Thread: G20 economic summit: What the key players want

G20 economic summit: What the key players want

As representatives from the 20 nations gather in Washington, they bring different problems and goals to the economic summit

By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 12:22PM GMT 15 Nov 2008

USA

Led by: President George W Bush

Problems: Home of the worst financial crisis in 80 years, triggered by the subprime lending debacle. America's stock market has plunged from more than 11,000 to under 9,000; major investment bank have failed or beenf forced into precautionary mergers; and now one of its largest manufacturing industries, car building, is on the brink of oblivion with all three of its major firms seeking government loans to avoid bankruptcy.

What they've done: $700billion stimulus package to shore up banks, $290bn of which has already been spent. Cut interest rates to 1 per cent.

What they want: Bush administration queasy about fiscal stimulus package but President-Elect Obama has indicated he wants $100bn of measures passed and will make it his first priority in the White House. US is opposed to any new international regulatory agency that would give foreign watchdogs influence over US companies, but they might agree to a more informal framework of talks proposed by Britain. Similarly, they do not regard a new Bretton Woods Agreement, extending the powers of the IMF with the same degree of urgency as European countries like France. Mr Bush's main goal will be to establish some "general principles" for dealing with financial issues, foremost of which will be an agreement to resist protectionist impulses.

BRITAIN

Led by: Prime Minister Gordon Brown

Problems: On Wednesday the Bank of England said Britain is probably already in a recession. Banks have been bailed out or are on the brink. Job loss announcements almost daily, with BT last week announcing it would cut 10,000 jobs by March 2009. The pound has fallen to historic lows against the euro.

What they've done: Cut interest rate to 3 per cent. A £15billion package including tax cuts plus £50billion to shore up the banking industry.

What they want: Gordon Brown realises that Obama's absence will make it difficult to get concrete agreements. He is pushing plans for financial regulators in different countries to meet three or four times a year to compare notes in order to prevent the collapse of the 30 biggest banks and financial institutions worldwide. He wants a statement of intent in which all the G20 states agree to support free trade and he hopes to establish working groups that will look at longterm changes to the role and structure of the IMF. Britain is also supporting measures that could see a worldwide agreement to coordinate stimulus packages in the same way the global interest rate cut was agreed earlier.

FRANCE

Led by: President Nicolas Sarkozy

Problems: Government just downgraded its growth forecast (0.2 per cent-0.5 per cent next year) to the lowest prediction ever as France flirts with a recession. Unemployment is over 8 per cent. The trade deficit is at record levels. Public debt is likely to increase to reach a record 70 per cent of GDP in 2010.

What they've done: Mr Sarkozy was instrumental in winning a Europe-wide interest rate cut and EU coordination of monetary policy to support the fiscal changes. But he has been rebuffed by Britain and Germany on attempts to set up a common tax policy.

What they want: The Europeans called the meeting, so they will need to lead the way in making it work. Sarkozy has been instrumental during France's EU presidency, which ends on Dec 31, of pushing for a complete overhaul of international financial regulation. The summit will not live up to his hopes that it would be a 21st Century version of the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement that set up the IMF and World Bank. But he will push hard for moves to increase international regulation.

GERMANY

Led by: Chancellor Angela Merkel

Problems: Europe's biggest economy officially entered a recession on Thursday. It shrank 0.5 per cent in the third quarter after a contraction of 0.4 per cent in the second quarter. The world's leading exporter has been hit by a slowdown in major markets and low levels of domestic consumption.

What they've done: Announced $23billion euro stimulus package, including money for roads, tax breaks on car purchases and loans to small and medium-sized businesses.

What they want: Not as keen as some on a worldwide coordinated fiscal stimulus package. Mrs Merkel argues that the IMF should get greater powers to oversee global financial companies. She also backs revised rules for rating agencies and an effort to make it more difficult for companies to hide risks outside their balance sheets.

CHINA

Led by: Premier Wen Jiabao

Problems: As markets in the West have dried up in the credit crunch, China has found itself far more exposed than it initially feared. Some economists predicted that growth, which was nearly 12 per cent last year, could fall to as low as 6 per cent next year. China has been trying to lower Western expectations that it will join in global actions, stressing its domestic economic problems and limited resources as a developing country.

