#464 | Saleha Mohsin: How the Dollar's Weaponization Changed the World Order - The Realignment Pod
Summary
TLDRIn diesem Podcast spricht Marshall mit Slay Mosen von Bloomberg News über ihr neues Buch 'Paper Soldiers', das die Waffennutzung des Dollars und deren Auswirkungen auf die Weltordnung untersucht. Sie diskutieren die historische Bedeutung eines starken Dollars in der US-Politik seit den 1990er Jahren und die wachsende Debatte über dessen Vor- und Nachteile. Mosen beleuchtet, wie der Dollar als mächtigstes globales Finanzinstrument genutzt wurde, um US-Außenpolitik durchzusetzen, und wie diese Praxis in den letzten Jahren zunehmend hinterfragt wird. Ein Schwerpunkt liegt auch auf den wirtschaftlichen und geopolitischen Konsequenzen der US-Sanktionen, insbesondere gegenüber Russland und deren Auswirkungen auf die Weltwirtschaft.
Takeaways
- 📰 Marshall führt ein Gespräch mit Slay Mosen von Bloomberg News über ihr Buch 'Paper Soldiers', das die Waffeneinsetzung des Dollars und ihre Auswirkungen auf die Weltordnung thematisiert.
- 💵 Seit den 1990er Jahren herrschte in Washington ein parteiübergreifender Konsens, dass ein starker Dollar sowohl der Innen- als auch der Außenpolitik der USA zugute kommt.
- 🌍 Mit der Wahl von Donald Trump und globalen Ereignissen wie der Ukraine-Krise hat die Debatte über die Vor- und Nachteile eines starken Dollars zugenommen.
- 📚 Slay Mosen erklärt, dass ihr Buch aus ihrer Arbeit als Treasury-Reporterin für Bloomberg entstand und sich auf die Rolle des Dollars in der globalen Wirtschaftspolitik konzentriert.
- 💰 Die Diskussion über den starken Dollar und dessen Bedeutung wurde in den 1990er Jahren von Robert Rubin, dem damaligen Finanzminister, geprägt.
- 🌐 Globalisierung und offene Handelsbeziehungen wurden durch einen starken Dollar unterstützt, was zu einer stabilen geopolitischen Umgebung beitrug.
- 📉 In den 1980er Jahren gab es viele Währungsinterventionen durch Regierungen, einschließlich der USA, um den Wert des Dollars zu beeinflussen.
- 🔧 Ein starker Dollar bedeutet, dass der Dollar gegenüber anderen Währungen mehr wert ist, was den Import von Waren in die USA erleichtert und die Exportkosten erhöht.
- ⚖️ Die Waffeneinsetzung des Dollars bedeutet, dass die USA Länder, die gegen internationale Normen verstoßen, vom Zugang zum Dollar und dem globalen Finanzsystem abschneiden können.
- 🚫 Russland wurde nach der Annexion der Krim und dem Krieg in der Ukraine mit Sanktionen belegt, was zeigt, wie die USA den Dollar als Druckmittel in der Außenpolitik einsetzen.
- 🔍 Trotz der Stärke des Dollars gibt es Bestrebungen einiger Länder, Alternativen zu schaffen, um sich weniger von der US-Währung abhängig zu machen.
- 📊 Janet Yellen und andere US-Beamte äußern sich zunehmend besorgt über die Herausforderungen, die durch die Abkehr einiger Länder vom Dollar entstehen könnten.
Q & A
Was ist die zentrale These von Slay Mosens Buch 'Paper Soldiers'?
-Das Buch 'Paper Soldiers' von Slay Mosen untersucht, wie die Waffe der Dollarstärke die Weltordnung verändert hat.
Welche zwei Hauptkomponenten definiert Mosen für eine starke US-Dollar-Politik?
-Die zwei Hauptkomponenten sind der Wechselkurswert des Dollars im Vergleich zu anderen Währungen und die Dominanz des Dollars im globalen Finanzsystem.
Wie hat die US-Politik in den 1990er Jahren den starken Dollar betrachtet?
-In den 1990er Jahren gab es in Washington einen starken parteiübergreifenden Konsens, dass ein starker Dollar sowohl der Innen- als auch der Außenpolitik Amerikas zugutekam.
Welche Rolle spielte Donald Trump bei der Diskussion über den starken Dollar?
-Donald Trump brachte die Diskussion über den starken Dollar in den Vordergrund, indem er dessen Auswirkungen auf den Handel thematisierte und öffentlich darüber sprach, was vorherige Finanzminister vermieden hatten.
Was bedeutet es, den Dollar zu 'waffnen'?
-Den Dollar zu 'waffnen' bedeutet, seine Dominanz zu nutzen, um Länder, die als schädlich oder feindlich angesehen werden, vom globalen Finanzsystem abzuschneiden, indem ihnen der Zugang zum Dollar verwehrt wird.
Wie hat der Einsatz von Sanktionen durch die USA nach den Anschlägen vom 11. September 2001 begonnen?
-Nach den Anschlägen vom 11. September 2001 waren die ersten Maßnahmen im Krieg gegen den Terror wirtschaftliche Sanktionen, die durch das US-Finanzministerium verhängt wurden, um Terrorgruppen vom US-Finanzsystem auszuschließen.
Welche Auswirkungen hatten die Sanktionen gegen Russland nach der Annexion der Krim?
-Die Sanktionen gegen Russland führten zu erheblichen wirtschaftlichen Schwierigkeiten, einschließlich eines massiven Rubelabsturzes, und zwangen Russland, seine Wirtschaftspolitik anzupassen.
Wie wird der Dollar als sicherer Hafen betrachtet und welche Rolle spielt das bei Krisen?
-Der Dollar wird als sicherer Hafen angesehen, was bedeutet, dass Investoren in Krisenzeiten in den Dollar und US-Staatsanleihen flüchten, weil sie die Stabilität und Sicherheit der US-Wirtschaft schätzen.
Welche Herausforderungen stehen den BRICS-Staaten gegenüber, wenn sie versuchen, vom Dollar wegzukommen?
-Die BRICS-Staaten stehen vor der Herausforderung, dass trotz ihrer Bemühungen, alternative Handelswährungen zu nutzen, der Dollar aufgrund seiner globalen Dominanz und Stabilität weiterhin eine zentrale Rolle im Welthandel spielt.
Was war die Reaktion auf die US-Sanktionen gegen Russland im Jahr 2022?
-Die Reaktion auf die US-Sanktionen gegen Russland im Jahr 2022 umfasste internationale Besorgnis und Aktionen, um Russland vom Dollar abzuschneiden, wobei viele Länder sich den Sanktionen anschlossen, trotz der wirtschaftlichen Selbstschäden.
