600 milliards de dollars + 500 milliards d’euros dans la même semaine, faites vos jeux !
Les 600 milliards de dollars achetés par la FED au Trésor Public américain n’ont pas fini de faire couler beaucoup d’encre.
.Lorsqu’on veut faire passer une mesure ou une décision on invente ou réutilise un mot ou groupe de mots qui n’a pas grand chose à voir avec la réalité mais en a l’apparence, pour faire passer la pilule dans l’opinion.
Cette fois-ci l’opération s’appelle quantitative easing. Ce qui ne se traduit pas dans la langue mais dans les faits par création de monnaie, risque d’hyperinflation et détournement (bien que légal) juridique de la procédure constitutionnelle et de la loi fédérale US avec en plus pour but avoué et inavoué selon les jours de faire chuter le dollar pour pousser les exportations américaines.
Dans les années 70 en France les licenciements massifs de la sidérurgie et des charbonnages étaient appelés « dégraissages ».
Plus récemment Alan Greenspan, alors Chairman de la FED, avait plaisamment parlé d’Irrational Exuberance à propos du marché immobilier américain en pleine crise et dont la valeur avait été multipliée par 3 en 5 ans sans aucune logique ni raison économique, financière ou même purement immobilière. En fait d’exubérance irrationnelle, il s’agissait simplement de la crise des subprime et de l’explosion du marché immobilier US qui a ruiné quelques dizaines de millions de foyers Américains et non-Américains, selon les systèmes Madoff, les systèmes équivalents ou même le plus légalement du monde.
L’effet sur la Chine du quantitative easing est au passage de diminuer la valeur de sa créance sur le Trésor US et tout simplement de réduire ses avoirs en dollars constants désormais très sous-évaluées. C’est de bonne guerre car la Chine a sous-évalué artificiellement le Yuan pendant des années.
Cependant, même si c’est de bonne guerre, cela crée des tensions internationales financières et diplomatiques lourdes qui n’échappent à aucun observateur.
La dernière nouvelle à propos de nos fameux 600 milliards de dollars achetés par la FED au Trésor US est que les Républicains qui ont pris le contrôle de la Chambre des Représentants il y a quelques jours et qui disposent désormais d’une minorité très forte au Senat, viennent aujourd’hui de se pencher sur la transaction qui a tant préoccupé la Chine et les autres grands pays du monde la semaine dernière et oblige le président Obama à intervenir alors que théoriquement et juridiquement la FED est indépendante du pouvoir politique : ces fameux 600 milliards de dollars d’achat par la FED de bons du Trésor US.
Les Républicains contestent vigoureusement – et le font savoir - l’opportunité du mouvement de la FED et la procédure employée.
Sur le plan constitutionnel, ils ne peuvent pas agir sur la FED, sauf en en modifiant les statuts… ou en la faisant disparaitre de droit ou de fait (cela s’est beaucoup fait au XIXème siècle, voir Madison et autres) en la remplaçant par autre chose qui aurait des fonctions plus larges et étoufferait la FED la rendant ainsi inopérante.
Ce qui peut être douloureux pour l’intéressée.
La disparition totale l’étant encore plus.
Après tous, c’est le Congrès, il peut se le permettre, il a tous les Droits Législatifs en vertu de l’article I de la Constitution américaine.
Le Congrès peut aussi demander des comptes au Trésor sous formes d’auditions (hearings) publiques et médiatisées.
Il peut également s’opposer aux futures dépenses du Trésor lors du vote du budget.
Ici il s’agit d’un revenu du Trésor (la vente de 600 milliards de Treasury Bonds à la FED) mais le Congrès a l’habitude, selon le principe constitutionnel américain inspiré de Montesquieu dans l’Esprit des Lois, d’exercer pleinement l’équilibre entre les pouvoirs, le fameux Checks and Balances, de négocier des deals du genre je te tiens tu me tiens pas la barbichette : si tu vends ces Treasury Bonds, je te coupe ton budget de 10% l’année prochaine (ce que le Congrès a le pouvoir de faire).
De manière générale, le Trésor est sensible à ce type d’arguments.
Simultanément en Europe un autre évènement significatif se déroulait : la Banque Centrale Européenne veut forcer l’Irlande à accepter un prêt de 500 milliards d’euros pour stabiliser ses finances et aider à stabiliser l’Euro qui fait le yoyo sur le marché des devises depuis quelques temps. De manière surprenante l’Irlande n’y est pas favorable même s’il va bien falloir qu’elle s’y résolve. La procédure est cependant surprenante que de forcer quelqu’un ou un pays à accepter un prêt dont il ne veut pas mais donc l’acceptation va surtout servir au banquier préteur.
La dernière nouvelle qui démontre une stabilité et un équilibre étonnants des marchés financiers et de la coordination des politiques monétaires des pays du monde est le dernier G20 qui vient de se dérouler à Séoul et au cours duquel dans une grande cacophonie chacun a refusé les propositions des autres et en plus de manière humoristique leur a demandé des comptes sur leurs politiques économiques et monétaires, comme à la Chine.
