Live data from Hacker News

America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

economist.com

11–20 of 326 posts

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#11
The lack of any viable alternative has kept the dollar in its current dominant position.

That alternative won't exactly announce itself so that US policymakers can rationally decide to change course about the weaponization of money.

It will instead, sneak up on the country in the form of weird little experiments that don't seem worth the time and effort to track or regulate. By the time one of them becomes the obvious marketplace disruptor, the die will have been cast.

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#12

For the rest of the world this is a good thing. Why would the United States be the one to decide if Germany is allowed to build a pipeline to Russia or not? Image if it was Germany that used sanctions to prevent the US from building a pipeline to Mexico. Would you be ok with that?

Is the US building a pipeline to Mexico? Is Mexico a corrupt, authoritarian dictatorship that routinely interferes in Western politics? If my aunt had balls, would she be my uncle?

Have you been reading too much propaganda lately? How does it feel to know that you’ve been influenced by paid influencers? Most intelligent people aren’t influenced by the MSM drivel.

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#13
As a point of fact, it isn't true that the dominant currency imposing costs is new...that has always happened. Britain did it in order to secure continued use of the £, and the US has done it before now. It is a normal extension of foreign policy (because finance is not separate from politics, as the Rusal example shows).

It isn't some kind of authoritarian aberration either. The point is that the US has most to lose from a system of free trade so is the one who shoulders most of the burden for securing it. You don't secure something by sitting back and letting people ride all over it.

And yes, some people who don't want to play by those rules will grouse. But the system will always lean towards one dominant currency, it is just easier that way (the UK losing control was was unexpected and took nearly six decades to play out after the point of obvious decline). The world is awash in dollars, no need to worry (if anything, the issue is that some are too reliant on too much dollar funding...not that the world is moving away).

It is kind of unfortunate that the Economist keeps getting worse. The election of Mango Man and Brexit has truly addled the minds of some generally smart people (or made clear that their smartness wasn't actual intelligence but an ability to just parrot whatever they were told was "right").

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#14
post #11

The lack of any viable alternative has kept the dollar in its current dominant position. That alternative won't exactly announce itself so that US policymakers can rationally decide to change course about the weaponization of money. It will instead, sneak up on the country in the form of weird little experiments that don't seem worth the time and effort to track or regulate. By the time one of them becomes the obviou…

Isn't the answer the euro? Stable, inflation proof, light or no sanctions. As brexit proceeds and more financial services move to mainland Europe, you won't even have to worry about the brits messing with it...

I seem to remember the EU agreeing to setup a psudo bank to deal direct with Iran so they can bypass restrictions on trade?

Edit: here it is! https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/eu-mechanism-for-...

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#16

It also endangers the basic principle of a rules-based, open world. If you think that's a good idea, imagine what happens to an economy when civil law and contracts are not enforced, even without any threat of violence. To pick just one example: if you're trying to get a loan to build a factory or buy a house, it's good for you that there are laws and trusted courts that would cause you a whole lot of pain if you fai…

There's no such thing as a rules-based, open world. International relations is a state of anarchy and perpetual conflict that only fleetingly resembles peace during those periods where there's a global hegemon that can enforce those "rules". Within a country, those courts are the hegemon. "Each country having a strong interest in remaining within that system that outweighs any short-term benefits from skirting its re…

Exactly. Rules must always be enforced by some higher authority. Because the highest functional units of governance are nations, this means that there will always have to be some "most powerful" nation enforcing order.

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#17

It also endangers the basic principle of a rules-based, open world. If you think that's a good idea, imagine what happens to an economy when civil law and contracts are not enforced, even without any threat of violence. To pick just one example: if you're trying to get a loan to build a factory or buy a house, it's good for you that there are laws and trusted courts that would cause you a whole lot of pain if you fai…

There's no such thing as a rules-based, open world. International relations is a state of anarchy and perpetual conflict that only fleetingly resembles peace during those periods where there's a global hegemon that can enforce those "rules". Within a country, those courts are the hegemon. "Each country having a strong interest in remaining within that system that outweighs any short-term benefits from skirting its re…

> There's no such thing as a rules-based, open world.

You're living in one right now. Anarchy need not be synonymous with chaos, especially if disputes and conflicts are relatively unimportant (due to easy defense making 'rights' self-enforcing). The point of courts is then to arbitrate disputes in a publicly-visible way, enforcement is relatively less important.

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no such thing as a rules-based, open world. International relations is a state of anarchy and perpetual conflict that only fleetingly resembles peace during those periods where there's a global hegemon that can enforce those "rules". Within a country, those courts are the hegemon. "Each country having a strong interest in remaining within that system that outweighs any short-term benefits from skirting its re…

> There's no such thing as a rules-based, open world. You're living in one right now. Anarchy need not be synonymous with chaos, especially if disputes and conflicts are relatively unimportant (due to easy defense making 'rights' self-enforcing). The point of courts is then to arbitrate disputes in a publicly-visible way, enforcement is relatively less important.

The only reason courts have authority to arbitrate disputes is because they are backed up by the will and authority of the government, which in turn has a monopoly on the use of force in society.

Re: America’s aggressive use of sanctions endangers the dollar’s reign

#19

For the rest of the world this is a good thing. Why would the United States be the one to decide if Germany is allowed to build a pipeline to Russia or not? Image if it was Germany that used sanctions to prevent the US from building a pipeline to Mexico. Would you be ok with that?

US opposition to a pipeline to Russia is confined to a small group of people who are strangely very friendly to Russia on all other matters. There is no widespread or popular opposition to Germany building a pipeline to Russia in the United States. This doesn't really treat with the dollar-denominated world economy but I wanted to point this out to differentiate the current irrational foreign policy of the US governm…

It isn’t in the US or NATO interest for Germany to be dependent on Russian oil.

Current US policy, to the extent that we have policy today, is a whole other matter.

Post reply on HN