Outlines
💬 Einführung und Vorstellung
Marshall eröffnet das Gespräch auf dem YouTube-Kanal des Realignment-Podcasts und stellt die Gesprächspartnerin Slay Mosen von Bloomberg News vor. Es geht um ihr neues Buch 'Paper Soldiers', das die Waffennutzung des Dollars und deren Auswirkungen auf die Weltordnung thematisiert. Das Gespräch beleuchtet den politischen Konsens über einen starken Dollar seit den 1990ern, der unter anderem durch Donald Trumps Politik und globale Ereignisse wie die Ukraine-Krise herausgefordert wurde.
📰 Mosens Hintergrund und Buchthema
Slay Mosen beschreibt ihre Rolle bei Bloomberg News, wo sie über Geld, Politik und Macht in Washington berichtet. Ihr Buch entstand aus ihrer Erfahrung als Finanzreporterin und beleuchtet, wie Entscheidungen in Washington sowohl nationale als auch internationale Auswirkungen haben, insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit der US-Währungspolitik und dem starken Dollar.
💲 Bedeutung eines starken Dollars
Marshall und Mosen diskutieren, warum der starke Dollar oft unterstudiert und unterrepräsentiert ist. Mosen erklärt, dass das Buch die historische Bedeutung des Dollars ab den 1990ern untersucht, beginnend mit dem damaligen Finanzminister Robert Rubin. Es wird darauf eingegangen, wie die Politik des starken Dollars zur Globalisierung beitrug und warum das Thema in den Medien weniger Beachtung findet.
🌎 Globale Auswirkungen eines starken Dollars
Mosen erläutert die zwei Dimensionen eines starken Dollars: den Wechselkurs und die Dominanz des Dollars im globalen Finanzsystem. Ein starker Dollar ermöglicht den USA, mehr ausländische Waren zu importieren und trägt zur wirtschaftlichen und geopolitischen Stabilität bei. Sie erklärt auch, warum ein starker Dollar historisch gesehen eine bevorzugte Politik war und welche Rolle sie in der Globalisierung spielte.
📉 Interventionen und Volatilität
In den 1980ern gab es häufige Währungsinterventionen, bei denen die US-Regierung aktiv in die Wechselkurse eingriff. Mosen beschreibt, wie das Treasury und die Federal Reserve damals die Märkte beeinflussten und wie Robert Rubin in den 1990ern versuchte, Stabilität zu schaffen, indem er die starke Dollar-Politik einführte und beibehielt.
📊 Die Geburtsstunde des starken Dollars
Mosen erzählt von den Plaza- und Louvre-Abkommen, bei denen führende Wirtschaftsnationen sich trafen, um die Stärke des Dollars zu regulieren. Diese geheimen Treffen, die in den 1980ern stattfanden, hatten das Ziel, die Währungsvolatilität zu verringern und ein stabiles globales Wirtschaftssystem zu fördern. Rubin setzte später auf eine konstante Kommunikation, um die Märkte zu beruhigen.
🇺🇸 Auswirkungen auf die US-Wirtschaft
Die Volatilität der 1980er Jahre hatte erhebliche Auswirkungen auf die US-Wirtschaft, insbesondere auf die Hersteller im Rust Belt. Mosen erklärt, dass unvorhersehbare Währungsbewegungen langfristige Geschäftspläne behinderten und die wirtschaftliche Stabilität beeinträchtigten. Dies trug zur Entwicklung der populistischen Bewegungen bei, die Trump 2016 an die Macht brachten.
🌐 Die Ära der Globalisierung
Die 1990er Jahre waren geprägt von der Stabilisierung der Währungsmärkte und der Vertiefung der Globalisierung. Mosen analysiert, wie die Politik des starken Dollars und die Globalisierung die US-Wirtschaft beeinflussten. Sie beschreibt die langfristigen Auswirkungen dieser Politik, einschließlich des Niedergangs der US-Fertigungsindustrie und des Aufstiegs populistischer Bewegungen, die letztlich zur Wahl Trumps führten.
🏭 Auswirkungen auf die Fertigungsindustrie
Mosen beschreibt, wie die Politik des starken Dollars und die Globalisierung die US-Fertigungsindustrie negativ beeinflussten. Sie erläutert, wie der Verlust von Arbeitsplätzen in der Fertigungsindustrie zur wirtschaftlichen Unsicherheit führte und zur Wut der Arbeiterklasse beitrug, die Trump 2016 ausnutzte. Sie zieht Parallelen zu historischen Ereignissen und erklärt, wie wirtschaftliche Veränderungen politische Verschiebungen hervorriefen.
📈 Trump und die Wirtschaftspolitik
Trump setzte als Präsident viele seiner wirtschaftspolitischen Versprechen um, einschließlich der Kennzeichnung Chinas als Währungsmanipulator und der Einführung von Handelszöllen. Mosen beschreibt, wie Trumps Administration die bestehende starke Dollar-Politik beibehielt und welche Auswirkungen dies auf die globale Wirtschaft hatte. Sie beleuchtet auch die Reaktionen anderer Länder und die Herausforderungen, denen sich die US-Politik gegenüber sah.
💥 Waffennutzung des Dollars
Der Dollar wird auch als geopolitisches Werkzeug genutzt, insbesondere durch Sanktionen. Mosen erklärt, wie die USA den Dollar einsetzen, um Gegner wie Terrorgruppen und Länder, die gegen internationale Normen verstoßen, zu sanktionieren. Die Sanktionen gegen Russland nach der Annexion der Krim und die Maßnahmen nach den Terroranschlägen vom 11. September sind Beispiele für diese Praxis.
🌍 Globale Reaktionen auf US-Sanktionen
Die Sanktionen der USA gegen Russland nach der Invasion der Ukraine 2022 zeigen die Stärke des Dollars als Waffe. Mosen beschreibt die internationalen Reaktionen und die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen dieser Sanktionen. Sie diskutiert, wie Russland und andere Länder auf diese Maßnahmen reagiert haben und welche langfristigen Konsequenzen dies für die globale Wirtschaftsordnung haben könnte.
🛡️ Wirksamkeit von Sanktionen
Mosen diskutiert die Debatte über die Wirksamkeit von Sanktionen. Sie erklärt, dass Sanktionen ein Werkzeug und keine vollständige Strategie sind und ihre Wirksamkeit oft schwer zu messen ist. Trotz der erheblichen wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen auf Russland haben die Sanktionen das Verhalten nicht vollständig geändert, was Fragen zur langfristigen Wirksamkeit dieser Maßnahmen aufwirft.
💡 Alternative Wirtschaftssysteme
Es gibt Diskussionen über alternative Wirtschaftssysteme, die den Dollar herausfordern könnten, wie das BRICS-Bündnis (Brasilien, Russland, Indien, China und Südafrika). Mosen erklärt, dass trotz der Bestrebungen dieser Länder, sich vom Dollar zu lösen, der Dollar aufgrund seiner Stabilität und seines globalen Vertrauens weiterhin dominiert. Sie betont, dass die USA wachsam bleiben müssen, um ihre wirtschaftliche Vormachtstellung zu sichern.
