

------
haspoken
[http://archive.is/YJrsc](http://archive.is/YJrsc)

------
kieselguhr_kid
Maybe I'm naive, but given the level of unemployment and the decrease in
consumer demand across a wide array of markets and fields, don't we see an
increased risk of deflation without printing more money?

~~~
starbugs
Consumer price inflation depends on four main factors: The velocity of money
(how much it moves around), the amount of money available, supply, and demand.
With the latter two being a potential result of the former two (amongst other
external factors that have an influence on supply and demand).

So yes, if people don't move (less velocity) and if less money is available
(lost job), then that will be deflationary. This effectively yields lower
demand. At the same time, if less supply is available, that's inflationary.

Now, good luck at predicting how supply and demand will behave, especially if
you add more money to the game.

For example, it could happen that if the crisis ends faster than anticipated,
too much money has been injected into the economy and demand picks up much
faster than projected. This would be highly inflationary, especially if you
add a drop in supply simultaneously (more money chasing less goods).

On the other hand, it may happen that regardless of how much money you add,
people are just not going to spend it, because they can't (low velocity). Then
you might end up with deflation anyway, conclude that you should add even more
money, and eventually end up in the scenario described above.

Too make it even more complex, you might end up with inflation in one class of
goods and deflation in another at the same time. Looking at a broader picture
by including not only consumer goods, you might for example inflate an already
existing asset bubble (housing) even more, while simultaneously suffering from
deflation in another area.

It's really really hard to judge what will happen. We're in the midst of a big
experiment.

~~~
mpalczewski
Just nit picking:

> and if less money is available (lost job)

that's less velocity. The employer keeps that money, and if it's because of
less sales then it's because someone else kept their money. Right now velocity
is dropping. The number of dollars stays the same in a lost job scenario.

~~~
starbugs
True, but I am looking at it in a simplified way by only talking about one
individual here instead of looking at the whole economy's money supply. Makes
reasoning about consumer price inflation easier for me, as an employer would
usually not use the money for their own grocery shopping anyway.

It's less money available to the individual who has lost their job in this
example. That may of course be caused by less velocity. Or it may be caused by
a business closing down defaulting on their loans which actually shrinks
overall money supply in the economy.

The resulting effect on prices is likely going to be the same anyway (in the
short run).

It remains to be seen whether lower velocity will keep being the only
deflationary driver over the long run. If businesses default en masse, then I
think we will see real money supply deflation.

------
gentleman11
Last week the currency panic was about deflation. As a simple software
developer, I just feel lost

~~~
starbugs
That's because it's really hard to predict right now what will happen, even
for most experts.

Both inflation and deflation are equally probable outcomes, if you look at it
from a broad perspective and with limited data. If demand goes down, that's
deflationary. If supply goes down, that's inflationary. Money printing is
always inflationary, but so far, the US has been able to "print" without the
money actually ending up causing inflation in consumer prices. It's also
unclear whether this is going to change after the COVID crisis is over.

Where we already see massive inflation is in the stock market and in asset
prices. So a "currency panic about deflation" is also a really narrow way to
look at it.

Sorry if I managed to confuse you even more.

~~~
mpalczewski
It looks like the FED figured out how to conquer deflation and showed that it
would do whatever it takes to defeat it. The amount of money printing earlier
was a demonstration. In a sense they are fighting the last war. 2008 was all
about deflation.

Inflation could help in some ways because the economy is over leveraged and
inflation is a transfer from lenders to borrowers. I recently refinanced my
mortgage and would really not want to be on the other side of that
transaction.

On the other hand the government is spending money without even a thought of
how to pay for anything, deficits are huge and the only reason it all works is
because interest rates are low. Higher rates due to inflation could stop this.

Historically governments tend to choose inflation over deflation.

Interest rates rising due to inflation could stop the government from spending
without constraint, but then again government is 35% of GDP(in the US), so
perhaps consumer choice making a greater impact on an economy might be ok.

~~~
starbugs
Interest rates cannot rise significantly anymore or the debt will become
uncontrollable.

On the other hand, I'd say it's very likely that a continued low interest rate
environment will drive the societal divide even further and won't be
politically sustainable in the long run.

Exciting times we live in.

~~~
effie
Indeed. With the recent course of US gov./FED decisions, debt seems pretty
much already uncontrollable, it just keeps soaring and current powers at helm
won't touch that problem with a ten foot pole.

However, it seems to me that as long as US gov. is maintaining world dominance
of US dollar and the US population is kept disorganized to prevent a major
coherent political action, this can probably go on indefinitely.

I would like to know what has to happen for the US gov. to change its fiscal
behaviour. Maybe the internal turmoil like we see these months is what
eventually breaks the camel's neck. What do you think will happen then? Maybe
we will see some extraordinary government actions reforming debt/currency or
work/incorporation laws to start over? Or maybe the situation will be managed
by spraying little money to the poor people to keep up? I can imagine with
some helicopter money the current mess can go on for next 100 years...

