如果中国不再要美国的债务,给中国几个核弹

  • 主题发起人 主题发起人 mds
  • 开始时间 开始时间

mds

新手上路
VIP
注册
2006-09-30
消息
14,407
荣誉分数
94
声望点数
0
这位在美国财政部干了20多年的伙计,美国金融改革的呼吁者,发出了预警。

对于美国的金融帝国最重要的资源,廉价资本(有实物经济支撑的)的来源的枯竭对美国经济模式的威胁已经完全显现了。

崩溃到来,COOK 提了四个解决方案,要么,美国人尽快宣告破产,回家跟老爸老妈同住;要么,给中国几个核弹,如果中国不再要美国的债务; 要么,美国自身发生右派发动军管,中止权利法案;要么,自由派再来一场新政,废除FED。

他最后说,美国的金融改革者完全清楚应该怎么办,只要他们有一线机会就会一拥而上。FED的敌人并不只在美国以外,这个全球资本主义的中枢大有兵临城下之 势?

It’s Official: The Crash of the U.S. Economy has begun

by Richard C. Cook

Global Research, June 14, 2007
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5964


It’s official. Mark your calendars. The crash of the U.S. economy has begun. It was announced the morning of Wednesday, June 13, 2007, by economic writers Steven Pearlstein and Robert Samuelson in the pages of the Washington Post, one of the foremost house organs of the U.S. monetary elite.

Pearlstein’s column was titled, “The Takeover Boom, About to Go Bust” and concerned the extraordinary amount of debt vs. operating profits of companies currently subject to leveraged buyouts.

In language remarkably alarmist for the usually ultra-bland pages of the Post, Pearlstein wrote, “It is impossible to predict when the magic moment will be reached and everyone finally realizes that the prices being paid for these companies, and the debt taken on to support the acquisitions, are unsustainable. When that happens, it won't be pretty. Across the board, stock prices and company valuations will fall. Banks will announce painful write-offs, some hedge funds will close their doors, and private-equity funds will report disappointing returns. Some companies will be forced into bankruptcy or restructuring.”

Further, “Falling stock prices will cause companies to reduce their hiring and capital spending while governments will be forced to raise taxes or reduce services, as revenue from capital gains taxes declines. And the combination of reduced wealth and higher interest rates will finally cause consumers to pull back on their debt-financed consumption. It happened after the junk-bond and savings-and-loan collapses of the late 1980s. It happened after the tech and telecom bust of the late '90s. And it will happen this time.”

Samuelson’s column, “The End of Cheap Credit,” left the door slightly ajar in case the collapse is not quite so severe. He wrote of rising interest rates, “As the price of money increases, borrowing and the economy might weaken. The deep slump in housing could worsen. We could also discover that the long period of cheap credit has left a nasty residue.”

Other writers with less prestigious platforms than the Post have been talking about an approaching financial bust for a couple of years. Among them has been economist Michael Hudson, author of an article on the housing bubble titled, “The New Road to Serfdom” in the May 2006 issue of Harper’s. Hudson has been speaking in interviews of a “break in the chain” of debt payments leading to a “long, slow economic crash,” with “asset deflation,” “mass defaults on mortgages,” and a “huge asset grab” by the rich who are able to protect their cash through money laundering and hedging with foreign currency bonds.

Among those poised to profit from the crash is the Carlyle Group, the equity fund that includes the Bush family and other high-profile investors with insider government connections. A January 2007 memorandum to company managers from founding partner William E. Conway, Jr., recently appeared which stated that, when the current “liquidity environment”―i.e., cheap credit―ends, “the buying opportunity will be a once in a lifetime chance.”

The fact that the crash is now being announced by the Post shows that it is a done deal. The Bilderbergers, or whomever it is that the Post reports to, have decided. It lets everyone know loud and clear that it’s time to batten down the hatches, run for cover, lay in two years of canned food, shield your assets, whatever.

