Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Barlow's avatar

Nicely explained... I admire China's engineering approach, stress test the system before you announce the product. Very much the opposite of the U.S. approach, launch the marketing hype and hope the product floats later. Can't help but wonder what's next?

Thomas St.Yeng's avatar

this is an essay about why nations should never use their currency as a weapon, as the USA has since Brenton Woods, as it establishes counter-trends which are hard to predict. In the 1970's, Saudi had a resource that attracted reserve dollars; since 1990, China has a resource that has attracted reserve dollars. The only thing those nations could buy with that shitty paper was Treasuries, which only encourage profligate spending in swamp D.C. Anyone buying cheap oil with yuan is natural. The oil selling nation needs yuan to buy manufactured goods from China.

The petrodollar only works when America has something to sell. Back in the 1970's, America made stuff. Now? Only so many Teslas to sell. Weapon systems? Perhaps.

This all leads me back to a foundational reserve asset that America may lead the way if it can get its regulatory framework corrected - cheap energy, unconstrained by daily pumping of oil or gas. Uranium for modular nuclear reactors that get refueled every 18 months to 10 years. Such long-ish timeframes provide natural stability far better than an SPR.

As for "fascinating rabbit hole. I might write a whole essay on it one day." - perhaps a whole book would be appropriate. An Austrian perspective of what happens when you try to weaponize a fiat currency to secure dominance in a real reserve asset. It's going to generate unintended (bad) consequences, guaranteed.

No posts

Ready for more?