~~~
starbugs
It can go on for a really long time unfortunately. Impossible to predict
timing. And I don't think the social unrest will change the US's fiscal
behavior unless it's really getting messy (civil war messy).

When looking at history, debasing the currency has always produced inflation
at a certain point, which then usually leads to the downfall of the
predominant power structure. This then causes things to reset and start over
eventually. It's highly likely it will be the same again.

Hypothetically, if China was to decide it wouldn't export anything to the US
anymore tomorrow, we could see inflation pretty quickly. The same is true for
the USD as the reserve currency. Hypothetically, if other nations were capable
of organizing a viable alternative, that would be the end for the current
fiscal behavior. Both are highly unlikely to occur anytime soon...

A major supply shock seems to be the biggest real risk in the short and medium
term, as demand issues can easily be controlled with "Money printer go brrrr"
again and again if you are in control of the planetary reserve currency, but
supply issues cannot.

------
bernaysway
Assuming we could convince individuals and the public, is there any feasible
scenario where Americans would resolve to work hard, live briskly, save and
defer 'wanton' type behavior for 24-months? And simultaneously allow the
government to spend less and perhaps a one-time 2 tax as a way to save the
fiscal system of the US.

The only way it would work is if we could somehow dramatically the improve the
lives of say 100 million people. (Ignoring all the common objections and
fallacies.)

~~~
sukilot
Paradox of thrift. If everyone saves, there's nothing to do hard work on, so
currency inflates.

The approach only works if we can use our work to stockpile durable goods.

~~~
TheCoelacanth
Investing in things that increase future productivity also works.

------
artur_makly
Could this also explain the latest BTC uptick?

~~~
21eleven
Maybe as a straw that broke the camel's back. BTC and Ethereum have been
poised to move upward for a while now due to market dynamics/cycle reasons.
Markets have their own internal dynamics and do not have to be "news" driven.

------
neonate
[https://archive.is/YJrsc](https://archive.is/YJrsc)

------
russellbeattie
Goldman realizes that soon there will be a Democrat in the White House, so now
they and the rest of the right-wing is getting ready to be "fiscally
conservative" again! Funny how that always happens just as liberals take
power. A few weeks ago the problem was deflation, but Goldman can read polls
as well as anyone and are changing their tune.

(This comment will soon be flagged because it's "too political", but oh well.)

------
OscarCunningham
Basic question: why is it bad for the US if the dollar stops being the reserve
currency?

~~~
starbugs
The US couldn't consume goods from other countries based on cheap debt
anymore, but would have to increase their own exports to match up their
deficit.

That's because if other countries aren't forced to purchase USD, there's a
much smaller market for the US currency. This means the US's ability to print
money without causing domestic inflation would be much more limited.

It would have to consume less and produce more.

~~~
mrep
How so? The yen isn't even close to USD as a reserve currency and yet their
central bank has about a 95% asset balance to gdp ratio compared to the US
that has about a 33% asset balance to gdp ratio [0, 1].

[0]: [https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/central-
bank](https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/central-bank)

[1]: [https://graphics.reuters.com/GLOBAL-
CENTRALBANKS/010041ZQ4B7...](https://graphics.reuters.com/GLOBAL-
CENTRALBANKS/010041ZQ4B7/index.html)

~~~
starbugs
Well, Japan actually has potent production assets and exports a lot?

------
creaghpatr
Must be that time of the year.

~~~
m3kw9
Month

------
fallingfrog
Called it. Decades of neoliberalism have rendered the United States government
unable to take care of its own population and infrastructure, and this is the
end result. Hope those tax cuts were worth it!

This explains why the stock market is up so much too. It’s not that they are
expecting profits- they are pricing in inflation.

------
trianglem
This administration is ruining American hedgemony. We are weaker and stupider
as a nation.

~~~
logicslave
As evidenced by what? A pandemic that gripped the nation during one of our
greatest economic booms ever?

~~~
ciarannolan
Do you think NATO's position is stronger or weaker now than it was 4 years
ago? The UN? US/EU relations? US/UK relations? US/China relations?

Is the Department of State better or worse off than it was 4 years ago? Is US
soft power stronger or weaker than it was 4 years ago?

The answer to all of these is pretty obvious, damning, and moving in the same
direction.

~~~
logicslave
All of these types of power hinge upon our economy/military and the
economy/military of other countries. This whole, "he has bad manners" have
zero effect on relations. Whoever told you that is brainwashing you

~~~
ciarannolan
> This whole, "he has bad manners" have zero effect on relations. Whoever told
> you that is brainwashing you

Complete strawman, since you don't have an actual leg to stand on in defending
this administration. Never did I say (nor would I) that Trump's "bad manners"
had any affect.