What they've done: Announced fiscal stimulus package worth $586 billion to be spent on infrastructure and social welfare. People's Bank of China cut interest rates to 6.66 per cent. Recently adopted export subsidies, seen as unhelpful by Europeans given that China is running the world's largest trade surplus.

What they want: Wants the rest of the world to sign up for fiscal stimulus package, but is less keen on gestures of support for free trade. Others want them to put a couple of hundred billion into funding the IMF, but Mr Wen says China's own stimulus package is the largest contribution it can make to global stability.

INDIA

Led by: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

Problems: Not badly hit by the financial crisis, its banks seem to have good credit ratios but risk of export slowdown as developed countries who buy Indian products go into recession. Economic growth expected to slow from 8.9 per cent over the past 4 years to 7.5 per cent this year and next. $12.5 billion has been lost from Indian equity markets this year. The Bombay stock exchange is down 53 per cent. The rupee has fallen more this year than at any time since 1996.

What they've done: Cut main short term lending rate from 8 per cent to 7.5 per cent. State Bank of India cut interest rate to its best clients to 13 per cent.

What they want: As major representative of the developing nations, India, along with Brazil, will lead demands for greater non-European representation on the boards of major international bodies like the IMF. They will find common cause with France in seeking to overhaul existing world financial architecture the G7, the IMF and the World Bank, which they see as outdated. Likely to seek acknowledgement that America is responsible for the current crisis, causing friction with the US .

RUSSIA

Led by: President Dmitry Medvedev

Problems: Stock market is often closed. The ruble is plunging despite interest rates of 12 per cent. Falling oil prices mean the Russian government has seen its revenues slashed in half and forced it to revise next year's budget, tapping reserves of cash saved up from the oil boom.

What they've done: Raised refinancing interest rate from 11 per cent to 12 per cent to slow capital flight from Russia and counter inflation.

What they want: Russian officials have called for a new international financial architecture - an idea reiterated by Mr Medvedev during his debut state of the nation address earlier this month. They want the IMF and World Bank to hand out money to struggling nations without the Western capitalist political preconditions they sometimes impose.

JAPAN

Led by: Prime Minister Taro Aso

Problems: A leading member of Japan 's central bank said on Thursday that Asia 's largest economy faces a long slump. Bank of Japan's policy board member, Seiji Nakamura, said the financial crisis is curbing economic growth, "putting the Japanese economy on the brink of a long-term adjustment phase". Exports fell nearly 10 per cent in the first 20 days of Oct alone, corporate bankruptcies jumped 13.4 per cent year on year.

What they've done: Announced fiscal stimulus package worth $275billion, including credits and loans to help small businesses. Cut interest rates from 0.5 per cent to 0.3 per cent.

What they want: Like China, may be expected to shoulder the burden of funding any new measures agreed at the summit. They will announce at the summit plans to offer $100 billion to help fund the IMF, money that will go to impoverished developing countries.

SAUDI ARABIA

Led by: King Abdullah

Problems: De facto representative of all major oil producers at the summit. Few macroeconomic problems. The size of the economy has doubled in 4 years. But the Saudi bourse lost some 40 per cent of its value this year and some large infrastructure projects have been called into doubt by the fall in oil prices from $147 a barrel in July to under $60 now.

What they've done: 70 per cent of the foreign reserves of Saudi Arabia 's central bank are in US government bonds and they have provided support and confidence to the US economy and the dollar.

What they want: Others want them and other oil exporters, who benefitted from the recent high oil prices, to make a substantial contribution to funding the IMF. In return, will want to see more influence for non-European nations on the IMF board. Will join calls for greater oversight of financial markets and of banks in the West and will demand the IMF plays a bigger role in monitoring industrial nations economies. Reluctant to be a cash cow for the West.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/fina ... -want.html

LOL.....there's no Prime Directive. This world isn't ready yet for a NWO.