🏛️ Zukunft des Dollars und US-Politik
Mosen betont, dass die Zukunft des Dollars von der inneren Stärke der USA abhängt. Sie verweist auf die Notwendigkeit, die wirtschaftliche und politische Stabilität zu wahren, um die Vormachtstellung des Dollars zu erhalten. Die USA müssen auf die Herausforderungen von innen und außen reagieren, um ihre führende Rolle im globalen Finanzsystem zu sichern.
📚 Abschluss und Podcast-Empfehlung
Mosen schließt das Gespräch mit einem Verweis auf ihr Buch 'Paper Soldiers' und ihren Podcast 'The Big Take DC'. Sie lädt die Zuhörer ein, mehr über die Themen des Interviews zu erfahren, insbesondere über die Auswirkungen der US-Wirtschaftspolitik auf die Welt. Der Podcast bietet tiefere Einblicke in die wirtschaftlichen und politischen Entwicklungen in Washington und deren globale Auswirkungen.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Dollarstärke
💡Waffenisierung des Dollars
💡Globalisierung
💡Sanktionen
💡Währungsintervention
💡Finanzintelligenz
💡Bipartisaner Konsens
💡Wirtschaftliche Dominanz
💡Finanzmärkte
💡Geopolitische Stabilität
Highlights
Discussion on how a strong dollar policy was historically seen as beneficial for America's domestic and foreign policy.
Analysis of the shift in consensus about the strong dollar policy since the 1990s, especially post-Trump election and global events.
Insights into the origins of the book 'Paper Soldiers' and the author's background covering money, politics, and power.
Explanation of the strong dollar's role in globalization and its impact on US trade and economic power.
Comparison of the dollar's exchange rate value versus its dominance as the world's most important currency.
Historical context of US currency interventions in the 1980s, including the Plaza and Louvre Accords.
Impact of currency volatility on American manufacturers and farmers, especially in the Rust Belt.
Assessment of the long-term effects of the strong dollar policy from the 1990s onwards, including globalization and economic integration.
The role of the dollar in US foreign policy, particularly its use in sanctions and economic warfare.
Detailed discussion on the US sanctions policy, particularly towards Russia after the Ukraine invasion.
Exploration of the economic and political challenges faced by the Trump administration regarding dollar policy.
Examination of the weaponization of the dollar and its implications for global financial stability.
Analysis of the potential decline in the dollar's dominance and the rise of alternative currencies.
The impact of domestic political and economic stability on the strength and dominance of the dollar.
Discussion on the importance of maintaining strong economic policies and leadership to ensure the dollar's continued strength.
Transcripts
Marshall here welcome back to the
YouTube version of the realignment
podcast I've got a great conversation
today with Bloomberg news's slay Mosen
about her new book Paper Soldiers how
the weaponization of the dollar changed
the world order basically not understand
going into this conversation as CA
documents ever since the 1990s there was
a strong bipartisan consensus in
Washington a strong dollar was to the
benefit of America's domestic and
foreign policy however ever since the
election of Donald Trump and events
worldwide from the crisis in Ukraine to
debates about how the US sanctions
regime steps up as a deterrent to
conflict we've seen an increasing of
debate about the de greater which the
strong dollar is a cost rather than
purely a benefit so CA in this
conversation is going to take us into
those debates and why no matter what
happens in the 2024 election this space
is no longer the consensus it used to be
going back to the 1990s hope you all
enjoy this
conversation s musion welcome to the
realignment thank you so much for having
me Marshall yeah I'm really excited to
speak to you not only as an author but
as a fellow podcaster I'd like to start
with uh your background in your beat
real quick obviously you're covering
Washington um from the perspective of
Bloomberg News but that's the biggest
possible beat ever so let's kind of
narrow it down a bit and explain how
that leads to the book we're talking
about today yeah I would say right now I
cover money politics and power and how
that shapes Washington and the rest of
the world Washington is obviously quite
powerful so how some of the decisions
that are made in Washington affect
domestically our country and then
internationally but always with an
economic lens on everything um and then
what led me to the book actually I was a
treasur reporter for Bloomberg at
Washington for six years uh and so it's
a treasury Department book it's all
about the dollar and so that's what led
me to
it why does it feel like the quote
unquote dollar and issues in debates
around American currency policy it feels
like these policy areas have been
incredibly understudied and undercovered
not from a reporter's perspective but
just from a discourse perspective
because you kind of start the book off
in the 1990s with then secretary uh
Robert Rubin he's talking about the
dollar and a strong dollar policy and I
think a lot of folks who listen to the
show will think about okay debates
around immigration in the 90s debates
about American manufacturing the 1990s
but they probably won't think about that
through the lens the dollar I love you
to kind of start off by talking around
that
Dynamic yeah and that's kind of gets to
the Genesis of the book idea um you know
for a journalist it's a natural course
to think about writing a book at some
point and there's so many books about
the Federal Reserve book after book
after book and they're all great and
they all um serve their own special role
in our history in the telling of our
history uh but they don't touch on the
dollar and then if you look at treasury
there's a musical called Hamilton there
are a lot of um uh treasury secretary
autobiographies uh that are terrific and
they are all-encompassing but you know
having covered uh government US currency
or government currency policy you know I
started in Norway tiny little um country
compared to the US but when I was there
one of my first jobs was to ask the
Prime Minister and the Finance Minister
what they thought of their croner and
like its impact it was a Commodities
driven uh economy they had the world's
largest seran wealth fund so there was
and impact then I get to the US and I
learn that the strong dollar policy and
asking a treasury secretary is something
that you do and they it's a you play
chicken they don't want to talk about it
you want to ask them questions Traders
investors are interested it had been
this light theme um for decades and it
was Donald Trump who kind of brought it
to the four that the dollar affects
trade and let's talk about it you know
treasure Finance ministers economic
officials are afraid to talk about
anything that's going to move markets if
they talk about the dollar if they opine
it will move markets so it felt like
there wasn't a lot of Grist there you
know um because no one wanted to talk
about it and then he did he wanted to
discuss it and then I just started
thinking there is so much here our
entire like if you think about uh how we
have power it's the economy stupid like
that's how we have E power in the world
world that's how we're able to export
our foreign policy objectives because we
are the world's largest economy and then
I just kind of took that line down to
where is it specifically and I thought
King Dollar has a lot to do with it
something I'm really curious about could
you explain what it means I was trying
to find the best way to introduce this
topic to folks what does it mean for the
us to have a strong dollar if we're
defining that like as a policy OB Ive
this feels like a category where maybe
the terms aren't helpable because why
would we want to have a weak dollar we
should just have a strong Dollar by
definition explain what having a strong
dollar means and what the actual Overton
window of what the debate actually would
be because I think it's hard to imagine
a politician in private saying yeah look
I'm GNA really desire a weak Dollar in
comparison to a strong dollar so there's
two components to it we'll brush one
aside very quickly it's the exchange
rate the actual value of the dollar
against another currency that is one
thing how how many pounds British pounds
or Japanese Yen can my dollar buy if I
