Sure would be nice if the rest of the federal government was backing up these words with actions. I'm sick of commodity prices (oil especially) skyrocketing because our currency keeps falling.

Now he's serious.

His name is Henry Paulson.

"We're talking about months and there will continue to be bumps in the road," Paulson said in response to questions after giving a speech in Abu Dhabi at the end of a four-day trip to the Persian Gulf. Paulson was repeatedly asked about what the U.S. is doing about the weakness in the dollar, which has fallen 14 percent against the euro in the past year.

Translation:
Please don't stop pegging oil to the dollar.

I came for the Fight Club reference.

/I leave satisfied

This is why I have moved strictly to bartering. I don't even get paid with money anymore. My employer has agreed to pay me in office supplies, and I will be trading those for the goods/services I need.

/pencil-top erasers are strong right now.
//lead refills for mechanical pencils have fallen hard.

Anyone else notice the Middle East has accumulated enough currency to buy out or losses 10x over?

Paulson was PISSED when the Fed didn't subscribe to 52 week T-bills

Need to raise interest rates if you want a strong dollar, but that's going to cripple the economy and send unemployment skyrocketing. Is it better that every has a job that's slowly worth less, or that the few people with jobs are making great money? Think it over.

Their support is strong, but their performance is weak.

I strongly support the end of all diseases, but there's nothing I'm personally going to do about it.

schnarff: Sure would be nice if the rest of the federal government was backing up these words with actions. I'm sick of commodity prices (oil especially) skyrocketing because our currency keeps falling.

But on the "bright side", at least our trade deficit is smaller, or something. But I wouldn't call ours a "booming, export-economy".

My underwear strongly supports my balls.

phlegmmo: That makes cents.

I admit it, I laughed.

ScottMpls: But on the "bright side", at least our trade deficit is smaller, or something. But I wouldn't call ours a "booming, export-economy".

The shrinking trade deficit due to rising imbalances in currency exchange rates has been almost completely offset by the increase in oil prices. Just as much money is leaving the country to pay for goods from abroad, but instead of going to Europe and China it is going to the Middle East.

I'm starting to wish they would decide to try weakening the dollar...

Because given how well they've done supporting a strong dollar, we'd be back to $1 = 1 EUR in no time!

/ Lives in Germany
// Paid in USD
/// NOT getting a kick out of this

griffer: MY GOD YOU HAVE OPENED MY EYES TO A DILEMMA NO ONE HAS EVER PONDERED! EVER!

Shaggy_C: Need to raise interest rates if you want a strong dollar, but that's going to cripple the economy and send unemployment skyrocketing. Is it better that every has a job that's slowly worth less, or that the few people with jobs are making great money? Think it over.

I think perhaps you are comparing todays low dollar value to the high inflation that faced Jimmy Carter and how his administration eventually fixed the problem (although, it wouldn't be until nearly half way into Reagans term until the strategy paid off).

The value of currency is either a reflection of inflation relative to the cost of commodities, or as in the current case, a reflection of the GDP vs. the amount of debt carried. To be perfectly blunt, our dollar is losing value because our projected earnings every year far outstrips our debt accumulation.

Also, whoever it was that suggested pegging the price of oil to the euro - I hope you are a european, because taking such a tact would be absolute murder for the united states.

griffer:
I very strongly support boobs.

I put it to you that you are a bra.

Texmandie:
/ Lives in Germany
// Paid in USD
/// NOT getting a kick out of this

Oh, my.

In my humble opinion we will have some ups and downs in the future. Where is the application for Treasury Secretary ?

I can just hear Darth Cheney intoning "I find your lack of faith disturbing."

gorgor: My underwear strongly supports my balls.

HAW!!

schnarff: Sure would be nice if the rest of the federal government was backing up these words with actions. I'm sick of commodity prices (oil especially) skyrocketing because our currency keeps falling.

Lets cut interest rates and give everybody free cash!

