I suspect that the vicious war in Iraq would make nations more likely to
want to use an alternative to the dollar.
I agree that the privilege of issuing a currency that serves as a unit of
account offers the profits of seniorage, but I cannot see a war in the
face of world public opinion shoring u
I’m just getting back to this thread — apologies if I’m way behind the
flow. Anyway, Krugman is OK as far as he goes. As I mentioned before,
the euro-vs-dollar conspiracy crowd is simply wrong on the mechanics of
how these things work. Whether oil is denominated in dollars or not is
relevant, a
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'PEN-L '" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 5:31 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:36004] RE: Re: Clash of Currencies and the Iraq War
> Sabri:
> I understand where P.K is coming from but however much I
> appreciate so
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Krugman argues that the issue is a crock:
http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/oildollar.html
His argument looks right to me.
He plays it down a bit too much I think. We've borrowed immense piles
of money in dollars with no currency risk. The Fed could run the
printing
i don't know what to make of this explanation. thoughts?
Look at it this way: the ownership of Iraq's oil reserves is about
to dramatically change hands. This will be one of the largest financial
transactions in history.
Of course world oil production will remain relatively constant, and
the pri
Krugman argues that the issue is a crock:
http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/oildollar.html
His argument looks right to me.
max
I'll plead ignorance and then speculate nonetheless:
It seems to me that the "clash of currencies" is pretty one-sided. Though
the Eurocrats would _like_ the E