go overseas or if I'm importing Goods
that is one side of the uh argument and
the US um especially in the 990s and up
until Trump uh wanted a strong value for
the dollar because we wanted to import a
lot of goods from overseas that was sort
of the the underpinnings of
globalization let's keep trade open we
have a huge consumer driven economy the
world wants to benefit from it if the
world economy is strong and
interdependent will have a stable uh
geopolitical environment so that that's
one benefit the separate benefit or the
separate definition of a strong dollar
is a dominant dollar a dollar that
Reigns Supreme it's the world's most
important
asset um the world literally runs on
dollars you can't the whole Global
Financial system it's a dollar sign
around everything so if you want to buy
oil if countries want to trade oil if um
a fisherman in papa guini wants to sell
his fish he is probably at some point
going to touch the Global Financial
system if it's a anything above like a
micro sale that means you are touching
the dollar and so that strength that
everyone needs it is another kind of
strength and it's more about dominance
and why does a strong dollar lead to
more Imports versus a weak dollar so
that comes down to just terms of trade
uh if a dollar exchange rate if the
value of the dollar is high that means
anything that China is selling I can buy
more of because the Chinese Zan uh is
weaker in comparison to a strong dollar
let's say it's $5 you can also think
about I think my favorite comparison is
a Big Mac how much how many Big Macs can
you buy with $20 right if the currency
exchange rate is strong it's high then
you go to let's say uh Europe and it's
like five EUR a burger so that got you
four four Burgers if the exchange rate
is weak then your dollar is by fewer
Euros so maybe it's three burgers or
it's two burgers because the Euro by uh
you know supply and demand exchange
rates are higher and the key thing when
you're telling this story you focus on
1995 this uh Robert Rubin speech what
was the US bipartisan say approach to
the dollar before the 1990s and the end
of the Cold War oh it was so exciting
actually I think I would have loved to
have been a treasury reporter in the 80s
uh my my contacts at treasury kind of
joke that o you just want to cover the
plaza or the Louver Accord basically in
the 80s and and a little bit before that
too there was an era of so much currency
intervention by governments including
the US treasure department and what I
mean by that is there's a exchange rate
there's a value of the dollar and the US
government doesn't like it and so they
go in and they either buy a bunch of
dollars to
artificially um uh uh reduce the supply
and then the the value goes up or if
they want it to be weaker for whatever
reason they will sell a bunch of dollars
and increase Supply so the the value
goes down and it was this Kabuki game
where no one really would fully admit it
that it was about to happen until the
treasury Department put out a statement
and they worked quietly behind the
scenes with the Federal Reserve
uh the Federal Reserve would do daily
checks with Traders and sometimes
because then Traders knew that the
government could intervene it's not a
completely free and open and fair market
Big Brother's going to come in and
change it they start like this Tea Leaf
reading routine of like trying to figure
out are they about to and so then
reporters start asking questions to see
like does the treasury secretary or the
chair of the Federal Reserve like the
value at itself at now what words is he
or she going to say that might hint at
what they might do next and Treasury and
fed officials knew this so they would
make calls into to Market participants
and say things leading questions about
the dollar or leading statements about
the dollar to just control it through
like uh verbal interventions like that
and so it took Ruben coming in and they
I think the government kind of realized
this isn't a great situation that
there's so much currency volatility and
people are just parsing our each
utterance about the economy or the
dollar and it's causing problems so he
sought to bring calm to that whole
regime and it's interesting I'm glad you
use the word uh Kabuki because this
process literally involved the Japanese
um talk about um in the 1980s the fact
that you had all the parsing and the
statements you describ you actually had
like meetings like at the Plaza Hotel
very very 1980s coded um talk about that
private process by which these Count's
um leading currencies would kind of
negotiate and find some type of us-led
consensus yeah I talk about this in a
chapter called the birth of a hegemon
which is the birth of the dollar as this
dominant uh asset there in 1985 or 86
there was h a meeting at the Plaza Hotel
in Manhattan where Finance ministers at
the time it was about the G5 and it
included West Germany the US Great
Britain Japan and I think France and
they realized that the they weren't
happy with the strength of the dollar in
that moment and they couldn't figure out
how are we going to manage this and they
realized that it's it's bad for for
everyone you know the dollar is really
really strong compared to other current
currencies it's bad for other countries
let's get together and figure this out
and it was uh treasury secretary Baker
Jim Baker at the time and he uh the
whole cabinet didn't even know Reagan's
entire cabinet didn't even know that
this meeting was going to happen
obviously the president would know they
snuck Finance ministers in through back
doors so that the Press didn't get whiff
of it they all sat down and agreed that
they would all work to uh temper the
Dollar's strength they took their action
and eventually there was a statement
but it was a big deal these big nations
are coming together to control the
dollar um so that they allow that to
happen the dollar weakens and then they
realize oh we did a little bit like too
good of a job so they meet again this
time in France at somewhere near the lra
uh and it's called the lra Accord uh a
couple years later to kind of pair that
back and so you can see how by the time
Reuben comes in
in the early and mid
90s currency Traders are just waiting
constantly for the next time that
there's a secret meeting
somewhere so I guess what I'm trying to
understand then is during this period of
volatility during the 1980s you have all
this parsing of statements and the
reporters and all these different
Accords in different locations just tell
the tell the story of that volatility
from the perspective of let's say like a
Rust Belt American or someone who just
is
30 years later seeing themselves in a
very trumpian light yeah that's a great
question and I love tracing through
history how we got to the populism that
we have today it's a really important
exercise that we should be doing uh
historically and intellectually and
politically
um that kind of volatility basically
unpredictability in markets in the
business environment particularly the
American Business environment because we
are the largest were the biggest
superpower the dollar is the world's
Reserve asset it was in the 80s it means
that farmers
manufactures exporters domestically in
the US and externally they can't make
long-term plans their business plans
because the manufacturing sector relies
heavily on the terms of trade the
exchange rate so you can you know
everyone has researchers and analysts
and economists who help them predict
what it might be and then you can basee
your plans your five or 10 year plan or
two or fiveyear plan around that
prediction but if the government is
coming in and artificially changing it
based on a metric that you don't
actually have they have it but they
don't tell you what their preferred
value is and what necessarily triggers
the US treasur Department to step into
dollar markets or call a meeting of the
five families to to step in then it's a
little unfair
so you can't make those plans um that
that's probably the the core uh way that
it affects affected Americans in the
rust belder in Middle America so I guess
the real question here and you kind of
said this earlier but I want to make
this very clear is we should understand
the
1990s consensus around the Rubin
approach because obviously that
consensus is continued into the George W
Bush Administration the belief then at
the time is we've reduced the volatility