Those left holding the bag will be the ordinary people whose assets are loaded with debt, such as tens of millions of mortgagees, millions of young people with student loans that can never be written off due to the “reformed” 2005 bankruptcy law, or vast numbers of workers with 401(k)s or other pension plans that are locked into the stock market.

In other words, it sounds eerily like 2000-2002 except maybe on a much larger scale. Then it was “only” the tenth worse bear market in history, but over a trillion dollars in wealth simply vanished. What makes today’s instance seem particularly unfair is that the preceding recovery that is now ending―the “jobless” one―was so anemic.

Neither Perlstein nor Samuelson gets to the bottom of the crisis, though they, like Conway of the Carlyle Group, point to the end of cheap credit. But interest rates are set by people who run central banks and financial institutions. They may be influenced by “the market,” but the market is controlled by people with money who want to maximize their profits.

Key to what is going on is that the Federal Reserve is refusing to follow the pattern set during the long reign of Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan in responding to shaky economic trends with lengthy infusions of credit as he did during the dot.com bubble of the 1990s and the housing bubble of 2001-2005.

This time around, Greenspan’s successor, Ben Bernanke, is sitting tight. With the economy teetering on the brink, the Fed is allowing rates to remain steady. The Fed claims their policy is due to the danger of rising “core inflation.” But this cannot be true. The biggest consumer item, houses and real estate, is tanking. Officially, unemployment is low, but mainly due to low-paying service jobs. Commodities have edged up, including food and gasoline, but that’s no reason to allow the entire national economy to be submerged.

So what is really happening? Actually, it’s simple. The difference today is that China and other large investors from abroad, including Middle Eastern oil magnates, are telling the U.S. that if interest rates come down, thereby devaluing their already-sliding dollar portfolios further, they will no longer support with their investments the bloated U.S. trade and fiscal deficits.

Of course we got ourselves into this quandary by shipping our manufacturing to China and other cheap-labor markets over the last generation. “Dollar hegemony” is backfiring. In fact China is using its American dollars to replace the International Monetary Fund as a lender to developing nations in Africa and elsewhere. As an additional insult, China now may be dictating a new generation of economic decline for the American people who are forced to buy their products at Wal-Mart by maxing out what is left of our available credit card debt.

About a year ago, a former Reagan Treasury official, now a well-known cable TV commentator, said that China had become “America’s bank” and commented approvingly that “it’s cheaper to print money than make cars anymore.” Ha ha.

It is truly staggering that none of the “mainstream” political candidates from either party has attacked this subject on the campaign trail. All are heavily funded by the financier elite who will profit no matter how bad the U.S. economy suffers. Every candidate except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich treats the Federal Reserve like the fifth graven image on Mount Rushmore. And even the so-called progressives are silent. The weekend before the Perlstein/ Samuelson articles came out, there was a huge progressive conference in Washington, D.C., called “Taming the Corporate Giant.” Not a single session was devoted to financial issues.


What is likely to happen? I’d suggest four possible scenarios:

Acceptance by the U.S. population of diminished prosperity and a declining role in the world. Grin and bear it. Live with your parents into your 40s instead of your 30s. Work two or three part-time jobs on the side, if you can find them. Die young if you lose your health care. Declare bankruptcy if you can, or just walk away from your debts until they bring back debtor’s prison like they’ve done in Dubai. Meanwhile, China buys more and more U.S. properties, homes, and businesses, as economists close to the Federal Reserve have suggested. If you’re an enterprising illegal immigrant, have fun continuing to jack up the underground economy, avoid business licenses and taxes, and rent out group houses to your friends.

Times of economic crisis produce international tension and politicians tend to go to war rather than face the economic music. The classic example is the worldwide depression of the 1930s leading to World War II. Conditions in the coming years could be as bad as they were then. We could have a really big war if the U.S. decides once and for all to haul off and let China, or whomever, have it in the chops. If they don’t want our dollars or our debt any more, how about a few nukes?

