• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US Dollar plummets today

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: soonerproud
LegendKiller:

What do you think of Ron Paul's proposals to bring back the gold and silver standard and to dissolve the central bank? (The Federal Reserve for those who do not know what our central bank is.)
Click to expand...



I think it is a noble idea but would probably crush the standard of living in this country
and the current economy as we now it. propbably for the better.

People wouldn't be able to buy stuff they couldn't afford😀😕

 
Originally posted by: soonerproud
LegendKiller:

What do you think of Ron Paul's proposals to bring back the gold and silver standard and to dissolve the central bank? (The Federal Reserve for those who do not know what our central bank is.)
Click to expand...

Would cripple us. We as a country rely way too much on credit and these types of fluctuating interest rates.
 
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Originally posted by: soonerproud
LegendKiller:

What do you think of Ron Paul's proposals to bring back the gold and silver standard and to dissolve the central bank? (The Federal Reserve for those who do not know what our central bank is.)
Click to expand...

Would cripple us. We as a country rely way too much on credit and these types of fluctuating interest rates.
Click to expand...

If done correctly and in stages, the crippling effect could be avoided. I have not completely decided where I stand on this quite yet. But I do believe that in the long run the benefits may outweigh the short term pain of adjustment.

The first thing that we would have to do is get rid of the massive Federal debt. We honestly cannot expect people to quit supplementing their living on credit if the Government is unwilling to do the same.

At least bringing back real assets to money would stop the foolish cycle of just printing more cash to make ends meet in the economy. The more cash that is printed, the less valuable our money is and the more prone we are to ridiculous inflation.

Removing the monetary policy from one central governing body would leave interest rates up to the free market to decide. This would make credit harder to get but at the same time it would protect the people most prone to destroying their finances with bad credit decisions. Regardless of what some people have been advocating, it is not in the best interest of the poor to have the opportunity to get credit for big ticket items like homes. The present situation in the housing market is proving this to be the case.

These would be some of the benefits. I am just wondering if it is too late to turn back the clock like that.
 
Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21
Originally posted by: soonerproud
LegendKiller:

What do you think of Ron Paul's proposals to bring back the gold and silver standard and to dissolve the central bank? (The Federal Reserve for those who do not know what our central bank is.)
Click to expand...

Would cripple us. We as a country rely way too much on credit and these types of fluctuating interest rates.
Click to expand...

If done correctly and in stages, the crippling effect could be avoided. I have not completely decided where I stand on this quite yet. But I do believe that in the long run the benefits may outweigh the short term pain of adjustment.

The first thing that we would have to do is get rid of the massive Federal debt. We honestly cannot expect people to quit supplementing their living on credit if the Government is unwilling to do the same.

At least bringing back real assets to money would stop the foolish cycle of just printing more cash to make ends meet in the economy. The more cash that is printed, the less valuable our money is and the more prone we are to ridiculous inflation.

Removing the monetary policy from one central governing body would leave interest rates up to the free market to decide. This would make credit harder to get but at the same time it would protect the people most prone to destroying their finances with bad credit decisions. Regardless of what some people have been advocating, it is not in the best interest of the poor to have the opportunity to get credit for big ticket items like homes. The present situation in the housing market is proving this to be the case.

These would be some of the benefits. I am just wondering if it is too late to turn back the clock like that.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? How would you create new money? How would you expand the economy? Why use gold? Why not use sea-shells?
 
Originally posted by: JS80
Are you kidding? How would you create new money? How would you expand the economy? Why use gold? Why not use sea-shells?
Click to expand...

You do understand that our currency was based on a gold and silver standard until the 1970's? Gold is a real asset who's actual value has remained relatively stable for thousands of years. Sea shells have no value and therefore could not be used to back currency.

You expand the economy by becoming more efficient and producing products and services for a better value. You create more wealth by obtaining more real assets. It was how it was done economically until recent history. The current system has no real value and is based solely on trust and credit. It is a house of cards waiting to come down.
 
Originally posted by: soonerproud
Originally posted by: JS80
Are you kidding? How would you create new money? How would you expand the economy? Why use gold? Why not use sea-shells?
Click to expand...

You do understand that our currency was based on a gold and silver standard until the 1970's? Gold is a real asset who's actual value has remained relatively stable for thousands of years. Sea shells have no value and therefore could not be used to back currency.

You expand the economy by becoming more efficient and producing products and services for a better value. You create more wealth by obtaining more real assets. It was how it was done economically until recent history. The current system has no real value and is based solely on trust and credit. It is a house of cards waiting to come down.
Click to expand...

yes but as the economy expands/shrinks you have to scale the reserves of gold the exact same.
The reason it was done away with was in the 1970s the American economy far outstripped the gold reserves - so it would have restricted the economy if they had to keep a 1:1 ratio.
 
Originally posted by: novasatori
yes but as the economy expands/shrinks you have to scale the reserves of gold the exact same.
The reason it was done away with was in the 1970s the American economy far outstripped the gold reserves - so it would have restricted the economy if they had to keep a 1:1 ratio.
Click to expand...

I am not disputing this at all. But that does not mean we are in a better situation today. Why did we not try using other hard assets to back our currency besides just silver and gold? Why not add platinum and diamonds to the list? There are other ways to expand the economy than just relying on "funny money".
 
Originally posted by: ADDAvenger
Originally posted by: Ktulu
WAIT A MINUTE!

When did OT turn into P&N?
Click to expand...

This has been going on for quite a while
Click to expand...

When an item of popular culture/news has enough interest it tends to get posted here.

If you'd like to cross swords with Dave over Hillarycare, Dave'sthreadowninallgoil&gas, Dave'sthreadowningBillGates&his DMCAviolation, Dave'sthreadowningallweather, Dave'sthreadowningallgeologicalactivity, he's only a click away 😉
 
I apologize if this has already been posted but I honestly didn't read every post in the thread.

As a currency trader, I fail to see where the earth-shattering news is. Or even news worth making a post about. Although I am happy to say that the move on the 18th was a nice money maker for those that happened to be in the right trade(s) when it happened. 😉

Yes, there was a noticeable drop in U.S. Dollar value Tuesday. But there was an even larger drop on September 4th. And it returned to an even higher value over the next couple of days. Currency values go up and down all the time. It's not significant or newsworthy unless it's a truly large move in a very short time(300+ points in a few hours might qualify as a notable change, and would usually only happen in response to a significant national/worldwide news event).

Tuesday's move was fairly small in the larger perspective. Just one month ago on August 17th the US Dollar value fell against the Canadian dollar from 1.0745 to 1.0561 in less than an hour. The day before that it dropped from 1.0828 to 1.0671 in about 2 hours. Of course, that was just after the exchange rate jumped up from 1.0486 all the way to 1.0867 over the span of just three days between August 13th and 16th.


In simpler terms, currency values move up and down all of the time, some times by large amounts. It's only significant if it's a huge jump in a short amount of time, and if the change stays in effect for a long time and does not bounce back (which it always does). Tuesday's drop of 168 points from a high of 1.0287 at GMT 0:00 to a low of 1.0119 at GMT 22:45 was a decent sized move, but it was nowhere near the largest move ever in the span of 24 hours, and it certainly won't be the last time a currency value moves as much as ~200 points in a day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top