globalization's happened globalization
benefits the us peace trade etc etc etc
how does that consensus actually
actually put it this way how would you
assess the
accuracy of policy makers assessments of
the world from 1995 onwards because I
think the key thing you kind of happen
now with all these debates or de
globalization and populism is people
start to say okay we were a little too
sanguin about the effects of the rise on
right we we we treated China's rise as
inevitable in ways that like cut off
policy debates AKA there actually could
have been a more serious debate about
admitting China to the wtoo in 2000
versus what actually ended up happening
so how would you assess the difference
between like the ideology of Robert
Ruben and Co and the actual way policy
went leading up into
Trump so in the beginning the intentions
were good it was to bring calm and
diffuse the volatility around currency
markets and the current and the US's
currency policy Bob Rubin came up with
the Mantra the strong a strong dollar is
in the nation's interest and just
repeated it repeated it because he
thought this is how I'll make it boring
I'm just going to say the same old thing
over and over again and then they had to
slowly curb the number of
interventions uh and he accomplished
that after a couple of years yeah you'd
have reporters ask about it particularly
when uh there was a switch between de a
democratic and a republican
Administration and you had Paul O'Neal
um he came from industry he worked in
the um aluminum sector and so You' think
manufacturing uh folks probably want a
weaker dollar is the strong dollar
policy over he adopted it so it became
bipartisan so he kept it stable it
wasn't like Administration to
Administration the dollar policy was
changing so it did bring this level of
calm brought the temperature down to
something that's uh underpinning you
know it's it's you know finally reaching
some sort of
stability at the same time you have
globalization really taking root uh
NAFTA you have uh China joining the WTO
in the early 2000s and the rest of the
world kind of rallying around this and
part of that has to do with calm
currency markets and less manipulation
or interventions in currency markets and
so the the US needed to tell China and
other Asian Nations no more meddling in
your currencies we've stopped now you
need to stop and for China it was a very
large shift because they were going from
a command economy sort of all dictated
by the the government uh to slowly an
open market economy and so it's still
you know not settled and um it took it's
been taking them time but the US had to
kind of set that example the intentions
were good right it's a consumer economy
if we can buy more goods from overseas
the American Consumer um has more
purchasing power they can buy more stuff
um they have more
variety it also means you know the
ultimate plan uh after World World War
II at Bretton Woods this big conference
that I write about in the book briefly
where the dollar was crowned King Dollar
as the world's Reserve asset it was all
and that the IMF was created the world
Bank was created was all to knit the
world uh together deeply economically so
that we can't go as easily to war with
each other um and it worked right if
we're economically integrated open trade
lots of trade then we're not going to
constantly be trying to shoot each other
right so that did work what happened was
um you saw the manufacturing sector
wasn't always called the r belt I'm from
Cincinnati Ohio it was it was the boom
boom times you know in the 80s and early
90s uh for the manufacturing sector you
saw those uh factories cloth you know
America is known for company towns you
know in in the book I take you to
Weirton West Virginia where there's a
glass maker I take you to Marine or
sorry a tin maker aluminum or sorry and
I take you to Marine Ohio where there's
a glass maker a plant that has evolved
from different products and is the heart
of the Town everyone works there or
knows somebody who works there the
restaurants and schools serve the people
who work there and that's how you became
a a city when the manufacturing sector
leaves because it is too expensive to uh
pay workers in
America it is because you have to charge
people more for your goods you because
you can't export them overseas if the
dollar is so strong you can't gather up
people the Japanese companies can't
gather up enough yen to buy that car so
everyone's thinking let me buy the
Japanese car because it's just so much
cheaper my dollar is so much stronger
and then China and Japan they don't want
American cars they're twice the price so
those those that manufacturing sector in
the Heartland started to shrivel up and
in the midst of that you've got you know
and people talked about it at Paulo
Neil's Hearing in 20 January of 2000 you
had both Republicans and Democrats
talking about the problems of Steel
Workers and steel
manufacturers um but it was kind of
overlooked because globalization brought
so much so many benefits with it they
thought oh well we just need programs to
retrain people and then they'll find
different jobs and no one really thought
through that you can't really
retrain someone in the middle of their
life into some new job like that there's
a a whole generation of economic
scarring that's going to come with come
with this and those people are kind of
ignored then right and in the middle of
it you've got 911 then you have the
global financial crisis so they kept
being put on the back
burner and it kind of came to the four
and what for me really crystallized it
is in 20 2016 on Election night or like
the the middle of the night I wrote a
story and the headline I've got it in
front of me because I I I come back to
the story often it's Trump magnifies
glass half empty economy to C uh to sway
cast off
workers Trump magnifies glass half empty
economy to sway castoff workers it was
the Forgotten man they
finally their voice was finally heard
that everyone's talking about the global
financial crisis there we got this great
recovery Obama and Clinton and and and
Jeb Bush and everyone saying there was a
the recovery it wasn't as good as it
could have been if you're a republican
Democrat saying oh we fixed it all no
one was talking about the Rust Belt
except for Donald Trump he took his uh
he he held rallies in cities that had
never seen a presidential candidate come
through and he licked his finger stuck
his finger in the wind and decided his
policies if he talked about China and
globalization and people cheered okay
I'm going to work on that rather than
these focus groups to figure out what
policies do people want he just listened
and that's how we get to the overlooked
part and that's populism now we're
seeing the the result of it yeah it's
interesting because the only
modification I'd offer on that story is
someone who cover the spaces Jeb Bush
and Mitt Romney would very conly
critique like the economic recovery
after the 2008 financial crisis they
would just the answer was tax cuts they
would say the answer they would they
would basically um suggest a specific
like free Market oriented approach that
even if it did increase economic growth
in specific ways wouldn't necessarily
address the manufacturing issues you're
describing that a good point you know
free market we're gonna get to you know
Jeb Bush put out this book you know was
about getting to 4% economic growth
that's great and I think a bunch of
different very specific ways but that
would not inherently address some of
those like Midwestern Cincinnati
Michigan concerns we talking about there
so that's a really good way of
articulating how even within the like
disagreement between the two parties
there was this third space that Trump is
obviously obviously covering so one last
question before we get into the second
part of this story and actually this is
part of the title of the book about the
weaponization of the dollar this is the
foreign policy aspect but I think I mean
this is just so important because once
again this is Undercovers people have to
understand all this I'm fascinated by
debates around alternate histories
around us manufacturing like in the
sense that if we're looking at all these
different things that caused uh
manufacturing to flee the US we could
talk about okay cost of Labor we could
talk about automation we could talk
about the strength of the dollar we
could talk about labor unions all all
