Forward, comrades to a one world bank.
Peter Goldmark and Paul Volcker want a one world bank, one which does not print currency but makes rules. That is what they see as the solution to our worldwide debt and deficit problems.
Obama spoke about setting up his own infrastructure bank last year to fund his projects (like Solyndra) without the hassle of Congress, which would only be the beginning for him. Remember how Obama told the Chinese that we have a “messy democracy” and how he envied them their efficiency?
I’m sure that Obama’s globalist views would support Peter Goldmark and Paul Volcker’s point of view, even though it’s insane.
What happens to U.S. sovereignty in this? This is what we can look FORWARD to when Obama has MORE FLEXIBILITY?
Goldmark sees the U.S. finances as irretrievably intertwined with Europe, which is true. He states that the United States has the tools to get us out of the crisis and Europe does not, which is not exactly true since Europe can solve many of their problems by cutting their entitlement programs as can we.
Goldmark says we can’t use the tools we have because of political intractability but a one world bank could solve the problem. [It would solve the problem of the messy democracy and the congressional interference on many issues.]
Quoting Volcker, Goldmark says the following:
Newsday Opinion:…There’s no way to work out of a financial mess in an orderly way, and no limits on how much debt or new currency can be issued in bailouts.
Volcker continues: “The result has been unsustainable and ultimately destructive economic and financial strains. There are no effective limits apart from a financial breakdown. That is where Europe is today, and that is where we don’t want to be tomorrow.”
Europe doesn’t have the tools to do what’s needed. We do, but we’re politically unable to use them. Financial regulatory authorities are national — but the financial system is teleconnected in a single worldwide market of complex transactions, deal-makers, financial lust and fear.
It’s time to talk about something that we’ve barely dared whisper: a strong, international body to play in the global system the role the Federal Reserve plays here in the United States. History sometimes forces difficult choices, and that’s where we are now. The international financial system needs a central bank — not to issue currency, but to help set the rules of the global money game and enforce them.
Just what we need – one enormous Federal Reserve for the world. I am not sure I want the one we have here.
There is one other solution Goldmark fails to see when he says we are politically unable to use the tools at our command and that is to vote out Obama along with his debt and deficit friends in Congress so we can get America back on a path towards solvency by cutting the growth of spending.
Instead, Goldmark and Volcker want to make our situation far more devastating by making us part of a one world financial government. We would be toadies to the international community as we fund their d & d and our own under international rules. How does our constitution fit into this? Volcker claims the bank would not print currency. I don’t know how long that would last.
Most of the world is totalitarian, why would we want to embrace them financially?
Dr. Kim, Obama’s recent appointee to head the World Bank, though a brilliant man, does not have the appropriate economic or financial background for the job he has been given. He’s a doctor and all his experience is in public health.
Why pick him? We already have many worldwide public health institutions. It was a snub to the business world. It is because he is a development specialist.
With this appointment, Obama is imprinting his economic vision on the World Bank. The goal, I believe, is to eliminate poverty through economic development which will concentrate on worldwide health, education, infrastructure, climate change but it’s more likely that we’ll simply have Obama’s failed vision spread throughout the world.
Now, back to Volcker and Goldmark. It is unsurprising that Volcker, a former Federal Reserve Chairman and advisor to Obama would see the Federal Reserve as the answer to world economic problems.
Volcker at the same time believes that calling Obama a socialist has no connection to reality. he might be right. Obama might be more of a crony corporatist or crony socialist.
Wall Street has thrived under Obama according to Volcker though Wall Street is giving more to Romney’s campaign than Obama’s so they might not agree with Volcker about the direction Obama is taking us.
[Corrected 5/6] We almost sold the NYSE to Germany, a socialist country, last year. It was described as a merger in the United States and a takeover in Germany. Whose laws would have applied if that had happened?
We need to retain as much of our sovereignty as possible. I don’t see the merging of finances in the EU as the positive so many others do as each country cedes more and more of their sovereignty to Technocrats. Do we really need to become more entwined with them?