Bydio

Did you know that oil is traded in U.S. dollars and no other currency?  I didn’t until a few months ago.  I was reminded of it from this article at lindasog.com.

I found that oil was only traded in U.S. dollars kinda odd.  Why is it only traded in dollars, not euros or shekels or rupees?  My brain couldn’t comprehend, so I let it slide.  It became more trivia in my addled brain.

Come to find out Iran is planning to trade oil for euros now.  Okay, so what’s the big deal?

Well, it seems the dollar is propped up by oil.  I don’t think this is some conspiracy thing, but please correct me if I’m wrong.  We went off the gold standard in 1972, but oil backed the dollar, basically keeping our monetary system stable and prosperous.  After all, if you can only buy oil in dollars, then you have to have dollars to buy oil.  Every country on earth would need U.S. dollars to buy their oil.  In 1972 they may’ve been thinking, “It’s highly unlikely people won’t need oil anytime soon, so there’s plenty of time to figure out another way to back the dollar and keep it strong.”

Well, no one was going to fuck with the U.S. in any major way back in the 70s.  Viet Nam, the Cold War, re-election of Tricky Dick… shiiiit, we looked like we were militarily ready and willing to fuck with anyone.

But now, we’re kinda looking like the big dude who cries when we get into a real fight.  Yes, we look like pussies.

What better time to undermine the big pussies, right?  The E.U. can get Iran to trade oil in euros in exchange for allowing Iran to do some heinous shit, but then THEIR currency is backed by oil, making it much stronger and propped up by the most-used energy source in the world.  Iran gets a pass at the U.N. if the U.S. starts to get crabby, and the E.U. becomes more secure with oil backing its fiat currency.  Win-win, right?

We all know the capricious nature of international politics, and I’m betting the E.U. is selling its soul for this deal, but now maybe you can see why the E.U. fucks with us at the U.N.

The full implications range much farther than this, but this was a question I’d asked myself before, and now I think this is the answer.  Either that or I’m on crack.  You decide.

This is all just a guess, mind you, but it seems to fit.  I’m no economist.

Update 20061212: More on how Oil Producing Countries own dollars, and how they’re getting rid of them.

Yup, they’re annoying, they’re long, they run up your bill… they’re cell phone voicemail messages.  David Pogue of the New York Times found out how to get around the messages and get right to the *beep*:

Verizon: press *

Sprint: press 1

T-Mobile or Cingular: press #

But you have to know which carrier the person you’re calling is using.  Well, he has a solution for that, too:

Just add the instruction in your greeting! That’s the best of all worlds: your callers hear your voice but not the recorded lady’s, and they don’t have to remember what the keystroke is.

So in your cell phone greeting, tell people they can press “X” to go right to the beep.  Simple.

Just so you know, I’m on T-Mobile.

David Pogue, rock on!

C’mon, when you say something like this:

Increased spending inevitably means increased taxes. Thus, despite
President Bush’s much vaunted tax cuts, Americans actually pay more in
taxes today than they did during Bill Clinton’s last year in office.

you’re just asking for a smackdown.

Of course taxes increase when spending increases.  Everything you buy is taxed, retaxed and taxed again.  From manufacture to sale, raw materials, labor, import/export, transportation, everything that goes into a product has been taxed out the ass.

So saying that increased spending equals increased taxes is like saying water makes you wet.  At merely the 5% sales tax, if I spend $10, I’m taxed 50 cents, but if I spend $20, I’m taxed $1… fuck, I’m being taxed double because I spent double!

However, focusing on the tax cut to make your point is a dickhead move.  “Don’t give a tax cut because you’re just going to spend more in taxes anyway”… what kind of retarded argument is that?

I really don’t understand the hardcore liberal.  A Socialist at heart who pontificates about the evils of Capitalism, all from the lofty heights that said “evil” Capitalism has created.  There is a mental disconnect in their heads, and at its heart it’s called GUILT.

The Guilty feel individualism is outdated and weak, while collectivism is bright, shiny and new, free from the weakness of dissent.  Never mind that history shows their Socialistic error over and over, the collective is always right, the individual is always evilly selfish, therefore the individuals must be treated like children by the collectivist mothers and fathers, showing the errant child-individualists the errors of their ways and punishing them for not thinking like their parents.

Leave My Money Alone!

In my opinion, you should push for the change you desire, but don’t force others to pay for your conscience.