these different policies I guess what
I'm really asking you is
if let's say Ross perau is President and
in
1995 let's not like guess what Ross
perau is opposed to the dollar would
have been because that's the World War I
compc let's just say for a like you had
a presidency that was oriented around
using a a a weaker dollar to prop up us
manufacturing and exports how much do
you think that would have limited the
flight of manufacturing jobs from this
country because when you tell this story
of alternate choices I just kind of go
back to this idea of like look there
were probably all sorts of things in the
1880s in Great Britain that were that
could have been done to basically
prevent the US from taking manufacturing
jobs but at the end of the day you were
going to transition from Manchester um
to Michigan that's probably going to be
enev to some degree so I'm just curious
how much do you think this dollar story
plays in this broader complicated
picture of the reasons that jobs fled
the
country but just point to 2016 and 17
Again the massive rupture that was
caused when Trump came on the scene and
said these things no one thought he was
going to win I was overseas from 2008 to
2016 in northern Europe and I came to DC
everyone said there's no way Trump's
going to win Republicans were saying
he's just like he's not going to become
the the GOP candidate then he becomes it
there's no way he's going to win no one
expected that anything he was saying
made sense to anyone and it did it
really did and so and at the time
everyone mainstream economists
establishment politicians were broadly
okay with globalization no one was
singing a different tune it was just
Donald Trump so for that to have
happened in the '90s or the early ughs
would have been just as big of a rupture
maybe bigger because again in 2001 and
2008 we had two major crises that took
our eye off of this ball we had 911 and
then the global financial crisis so I
think whenever it was going to happen it
was going to be painful hey it's
Marshall in an exponential era it's more
important than ever for our country to
have alignment between policy makers
Founders and funders however it's rare
that we find all of them in the same
room luckily the a16z podcast from Andre
and horrorwitz just dropped a brand new
series on American dynamism focused on
exactly this coined by realignment
friend and a6c general parter Katherine
Bole American dynamism is a movement
that embodies the spirit of innovation
and this new four-part series recorded
in the heart of Washington DC covers
topics including intelligence in the era
of AI the nuclear Renaissance and the
future of Defense guests include the
cia's first ever Chief technology
officer nand mandani the department of
Energy's assistant secretary for nuclear
energy Dr Katherine huff and director of
the dod's defense Innovation unit Doug
Beck not to mention the founders of
ambitious companies rivaling the status
quo like micro reactor company radiant
AI pilot company Shield Ai and advanced
autonomous systems company andero so
don't miss out go check out the a16z
podcast and their new series on American
dynamism on Apple podcasts Spotify or
wherever you're listening now
so to take this story Beyond 2016 and
early 2017 what actually happens then
when President Trump is now president
and then you have treasury secretary um
Stephen minuchin you talk about you
begin the book by talking about like an
incident that happens at Davos let's
actually focus on Trump's uh maybe only
maybe first term what actually happens
from the transition from the campaign
trail to the actual policy
implementation phase well first it was
shocked that all of the things that he's
this politician this Donald Trump at
that point as a politician said he was
going to do he actually started to do it
or really try to do it right that
doesn't necessarily always happen
there's lots of fancy talk on the
campaign Trail and then people come into
office and they g a button down he
actually did it everyone loves to talk
tough tough on China on the campaign
Trail China knows this the president
comes to the office he tempers that down
China also knows that's going to happen
didn't happen this time he started uh he
late designated China currency
manipulator he did the the trade tariffs
he ended this big economic dialogue that
the US and China relied on he stopped
all of it because this isn't working for
us um he also you know he talked about
wanting to we weaken the dollar and then
he got into office and he talked about
it beh sitting behind the Resolute desk
with his treasury secretary and his
trade advisor and his National Economic
Council director and said let's do this
um and that's one of the moments that I
covered deeply as a treasur reporter in
that time and then I wrote about in the
book that Donald Trump talked to his
advisers Peter Navaro Larry cudow and
treasur and secretary Sten minian saying
I want to do this now look into it and
Steph minian realize that this is not
the 80s or the 90s the currency Market
is a lot larger so the 70 or 90 billion
dollars that the you the treasure
department has on hand and something
called the exchange rate stabilization
fund fund which is just to stabilize
currency markets is just going to cause
a mere blip and also Qui quick pause to
make this clear for folks because when
we were talking about like the plaza
Accords when the US is
manipulating the system buying its
currency it's using that 70 to 90
billion correct and so the point you're
making
is the economy is just so much bigger
now that you couldn't do you you just
couldn't do a second version of The
Plaza is is is that is that a correct
so um the money in that fund ESF it
fluctuates um and it's not the economy
it's that the currency um markets are so
huge now okay that the US itself
couldn't go in and do something unless
you had allies and As cudow Told Trump
in that moment who's gon to do this with
us no one likes us right now we've
triggered trade Wars everywhere um so
the US didn't have allies in that moment
and always needed the Federal Reserve to
join in and in that moment uh even
though Trump appointed and nominated J
Powell he picked a big bone with him
called him a bonee head publicly you
know and so the FED not just for those
reasons but for deeper reasons of um
intervention probably not working and it
meddling in a way that would be damaging
wasn't going to get on board so what's
super interesting there to your comment
about allies obviously what makes the
80s policy work is to a certain degree
you have as you said it Japan France
West Germany aligned with the US policy
in that category what did these other
economies think about the strength of
the dollar Circa 2017 2018 obviously you
have the Euro you don't just have like
you know the Frank or the deut Mark um
what was the foreign perception of the
strong dollar policy during the Trump
Administration you know it by then it
had been place for almost a quarter of a
century so it was just part of like the
economic assumptions that had been there
for so long let's just keep it because
it's stable and it means nothing's going
to change and you know foreign countries
were benefiting from it you know to have
a better terms of trade and be able to
export to the US this massive consumer
Geren economy that's good for them um so
you know they had no complaints uh until
there's a rupture if the US the leader
of the world is going to cause a rupture
like that especially if it's going to be
have economic blows then it's a concern
for everyone okay so let's get to the
second part of the book weaponization um
what does it mean to weaponize the US
dollar yeah so that's the third
component right like we talked about the
exchange rate side of the dollar we
talked about its strength and dominance
and then we get to uh the safety and
protection and then weaponization that
it offers um because it is the world's
you know it's a national treasure the
world's Reserve asset
um that strength means that
if uh the US thinks that a country is
misbehaving there's lots of ways to put
it terrorism or nuclear proliferation or
whatever uh disrupting the world order
then the US has a right to say well you
can't use the dollar anymore which means
you can't use the Global Financial
system now there's a spectrum of that um
action sanctions are incredi economic
sanctions that's what it means to cut
someone off on the dollar there's a lot