Fox just reported a clip from Bush's speech today where he urged against protectionism for another year. Lack of protectionism is just what the rest of the world wants out of us. We do not protect our jobs so we are forced to pay prices set by countries artificially inflating their currencies (like China) where a yuan might only be worth 2 cents, were it in the free market, but with the government support, we are trading with China at 20 cents to a yuan. In other words, we could be paying many times what the product is worth. (And happily getting poisoned by their products, but that is another subject.)

Are those meetings open to the general public? They should be. We the PEOPLE are still the LEGAL Admiral of this ship. Bush is only supposed to be a mouth piece.

main goal will be to establish some "general principles" for dealing with financial issues, foremost of which will be an agreement to resist protectionist impulses.

What is really meant by "protectionist impulses"? Does that mean that Americans might be "overally" concerned about where our $700 Billion went and how it is being used? I dont understand. I do inderstand that the majority of Americans jammed up the phones and faxes to plea with our reps NOT to vote for the BAILOUT SCAM. But nooooooooooo. They think they are smarter than us. Now look at the mess our country is in.

Guys, I have to share something with you that I first discovered a few days ago at the website http://teamlaw.net/history.htm. I was completely floored when I read it and I've been doing some followup research ever since.

Are you sitting down? Did you know that our government is not a Constitutional Republic but rather a Corporation????

If you don't believe me, just read on. I'm posting the following information here because after reading AirborneSapper7's thread on the G20 economic summit, I am beginning to see the reasons why things are the way they are. This has to be the biggest deception in our nation's history!

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. IÂ*refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," SectionÂ*34, SessionÂ*III, chaptersÂ*61 andÂ*62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. TheÂ*Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

"The Constitution for the united states of America".

The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.

Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn't. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.

Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the "organic" Constitution, we now have "relative" rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign's right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a "privilege" which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.

So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word "Sovereign," we must think about what the word means.

According to Webster's Dictionary, "sovereign" is defined as: 1. chief or highest; supreme. 2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others. 3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction.

In other words, our government was created by and for "sovereigns" — the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign — remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: "government is subject to the consent of the governed" — that's supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? IÂ*don't.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that this is not what is happening in our country today. Government in these times is NOT subject to the consent of the governed. Rather, the governed are subject to the whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia — encroaching into every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia. THEY just want you to think it does.

You see, you are presumed to know the law. This is ironic because as a people, we are taught basically nothing about the law in school. We are made to memorize obscure factoids and paragraphs here and there, such as the Preamble, and they gloss over the Bill of Rights. But we are not told about the law. Nor do our corporate government schools delve into the Constitution in any great depth. After all, they were put into place to indoctrinate and dumb down the masses — not to teach us anything. We were not told that we were sold-out to foreign interests and made beneficiaries of the debt incurred by Congress to the international bankers. For generations, American citizens have had the bulk of their earnings confiscated to pay on a massive debt that they, as a People, did not incur. There are many, many things the People have not been told. How do you feel about being made a beneficiary of somebody else's massive debt without your knowledge or consent? Are we gonna keep going along with this??

When you hear some individuals say that the Constitution is null and void, think about how our government has transformed over time from a municipal or service-oriented entity to a corporate or profit-oriented entity. We are living under the myth that this is lawful, but it is not. We are being ruled by a "de facto," or unlawful, form of government — the corporate body of the death-mongers — The Controllers.

With the passage of the Act of 1871, a series of subtle and overt deceptions were set in motion — all in conjunction and collusion with the Congress, who knowingly and deliberately sold the People down the river. Did they tell you this in government school? IÂ*doubt it. They were too busy drumming the fictional version of history into your brain — and mine. By failing to disclose what THEY did to the American People, the people became ignorant of what was happening. Over time, the Republic took it on the chin to the point of a knockdown. With the surrender of their gold in 1933, the People essentially surrendered their law. IÂ*don't suppose you were taught THAT in school either. That's because our REAL history is hidden from us. This is the way Roman Civil Law works — and our form of governance today is based upon Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law — better known as the "Divine Right of Kings" and "Law of the Seas", respectively. This explains a lot. Roman Civil Law was fully established in the original colonies even before our nation began and is also known as private international law.