Maybe we’ll finally have a revolution either from the right or the center involving martial law, suspension of the Bill of Rights, etc., combined with some kind of military or forced-labor dictatorship. We’re halfway there anyway. Forget about a revolution from the left. They wouldn’t want to make anyone mad at them for being too radical.

Could there ever be a real try at reform, maybe even an attempt just to get back to the New Deal? Since the causes of the crisis are monetary, so would be the solutions. The first step would be for the Federal Reserve System to be abolished as a bank of issue and a transformation of the nation’s credit system into a genuine public utility by the federal government. This way we could rebuild our manufacturing and public infrastructure and develop an income assurance policy that would benefit everyone.

The latter is the only sensible solution. There are monetary reformers who know how to do it if anyone gave them half a chance.

Richard C. Cook is the author of “Challenger Revealed: An Insider’s Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age.” A retired federal analyst, his career included work with the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House, and NASA, followed by twenty-one years with the U.S. Treasury Department. He is now a Washington, D.C.-based writer and consultant. His book “We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform,” will be published later this year. His website is at www.richardccook.com.


Richard C. Cook is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Richard C. Cook
 
米国要耍LM啦:
格老:中国无法为持有的美国国债找到买家


前美联储(FED)主席格林斯潘Alan Greenspan周二表示,没有理由担心中国抛售美国国债,迫使美国利率上升。
  
格林斯潘称,中国无法为持有的美国国债找到买家。  

在过去一周,因担心全球宽松的信贷环境将告终, 美国国债面临沉重的抛售压力,国债收益率急剧飙升。

格林斯潘同时强调指出,自冷战结束以来全球流动性充裕的局面不会永远持续。  

格林斯潘重申,中国经济增长已经失控,股价被高估,中国以及第三世界高速发展的经济不会继续。  


环球外汇网
 
中国内地减持了58亿美元的美国国债


2007/06/19

美国财政部日前发布的最新统计数据显示,在今年4月份,中国内地减持了58亿美元的美国国债,为一年多来首次出现净减持的状况。由于中国目前是美国国债的主要海外持有人之一,占所有美国可流通国债总额的10%,这一新动向也引起了市场广泛关注。

  不过,专家也指出,尽管当前全球范围内对于外汇储备多元化的需求升温,但中国政府不大可能大规模抛售美国国债。

  中国罕见净减持美债

  根据美国财政部网站,截至4月份,中国持有的美国国债总额为4140亿美元,较3月底的4198亿美元下降了58亿美元。在财政部提供的近一年的统计数据中,这还是中国头一回出现减持美债的情况。而彭博社的报道则称,这是中国自2005年10月以来首次减持美国国债,同时也是7年来减持规模最大的一个月。

  根据美国财政部网站的数据,截至4月底,中国为持有美国国债总额第二多的外国政府,排在第一位的仍是日本,持有6148亿美元的美债。

  “很多投资人都持有美债,市场对于中国在这方面的任何举动都非常敏感,这会直接影响到价格和收益率。”雷曼兄弟亚洲经济学家孙明春对记者说。截至4月份中国持有4140亿美元美国国债,同期美国国债的可流通总额为4.4万亿美元,中国占比近10%。

  “现在市场关注的是两方面:一是中国会不会大量抛售美元资产,转而买其他货币资产,这会直接影响到美元汇率;二是会不会减持低收益的美国国债,转而购买高收益的其他美元资产,从而影响到美国国债的价格和收益率。”孙明春说。

  中国今年宣布成立一家国家外汇储备专业投资机构,投资范围包括全球的高收益债券、股市、房地产甚至私募股权投资基金等。据估计,中国外汇投资公司的启动资金规模可能在2000亿美元左右。

  不大可能大举抛售

  有分析认为,中国在4月份罕见减持美国国债,可能标志着一种新的趋势,进而可能引发国际市场上更大规模的抛售,直接导致美国国债价格下跌收益率上升,甚至引发更广泛的金融动荡。