of different ways to do it you can have
carve out so it's not as painful it's
kind of like a vice where you're slowly
tightening it tightening it on someone
to get them to change their behavior but
with nine and that the US had done in
various forms of embargos and such
previously um but 2001 you know 911 hits
and and the First Act in the global war
on terror that George W Bush started was
not a machine gun it was no tanks
rolling anywhere or American like
military boots on the ground it was
through the US Treasury Department it
was with the dollar it was saying we're
cutting off the uh certain terrorist
groups from using the dollar Point Blank
and we are using the power of the dollar
to to track money flows figure out how
terrorists financed the attack so that
we can first stop any other attack from
happening and find out who all was
involved and cut them off so it was the
dollar it was a stroke of a pen
September 24th 2001 after that it was
that then the blood you know started
spilling so then the other immediate uh
perception of like the weaponization of
the dollar is obviously going to be like
the sanction I think the big ones early
21st century this the sanctions policy
towards Russia after Russia invaded
Ukraine tell that side of the story yeah
so you know we've had 20 plus years of
ramping up economic sanctions um in the
wake of 911 in the pay trade act a whole
unit was created inside of Treasury
there's the domestic policy unit
International policy unit and then they
added in 2004 uh terrorism and financial
intelligence and that is basically
Financial intelligence and sanctions set
inside of that and so um little Pro you
know big problems are coming along Iran
um Lebanon Etc you know Russia and the
annexation of Crimea and they're using
this leverage the economic sanctions to
uh bully and to export foreign policy
and to bully
adversaries
um the use of sanctions had has grown um
not 933 between 2001 and I don't know
2021 or
2022 by February 2022 it's a potent
weapon people are scared of it just the
mere threat of
sanctions has an impact by now um
Russia uh triggered what is arguably the
greatest military crisis since World War
II uh a land invasion in Europe and you
know Russia is a G20 country um it is
the world's 11th largest economy it is
so deeply integrated in the world
economy through Commodities you know
aluminum and metals and oil exports
everyone needs that oil everyone needs
that those medals and Putin thought you
know he has started to diverse away
diversify away from the dollar somewhat
in preparation it seems he had a half
trillion dollar War chest and it was
some in dollars and some in other
currencies um he had really deepened
trade with Germany and Europe because of
proximity and he figured well the US
might sanction us it won't be so
damaging Europe won't because it would
be too damaging to Europe and then maybe
even the US wouldn't get involved
because like the plan was from Bretton
Woods we're going to be so
interconnected that if I try to hurt you
you end up hurting yourself right no one
thought the US would take
would lead in such a big action it was
considered the nuclear option in the
Biden White House um the US said we're
going to do it um they knew they had to
do it very quickly uh they did it on a
Saturday they got together uh the
package had been
prepared the G7 had signed on and it
took some persuading because everyone
knew there will be a self-inflicted
wound from pushing Russia away from the
dollar or to begin to is not ultimately
completely cut off um and at 5 something
p.m. on Saturday February 26th the US
announced that we are s sh sanctioning
cutting off the Russian Central Bank
from the dollar and uh we we don't have
to go into it too deeply but also
cutting them off from Swift which is
like a communication system among Banks
and the US LED that and and you know
almost half the world joined and on that
day you know treasury secretary Janet
Ellen I go pretty deeply into it in the
book um she has a moment of hesitation
because she realizes I am the current
Steward of the dollar and are we going
too far with it um the US takes the
action she signs on she realizes this
might be the right thing to do this is
the right thing to do uh when you are
rupturing the world through this great
military crisis maybe this is the moment
that you do this and ever since then
there has just been talk that well the
US has political
volatility and what if Trump comes back
and that um unpredictability still
exists in the US they're so deeply
divided right now and now you're using
the dollar to bully us um maybe it's not
worth being so dependent on the dollar
now that talk has happened constantly
right since for since 1944 when you know
the dollar became the world's Reserve
asset everyone's wondering when is the
demise of this this Reign um but this is
the first time that it's happening with
such urgency there is some action behind
it and uh we can unpack you know where
we think it might go from here I guess
the question would
[Music]
be when the sanctions were first
launched once again it's it's the
nuclear option there was this prediction
and perception that this would be
crippling um from Russia's perspective
obviously there have been incredibly
high costs to the sanctions policy but
Russia has been able to weather it to
the degree which they've just continued
the the The Invasion and what ended up
actually mattering um was the actual
Battlefield outcome relative to it um
Russia just had the ability to weaponize
their literal economy transition to a
wartime economy and maybe you're not
perfectly economically efficient but
you're still able to get the job done
there um has that result
impacted the long-term ability of
sanctions to deter conflict Behavior
aggression does China look at that
situation and say hey everyone knows if
there's an invasion of Taiwan separate
from US military intervention there will
almost certainly be a severe us
sanctions policy seeing Russia
weathering and Russia isn't exactly the
greatest economy in the world does that
suggest there's a world where sanctions
have lost a lot of their bite um from a
dictating Behavior
perspective I will say Marshall this
debate is Raging right now in Washington
um I've done a fair bit of reporting on
it sanctions are incredibly complicated
to
explain like you have to know what was
the goal and actually sanctions aren't a
policy it's a tool um you know so when
you're building a house you have a
strategy of how to build a house a map
you've got the sanctions are like the
hammer of putting it all together so if
your house falls down you don't
necessarily blame the hammer for failing
the way people say sanctions have failed
you might be blame the strategy behind
it and sanctions is a large component of
it or the potency of the Hammer of the
sanctions um and they're also hard to
measure because you're talking in
counterfactuals you have to try to guess
like what would have happened if we had
not done it but you can't really measure
that so then you're looking at what's in
front of you and the immediate impact
the the ruble plunged 30% and the the
central bank had to go through a lot to
to prop it up and to keep things going
there's some facts that are out there
one that Russia has lost its Prestige
and standing in the in the in the world
uh maybe they didn't care about it so
who knows if that really hurts them they
have had a lot of money leave they are a
war economy now at the same time and
they have not you know I think it there
was a feeling if you go back and and I
mention it in the book and I it's I I
remember this vividly talking to senior
White House and treasury officials
between February 26 and 2 uh February
22nd and 26 when the first Invasion
happened on the 262nd and the um
sanctions hit on the 26 between that
period it was largely thought that this
invasion is a 72-hour operation Kiev
will
fall um so it didn't fall right away it
still is there that's one piece but the
other side of it is that without
violating sanctions Russia has bought a
billion dollars worth of American and
European microchips for their War
technology MH and that's wild so the war
is still going because they can still do
business because if we sanction
everything we completely cut them off
the pain is too much for us because if
you remember February the first two you
know half of 2022 our gas prices went up
