G20 - Make or break?

In the decades since Nixon, Europeans have pleaded, shouted, begged and decried the growing chaos affecting global economic prosperity. That prosperity, first was compromised, then threatened, and finally tanked by US policy.

Germany and France [remember the taunt about "Old Europe"?] were usually the most vocal in trying to get the globe's financial house into some coherent state. They always were politely ignored. We were too big and too militarily muscular to fail...

Now China, Russia, India, South America and other countries appear to have accepted that America is incapable of reorganizing its power structure. The 20 year agenda of "restructuring to face new challenges" has been window-dressing after all.

The old game remains control of money and we have demonstrated too well and too often that it's not our strongest logistical suit.

We prefer a remarkably warped version of Keynesianism -- using fiat currency (and wars as public works spending orgies) as opposed to actually competing with innovative new products and hot sellable inventions.

Progress via R&D is Old Thinking to us. We prefer stupid risk taking -- like the Russian Roulette of state sanctioned derivatives

As of 1 April the Euro was worth $1.32772 US.

The Euro first came to market with a value of $ 0.85 US.

Saddam liked the Euro and intended to shift to it for all oil purchases before the invasion of Iraq. Iran has the same idea.

Is there a global currency which is stable enough to replace the greenback? Watch the Euro for awhile.

http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic

We are in a world of hurt.

In regard to Mr. Endahls' comments, the European Union may be an "arbitrary construct" to some, but not to the many forward thinking Europeans who saw it as a way to eliminate the provincial, nationalistic and economic sources of the devastating wars that ravaged Europe in every generation in the past five centuries.
The EU definitely wasn't "created by Washington."
Because of it's size it is as much a rival as anything else. Thankfully, because of our long mutual ties of culture and co-operation, it has been a friendly rival.
You'll note it has also been able to be more resistant to some of the excesses of Washington than many of the U.S.'s former allies individually.
It's not a perfect union, as one would expect. It's just as political, and often even more bureaucratic, than some individual states. But, it has done a lot toward improving the health and economies of its member states and it has given Europe the collective muscle to accomplish things it couldn't beforehand. Imagine a fisheries compact with a dozen national states aggressively competing only for their own immediate interests without an overall body to speak for the ecosystem, hire independent scientists to monitor results, and to enforce behavior.
AveryMoore is right in suggesting the Euro is well placed to become the alternate world currency under discussion now in economic circles. Perhaps better the Euro, than the Chinese Yuan, don't you think?

The people are hungry and homeless! www.thisisbetter.ws

I hope you all take the time to open and read AveryMoore's reply to me. It perfectly pegs the untenable economic fiction at the core of our fantasy economy, and, in a few short sentences, looks unblinkingly at the staggering continuing tragedy of our inability as a society to connect with each other in any meaningful, caring, and rational way.
If we are to continue as a larger society and not merely to survive through a new form of personal and familial autarky (of which I've come to accept myself to as a viable last resort) we need a new social compact. Is that possible?

Avery, I am humbled by your eloquence and by the soothing cadence that accompanies your insightful analysis.

Everyone should take note of this conversation and how "above the din" it takes us.

In our quest for understanding the import of where the world is failing its inhabitants, I and others should salute Avery's clarity of thought. The reduction of the seemingly complex to a distilled equation blessed with a brevity of variables not only serves Avery well but it is also what makes our constitution so timeless.

Only when we remove the adjectives and adverbs do we see a sentence's true intent.

The preamble's "We the People" phrase was long ago hijacked by those capable of buying laws. Until the recent usurpation of our press by those forces, the three branches of government clumsily worked to successfully oppose that theft of sovereignty.

Has the "the press" always been so "agenda-laden" or am I just now noticing which masters its many arms serve?