|
|
|
Does Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner favor replacing the U.S. dollar with a global currency, or doesn't he? Or, as Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) pointedly asked on Sean Hannity's program, "Which Tim Geithner do we believe?" On March 23, China and Russia urged the world to replace the U.S. dollar as the world's standard with a new currency. This anti-American notion was floated by Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of Communist China's Central Bank, along with urging an increased role for the International Monetary Fund in order to protect world financial markets from the Federal Reserve printing more dollars. On March 24 during a House Financial Services Committee hearing, Rep. Bachmann asked Treasury Secretary Geithner if he would "categorically renounce the United States moving away from the dollar and going to a global currency" as suggested by China and Russia. He replied "I would, yes." Rep. Bachmann then asked for confirmation of that reply, and included Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who was also sitting at the witness table, in her question: "You 'categorically,' and the Federal Reserve chair?" Geithner indicated assent, and Bernanke responded, "I would, also." On March 25 during an appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, banker Doug Smith asked Secretary Geithner about China's proposal to replace the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Geithner responded that "we're actually quite open to that suggestion," adding that we should think of it as "evolutionary" and as "building on the current architecture" of the world's currency rather than moving to global monetary union. On the Sean Hannity program, Rep. Bachmann said, "Secretary Geithner has left the option on the table. I want to know which it is. The American people deserve to know." On March 26, a United Nations panel of expert economists pressed for a new global currency reserve system made up of dollars, euros, sterling, yen, and others. You can bet that any plan concocted by the UN that mentions "global equity" will involve more transfers of U.S. wealth to other countries." On the eve of the opening of the G20 Summit in London on April 2, Geithner expanded on his views for "new rules of the game." He said, "Our hope is that we can work with Europe on a global framework, a global infrastructure which has appropriate global oversight, so we don't have a Balkanized system at the global level, like we had at the national level." It's no wonder that commentators are starting to refer to a possible world currency as the "globo." Were Geithner's contradictory remarks a gaffe or a political trial balloon? Now we have it from our highest financial authority, Secretary Geithner, that a world currency is on the table of international discussions. And he implies that we shouldn't be surprised because it is "evolutionary" in our existing financial "architecture." That is how the Europeans were tricked into the European Union (EU) by their governments, mostly without any vote by the people. The EU started out as just a trade agreement, but it evolved into a political union that ultimately replaced national currencies with a common currency called the euro. |