  事实上,随着美元贬值,类似的关于美元资产可能遭到抛售的担忧一直存在。也正因如此,美国国债的价格近来才持续走低。就在上周,美国10年期国债的价格跌至5年低点,相应的收益率则升至5年高位。彭博社刊文指出,国债价格下跌,已使过去一个月美国国债市值蒸发掉5500亿美元,令最为乐观的投资者也确信:美国国债已步入熊市。

  不过也有不少人士认为,至少从中国的角度来说,大举抛售美国国债等美元资产似乎并非本意所在。尽管出于外储多元化的需要,中国已设立专门的外汇投资公司管理部分外储,但中国官员多次强调,中国并不会大规模减持美债。

  “我认为,中国每年通过贸易顺差新增的外汇储备已足够用来从事高收益的投资,中国不见得、也不需要动用目前1.2万亿美元的外储存量,即便真的抛售,也不会卖很多。”孙明春说。

  Brown Brothers Harriman的全球外汇策略师Marc Chandler也指出,中国进行外汇储备多元化的资金仅占其1.2万亿美元储备的极小一部分,且中国官方也表示不会大举减持美债。美国财长保尔森,美联储主席伯南克和美联储前主席格林斯潘均表示,海外央行减持美国公债不会对美国经济安全构成威胁,因为中国目前持有的美债规模仅相当于美国公债市场一天的交易量。

  荷兰银行的外汇策略主管Greg Anderson则表示,中国的外储投资标的仍是美元资产,这对美国金融市场是利好消息。同时,美联储最新公布的数据显示,海外央行对美国国债的兴趣已得到显著恢复。截至6月13日的一周内,美联储为全球各央行托管的美国国债和机构债券规模大幅增长755亿美元,总持有规模扩大至1.958万亿美元。

  美高官亲赴海外“拉生意”

  中国财政部的数据还显示,从总体上看,4月份全球投资人也在净卖出美国国债,截至4月底,全球各国持有的美国国债总额为2.17万亿美元,较3月底的2.19万亿美元下降了282亿美元。

  经济学家指出,为了尽可能增加投资收益,全球各大央行均纷纷推行多元化投资策略,这可能对美债市场构成长期压力。Mellon Financial的全球外汇策略主管Samarjit Shankar表示,各央行展开的多元化进程将是一个持续、长期的过程,这将对国债市场带来持久影响。英国也于4月减持了124亿美元的美债,有人担心,这可能是全球投资者对美国国债兴趣发生转折的苗头。

  或许是感受到了压力,美国财政部也开始有所举动。美国财政部副部长基米特本周就将专门访问莫斯科和北京,游说俄中两国继续投资美国国债市场。

  基米特还表示,在不久的将来,他还计划到日本、韩国以及中东进行类似的访问。基米特上周出发前在华盛顿说,中国和俄罗斯将会利用他们不断增长的外汇储备投资于“包括美国国债在内的”一系列资产,“他们都是很专业的投资者,寻求外汇储备多元化没什么奇怪的。”

  基米特本周将先后到访北京和莫斯科,与当地的政府官员及中、俄、美企业领袖会晤,着重讨论“开放投资”的话题。美国媒体称,基米特此行,是看中了中俄这两个“主权财富基金(Sovereign Wealth Funds)”最多的国家的巨大投资潜力。外电援引基米特在华盛顿的一次公开演讲上的言论称:“我们希望他们能在制订自己的主权财富基金战略时,考虑在美国进行投资的机会。”

  所谓主权财富基金,其实是类似于中国的国家外汇投资公司掌握资金及运作的模式,其资金主要来源于外汇储备盈余、自然资源出口盈余和国际援助基金,这种基金不同于那些简单持有储备资产以维护本币稳定的做法,而是一种全新的专业化、市场化的积极投资。目前,全球已有22个国家和地区设立了主权财富基金,其他一些国家的主权财富基金也在酝酿之中。
 
后退
顶部