in the US gasoline costs went up because
of the sanctions and so we all face a
bit of economic pain to protect this
tiny democracy that not everyone
necessarily could immediately find on a
map in America um and so it's really
hard to make that
judgment uh which and it's one of those
things where you kind of think well if
you're explaining you're losing the
argument which is one thing I do say to
Administration officials sometimes um
but it it's not an easy question to
answer um if you're China you know from
what I've heard it's part of their
calculus that it will be painful it will
but can Factor it into their planning
now right because they've seen how far
the US is willing to go yeah I really
like your distinction between strategy
and Tool and it seems like when you're
looking at the war in Ukraine clearly a
huge part of the Strategic failure was
the inability to deter a Russian
invasion 2014 to 20121 that was the
clear policy Cara was a surprise they
could go further so let's do what we can
to Det her an actual Invasion that was a
failed part of the policy maybe um an
awareness of that sanctions nuclear
option being on the table um could have
served as a PO possible deterrent to an
invasion um and then that being on the
table in the case of china could serve
as a possible deterrent um when it comes
to Taiwan or other parts of the
indopacific but the key thing is that's
a hammer not the overall um thing you're
working with so okay here's the last big
question then and this is where we get
into the like there's a lot of like
Twitter discourse about this and there's
a lot of marketing a lot of hype um
there's been a lot of talk about you
know bricks Brazil Russia India China
South Africa this started as a you know
Goldman Sachs term um in the 2000s but
quickly kind of turned into like a quasi
real thing but also kind of like an
internet meme there's lots of talks
about how like the bricks are
dissatisfied with the fact that the US
is so dominant um in the world order
today um and we're living in a more
multi-polar world and obviously one of
the ways by which the US maintains the
status quo is the strength of the dollar
and the use of theer of currency um
after the Russia sanctions policy
there's a lot of talk about the bricks
coming together to create an
alternative an alternative system talk
about like just fact check all this
discourse um what's actually happening
because you could have all sorts of
meetings in South Africa that's not the
same thing as actually putting together
a serious plan it's not quite clear
whether Brazil Russia India China and
South Africa actually do have perfectly
aligned monetary and fiscal interests so
yeah just close by giving us a a real
understanding of what this like quasi
alternative system is and could look
like well first of all it's really
happening right there are these meetings
there are actions being taken of
companies saying let's not necessarily
settle our contracts and account whether
I if I sell like a the world's biggest
wood pulp producer and oil is now being
settled in contracts that are outside
the dollar just through bilateral trade
it's actually happening um it's not
happening to the extent that the
headlines and the rhetoric from these
countries might suggest because it's
very hard to move away from the dollar
Russia still needs dollars they can buy
as much material and goods in Indian
rupes the fact of the matter is they
can't no one wants to take those rupes
off their hand they can't use it to
purchase other things the way they can
the dollar um the other component I will
flag is that the the dollar remains a
safe haven asset so when things get
sticky you have a global financial
crisis you have a a global pandemic um
when people are looking for a safe haven
they come to the dollar or the us
treasuries or investments in the US
because they know it's a stable
democracy um but this is happening it's
I think the US needs to pay attention to
it it is paying attention to it it has
put US economic policy makers in a
defensive posture you'll hear Janet
Yellen uh you'll hear fed officials uh
fed a Fed Governor Christopher Waller
just in February gave a speech dedicated
to the dollar which is r a rare topic
for a Fed official to talk about they
always say well US currency policy is
the purview of the Treasury Department
it's almost like we're getting to that
I'm not a crook moment of like there's
nothing to see here that means there is
something you're thinking about it
you're discussing it you spent several
hours writing a a a speech speech and
what your comments are going to
be um so I would say it is worrying
officials and but it's not happening to
the extent that maybe the headlin
suggest it should be paid attention to
but I will actually Point everyone like
a US audience inward right so no matter
what happens overseas there's nothing
wrong with us power uh dollar um
dominance Plateau a little bit coming
down just a little bit and then just
settling there it doesn't have to be as
dominant as it is now to still remain
potent and provide all the things that
has provided the world and the country
itself
um those countries are not you know a
lot of the countries that are moving
away from the dollar they are not uh
democracies like ours so we have rule of
law free and fair elections um
independent agencies so hopefully in 10
15 20 years we remain that we have free
and fair elections and democratically
elected leaders whereas in other
countries that are part of the bricks
plus block that's moving away from the
dollar if their closed autocracy if
their dictator dies as everyone dies or
if he moved out of power then that
instability might bring them back to the
dollar or lose that focus on moving away
from the dollar but I'm again I'm going
to point inward inward because and I got
this you know I my interview with um
George W bush third secretary treasury
secretary Hank pulson was so interesting
and he said and he said this many times
somehow it resonated when he said it to
me when I interviewed him that you know
as long as America's strong and our
economy is strong we're fine so as long
as if we can get over the partisanship
if we can maintain our public finances
in a mature way sure we haven't actually
breed the debt ceiling ceiling but even
if we fight about it constantly and take
that deadline to 1159 before it breaches
and play chicken that fight is bad if we
um Can unite behind
leaders and uh stay strong ourselves
have a strong economy ourselves then it
doesn't matter what happens around the
world the dollar the strength that
strength of the dollar will be able to
endure whatever else is coming at
it very well said um can you just close
us out uh by shouting out your your
actual podcast um you've got a we're
obviously trying to move a book here but
I think he's great to thr some downloads
some way because you do a bunch of
things obviously yeah so the book is
first the book is called Paper Soldiers
how the weaponization of the dollar
changed the world order it is out out
March 19th please order it but I also
have a podcast called the big take DC uh
and some of the topics that we Marshall
you and I talked about um especially
Russia sanctions I talked to the chief
Economist for sanctions at treasury
about have Russian Russian sanctions
from the US that we've LED work worked
or not worked and why and let's get into
it I talk unpack it we come out every
Thursday we talk about um you know my
ethos as a reporter has just been let's
connect what happens in Washington to
the rest of the world and I'm from Ohio
so I'm always going to bring in the like
Midwestern perspective of how it affects
middle Americans uh not just the right
and left coasts so um definitely have a
listen uh it's available on Spotify
apple and wherever you find your
podcasts thanks for joining me on the
realignment this has been really fun
thank you so much
Marshall
関連動画をさらに表示
🔴 Рамзан лучший воспитатель, к нему лучше обращаться на его родном языке!
Bitcoin: Darauf warten wir seit JAHREN, denn das ändert ALLES!
Nächste Insolvenzen, neue Vorwürfe: Weitere Turbulenzen im Benko-Imperium
#amc - Das Morning Briefing am 15. Mai 2024 - Kurs, Volumen, Short Interest, ATM Ende, Roaring Kitty
Höre die Zukunft: Was ESC-Songs über morgen sagen (und wie Du Dich darauf einstellst!)
Mythos Testosteron: Wann ist ein Mann ein Mann? | Leschs Kosmos | Harald Lesch
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)