Questionner autoritairement, le Second-Premier pays du monde qu’est la Chine c’est rigolo. Mais cela peut avoir des conséquences à venir douloureuses pour les questionneurs. Il faut en effet avoir les moyens de ses insolences.
Il parait que la Chine l’a assez mal pris ; qu’elle a pardonné, certes, mais que selon la bonne tradition La Chine a gardé la liste [des pays questionneurs et insolents] … au cas où…
Donc les débiteurs ne veulent plus de l’argent des banques (FED, BCE) et les banques leur en veulent pour cela.
Si on trouve dans la salle quelqu’un pour estimer que cette situation est saine (FED et Congres, BCE et Irlande, G-20 et Chine, le tout dans la même semaine) il devrait se manifester.
Une confusion généralisée ne règnerait-elle pas dans la finance internationale ?
Les institutions financières, les Etats et les groupes d’Etat perdent leur puissance, leur indépendance et ne contrôlent plus leur propres mouvements financiers désormais soumis aux inlassables vetos de leurs partenaires.
Quand 22 joueurs (G-20) de football doivent jouer leurs matchs avec des poids de 10 kilos attachés à chaque cheville, leur vélocité est en généralement réduite.
Par contre leur exaspération augmente.
Olivier Chazoule
--------
$ 600 billion + 500 billion euros in the same week, place your bets!
The $ 600 billion purchased by the Fed in the U.S. Treasury have not finished doing much attention.
When you want to pass a measure or decision is invented or reuses a word or phrase that has little to do with reality but looks like, to get the pill in the opinion.
This time the operation is called quantitative easing. That does not translate into the language but in fact by money creation, risk of hyperinflation and diversion (although legal) legal and constitutional procedures of the U.S. federal law with more purpose and confessed by ulterior days to push down the dollar for U.S. exports. In the 70 mass layoffs in France of the steel and coal were called "downsizing."
More recently Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Fed, had jokingly talked about Irrational Exuberance about the U.S. housing market in crisis and whose value was multiplied by 3 to 5 years without any economic logic or reason, or even purely financial property. In fact irrational exuberance, it was just the subprime crisis and the U.S. real estate boom that has ruined tens of millions of American homes and non-Americans, according to Madoff systems, systems or equivalent even the legal world.
The effect on China's quantitative easing is the passage of diluting the value of its debt on the U.S. Treasury and simply to reduce its dollar holdings constant now very undervalued. That's fair because China has undervalued the yuan artificially for years.
However, even if it's fair game, it creates international financial and diplomatic tensions that are evident to any serious observer.
The latest news about our famous $ 600 billion purchased by the Fed U.S. Treasury is that the Republicans who took control of the House of Representatives a few days ago and now have a very strong minority in the Senate, come today to look into the transaction that has so concerned about China and other major countries in the world last week and forcing Obama to speak theoretically and legally while the Fed is independent of political power: the famous 600 000 000 000 dollar purchase by the Fed of U.S. Treasury bonds.
Republicans strongly dispute - and they do know - whether the movement of the EDF and the procedure used.
In constitutional terms, they can not act on the Fed, except by amending the articles ... or making it disappear in law or fact (it has done much in the nineteenth century, see Madison and others) by replacing by something else that would have broader functions and stifle the Fed making it inoperable.
Which can be painful for the woman.
The loss is the total even more.
After all, it is Congress, he can afford it, he has all the legislative rights under Article I of the U.S. Constitution.
Congress can also demand accountability to the Treasury in the form of hearings (hearings) public and media attention.
It may also object to future spending at the Treasury budget vote.
Here it is income of the Treasury (the sale of 600 billion Treasury Bonds to the Fed) but Congress is accustomed, as the American constitutional principle inspired by Montesquieu in The Spirit of Laws, to fully exercise balance between the powers, the famous checks and balances, negotiate deals of its kind I've got you you hold me no goatee: if you sell these Treasury Bonds, I will cut your budget 10% next year (this that Congress has the power to do).
In general, the Treasury is sensitive to such arguments.
Simultaneously in Europe another significant event took place: the European Central Bank wants to force Ireland to accept a loan of EUR 500 billion to stabilize its finances and help stabilize the Euro makes the yoyo on the currency market since some time. Ireland, surprisingly, is not favorable even if it is fine to have it resolved. The procedure is however surprising that forcing someone or a country to accept a loan that he will not but then the acceptance will mainly serve the banker lender.
The latest news and it shows a surprising stability and equilibrium in financial markets and the coordination of monetary policies of countries in the world is the last G20 has just taken place in Seoul, during which everyone in a great cacophony has refused offers of others and so more humorous asked them accountable for their economic and monetary policies, as in China.