The government which was created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 operates under Private International Law, and not Common Law, which was the law of the Constitutional Republic. This is very important to note since it impacts all Americans in concrete ways. You must recognize that private international law is only applicable within the District of Columbia and NOT in the other states of the Union. The various arms of the corporation are known as "departments" such as the Judiciary, Justice and Treasury. You recognize those names? Yes, you do! But they are not what you assume them to be. These "departments" all belong to the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. They do NOT belong to you and me under the corporate constitution and its various amendments that operate outside of the Constitutional Republic.

I refer you to the UNITED STATES CODE (note the capitalization, indicating the corporation, not the Republic) Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C). It is stated unequivocally that the UNITED STATES is a corporation. Realize, too, that the corporation is not a separate and distinct entity from the government. It IS the government. YOUR government. This is extremely important. IÂ*refer to this as the "corporate empire of the UNITED STATES," which operates under Roman Civil Law outside of the Constitution. How do you like being ruled by a cheesy, sleazy corporation? You'll ask your Congressperson about this, you say? HA!!

Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to you? This is why we can't get them to do anything on our behalf or to answer to us — as in the case with the illegal income tax — among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.

The great number of committees and sub-committees that the Congress has created all work together like a multi-headed monster to oversee the various corporate "departments." And, you should know that every single one of these that operates outside the District of Columbia is in violation of the law. The corporate government of the UNITED STATES has no jurisdiction or authority in ANY state of the Republic beyond the District of Columbia. Let this sink into your brain for a minute. Ask yourself, "Could this deception REALLY have occurred without the full knowledge and complicity of the Congress?" Do you think it happened by accident? You are deceiving yourself if you do. There are no accidents or coincidences. It is time to confront the truth and awaken from ignorance.

Your legislators will not apprise you of this information. You are presumed to know the law. THEY know you don't know the law, or your history for that matter, because this information has not been taught to you. No concerted effort has been made to inform you. As a Sovereign, you are entitled to full disclosure of the facts. As a slave, you are entitled to nothing other than what the corporation decides to "give" you — at a price. Be wary of accepting so-called "benefits" of the corporation of the UNITED STATES. Aren't you enslaved enough already?

I said (above) that you are presumed to know the law. Still, it matters not if you don't in the eyes of the corporation. Ignorance of the law is not considered an excuse. It is your responsibility and your obligation as an American to learn about the law and how it applies to you. THEY count on the fact that most people are too uninterested or distracted or lazy to do so. The People have been mentally conditioned to allow the alleged government to do their thinking for them. We need to turn that around if we are to save our Republic before it is too late.

The UNITED STATES government is basically a corporate instrument of the international bankers. This means YOU are owned by the corporation from birth to death. The corporate UNITED STATES also holds ownership of all your assets, your property, and even your children. Does this sound untrue? Think long and hard about all those bills you pay, all those various taxes and fines and licenses you must pay for. Yes, they've got you by the pockets. Actually, they've had you by the ass for as long as you've been alive. In your heart, you know it's true. Don't believe any of this? Read up on the 14th Amendment. Check out how "free" you really are.

With the Act of 1871 and subsequent legislation such as the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment, our once-great nation of Sovereigns has been subverted from a Republic to a democracy. As is the case under Roman Civil Law, our ignorance of the facts has led to our silence. Our silence has been construed as our consent to become beneficiaries of a debt we did not incur. The Sovereign People have been deceived for hundreds of years into thinking they remain free and independent, when in actuality we continue to be slaves and servants of the corporation.

Treason was committed against the People in 1871 by the Congress. This could have been corrected through the decades by some honest men (assuming there were some), but it was not, mainly due to lust for money and power. Nothing new there. Are we to forgive and justify this crime against the People? You have lost more freedom than you may realize due to corporate infiltration of the so-called government. We will lose more unless we turn away from a democracy that is the direct road to disaster — and restore our Constitutional Republic.

In an upcoming article, we'll take a closer look at the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment and how we became "property" of the corporation and enslaved by our silence.