Also came for the fight club reference. Glad that my fellow farkers are as devious as I.

TwistedFark: I think perhaps you are comparing todays low dollar value to the high inflation that faced Jimmy Carter and how his administration eventually fixed the problem (although, it wouldn't be until nearly half way into Reagans term until the strategy paid off).

I'm taking it as a factor of three things:
1) Current account deficit
2) Fractional reserve-induced inflation
3) Interest rates

The three are heavily correlated with oneanother. Bumping up interest rates would be a single method we could use to bring up value, but bringing our account deficit down would work as well. Unfortunately, that's a lot harder to do as a matter of public policy unless you want to start talking - *gasp* - 'protectionism'.

Eight months ago, America's housing market was removed. Then, interest-rate therapy. The American economy developed b*tch tits because its level of investment was too high and its national bank upped the money supply.

Dumbass tag is for subby?

Shaggy_C: I'm taking it as a factor of three things:
1) Current account deficit
2) Fractional reserve-induced inflation
3) Interest rates

The three are heavily correlated with oneanother. Bumping up interest rates would be a single method we could use to bring up value, but bringing our account deficit down would work as well. Unfortunately, that's a lot harder to do as a matter of public policy unless you want to start talking - *gasp* - 'protectionism'.

Why didn't you just say "Money Supply"

As for protectionism:
- The American consumer loses when it comes to commodities (see Softwood lumber)
- The American corporation loses when it comes to labor

There is no ideology conflict when it comes to trade policy, just individual greed. If you want to provide the most benefit for the American worker, you have a menu of options before looking to protectionism.

For some perspective consider that your instincts are the same as what is happening in South Africa right now and the biggest impact on decreasing the standard of living is not competition with more workers.

I'm completely against a strong dollar so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

I'm not familiar with the gesture he's making, but whatever it is, it probably isn't good.

h to the 'ojo: As for protectionism:
- The American consumer loses when it comes to commodities (see Softwood lumber)
- The American corporation loses when it comes to labor

They would only lose on commodities that have no direct substitute within this country, in which case we would be stupid to tarriff such a good.

And what does that even mean, the 'corporation loses when it comes to labor'? Why, because they have to actually treat their employees like human beings instead of slaves?

So, is saying you support a strong dollar while doing nothing whatsoever to promote it anything like Planned Parenthood saying 'we support motherhood'?

It would be nice if the Treasury Secretary actually did something instead of blathering on about how he "supports" stuff. Great, you support a strong dollar, now do your freaking job and strengthen the dollar.

Shaggy_C: They would only lose on commodities that have no direct substitute within this country, in which case we would be stupid to tarriff such a good.

And what does that even mean, the 'corporation loses when it comes to labor'? Why, because they have to actually treat their employees like human beings instead of slaves?

No, you are wrong. In the case of Softwood lumber, the lumber producers primarily in the American south were free to keep prices raised and collect windfall profits while being directly subsidized by the government.

As for corporations and protectionism... You can go to anywhere on about 60% of the planet, set up a factory, and treat the employees like human beings with wages 50% above the local norm, and still save on labor when transportation/logistics are factored in.

Even if they were just poor, they are more competitive because the first few dollars of their pay cheque improve their utility far beyond what it would in America. This is amplified by differences in purchasing power.

Simply put, they have more people than work.

You also cannot protect domestic labor forever with the human rights argument. Robots are diffusing through all of manufacturing. They are hardly in textiles at all right now, so far the high value added factories have been introducing them incrementally like the automotive sector. It is happening at an exponential rate-that sock factory that moved to Guatemala? it only had another 25 years tops.

hyperflame: It would be nice if the Treasury Secretary actually did something instead of blathering on about how he "supports" stuff. Great, you support a strong dollar, now do your freaking job and strengthen the dollar.

It's not within the Treasury's mandate, nor is it within their power to implement a "strong dollar" policy.

It's a Federal budget problem. Pressure your Presidential candidate for a response.