Question authoritatively, the Second Prime countries of the world is China's funny. But it can have painful consequences for future questioners. It must indeed have the means for its insolence.
It seems that China has taken quite ill, she has forgiven, of course, but according to the good tradition China has kept the list [of countries and insolent questioners] ... in case ...
So the debtors do not want more money from banks (FED, ECB) and the banks want them to do so.
If there is someone in the room to find that this is healthy (EDF and Congress, ECB and Ireland, G-20 and China, all in the same week) it should occur.
Widespread confusion does not reign it in international finance?
Financial institutions, states and state groups lose their power, their independence and no longer control their own financial transactions now subject to relentless vetoes of their partners.
When 22 players (G-20) football must play their matches with weight of 10 kg attached to each ankle, their velocity is generally reduced.
However, their frustration increases. The $ 600 billion purchased by the Fed in the U.S. Treasury have not finished doing much attention.
When you want to pass a measure or decision is invented or reuses a word or phrase that has little to do with reality but looks like, to get the pill in the opinion.
This time the operation is called quantitative easing. That does not translate into the language but in fact by money creation, risk of hyperinflation and diversion (although legal) legal and constitutional procedures of the U.S. federal law with more purpose and confessed by ulterior days to push down the dollar for U.S. exports. In the 70 mass layoffs in France of the steel and coal were called "downsizing."
More recently Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Fed, had jokingly talked about Irrational Exuberance about the U.S. housing market in crisis and whose value was multiplied by 3 to 5 years without any economic logic or reason, or even purely financial property. In fact irrational exuberance, it was just the subprime crisis and the U.S. real estate boom that has ruined tens of millions of American homes and non-Americans, according to Madoff systems, systems or equivalent even the legal world.
The effect on China's quantitative easing is the passage of diluting the value of its debt on the U.S. Treasury and simply to reduce its dollar holdings constant now very undervalued. That's fair because China has undervalued the yuan artificially for years.
However, even if it's fair game, it creates international financial and diplomatic tensions that are evident to any serious observer.
The latest news about our famous $ 600 billion purchased by the Fed U.S. Treasury is that the Republicans who took control of the House of Representatives a few days ago and now have a very strong minority in the Senate, come today to look into the transaction that has so concerned about China and other major countries in the world last week and forcing Obama to speak theoretically and legally while the Fed is independent of political power: the famous 600 000 000 000 dollar purchase by the Fed of U.S. Treasury bonds.
Republicans strongly dispute - and they do know - whether the movement of the EDF and the procedure used.
In constitutional terms, they can not act on the Fed, except by amending the articles ... or making it disappear in law or fact (it has done much in the nineteenth century, see Madison and others) by replacing by something else that would have broader functions and stifle the Fed making it inoperable.
Which can be painful for the woman.
The loss is the total even more.
After all, it is Congress, he can afford it, he has all the legislative rights under Article I of the U.S. Constitution.
Congress can also demand accountability to the Treasury in the form of hearings (hearings) public and media attention.
It may also object to future spending at the Treasury budget vote.
Here it is income of the Treasury (the sale of 600 billion Treasury Bonds to the Fed) but Congress is accustomed, as the American constitutional principle inspired by Montesquieu in The Spirit of Laws, to fully exercise balance between the powers, the famous checks and balances, negotiate deals of its kind I've got you you hold me no goatee: if you sell these Treasury Bonds, I will cut your budget 10% next year (this that Congress has the power to do).
In general, the Treasury is sensitive to such arguments.
Simultaneously in Europe another significant event took place: the European Central Bank wants to force Ireland to accept a loan of EUR 500 billion to stabilize its finances and help stabilize the Euro makes the yoyo on the currency market since some time. Ireland, surprisingly, is not favorable even if it is fine to have it resolved. The procedure is however surprising that forcing someone or a country to accept a loan that he will not but then the acceptance will mainly serve the banker lender.
The latest news and it shows a surprising stability and equilibrium in financial markets and the coordination of monetary policies of countries in the world is the last G20 has just taken place in Seoul, during which everyone in a great cacophony has refused offers of others and so more humorous asked them accountable for their economic and monetary policies, as in China.
Question authoritatively, the Second Prime countries of the world is China's funny. But it can have painful consequences for future questioners. It must indeed have the means for its insolence.
It seems that China has taken quite ill, she has forgiven, of course, but according to the good tradition China has kept the list [of countries and insolent questioners] ... in case ...
So the debtors do not want more money from banks (FED, ECB) and the banks want them to do so.
If there is someone in the room to find that this is healthy (EDF and Congress, ECB and Ireland, G-20 and China, all in the same week) it should occur.
Widespread confusion does not reign it in international finance?
Financial institutions, states and state groups lose their power, their independence and no longer control their own financial transactions now subject to relentless vetoes of their partners.
When 22 players (G-20) football must play their matches with weight of 10 kg attached to each ankle, their velocity is generally reduced.
Olivier Chazoule