I am saddened to think about the brave men and women who were killed in all the wars and conflicts instigated by the Controllers. These courageous souls fought for the preservation of ideals they believed to be true — not for the likes of a corporation. Do you believe that any one of the individuals who have been killed as a result of war would have willingly fought if they knew the full truth? Do you think one person would have laid down his life for a corporation? IÂ*think not. If the People had known long ago to what extent their trust had been betrayed, IÂ*wonder how long it would have taken for another Revolution. What we need is a Revolution in THOUGHT. We change our thinking and we change our world.

Will we ever restore the Republic? That is a question IÂ*cannot answer yet. IÂ*hope, and most of all — pray — that WE, the Sovereign People, will work together in a spirit of cooperation to make it happen in this lifetime. IÂ*know IÂ*will give it my best shot — come what may. Our children deserve their rightful legacy — the liberty our ancestors fought so hard to give to us. Will we remain silent telling ourselves we are free, and perpetuate the MYTH? Or, do we stand as One Sovereign People, and take back what has been stolen from the house of our Republic?

Something to think about — it's called freedom.

http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

Mrs Merkel argues that the IMF should get greater powers to oversee global financial companies. She also backs revised rules for rating agencies and an effort to make it more difficult for companies to hide risks outside their balance sheets. Germany

Will join calls for greater oversight of financial markets and of banks in the West and will demand the IMF plays a bigger role in monitoring industrial nations economies Saudia Arabia



The Europeans called the meeting, so they will need to lead the way in making it work. Sarkozy has been instrumental during France's EU presidency, which ends on Dec 31, of pushing for a complete overhaul of international financial regulation. The summit will not live up to his hopes that it would be a 21st Century version of the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement that set up the IMF and World Bank. But he will push hard for moves to increase international regulation. France


As major representative of the developing nations, India, along with Brazil, will lead demands for greater non-European representation on the boards of major international bodies like the IMF. They will find common cause with France in seeking to overhaul existing world financial architecture the G7, the IMF and the World Bank, which they see as outdated. Likely to seek acknowledgement that America is responsible for the current crisis, causing friction with the US . India


Do you see a pattern here?

Originally Posted by Gogo

Mrs Merkel argues that the IMF should get greater powers to oversee global financial companies. She also backs revised rules for rating agencies and an effort to make it more difficult for companies to hide risks outside their balance sheets. Germany

Will join calls for greater oversight of financial markets and of banks in the West and will demand the IMF plays a bigger role in monitoring industrial nations economies Saudia Arabia



The Europeans called the meeting, so they will need to lead the way in making it work. Sarkozy has been instrumental during France's EU presidency, which ends on Dec 31, of pushing for a complete overhaul of international financial regulation. The summit will not live up to his hopes that it would be a 21st Century version of the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement that set up the IMF and World Bank. But he will push hard for moves to increase international regulation. France


As major representative of the developing nations, India, along with Brazil, will lead demands for greater non-European representation on the boards of major international bodies like the IMF. They will find common cause with France in seeking to overhaul existing world financial architecture the G7, the IMF and the World Bank, which they see as outdated. Likely to seek acknowledgement that America is responsible for the current crisis, causing friction with the US . India


Do you see a pattern here?

What happens if we don't go a long with it is the question? Does most of the rest of the world, China, Germany, France, Russia theating war on us?I don't know this, but it is possible. If that was so would we trade "peace" to oppose it, on the otherhand we are the worlds super power and should have a lot of power to deman a fair treatment in this. I believe Bush needs to say that the system will be our "system"(Free market system), in US, America will get nearly full veto power to protect our economy that feeds you and gives the rest of the world high living standards. In then deman that we have a fair playing field with fair trade towards the United states.

If Bush would say this and most of the world is really black mailing us to go a long with this. Then I would rather see that then WWIII. It is possible that is whats going. I think that our leaders are worried in keeping the rest of the world stable because if we don't give them what they want they might do another world war.

Do you think its possible that black mail is going on?

Originally Posted by crazybird

LOL.....there's no Prime Directive. This world isn't ready yet for a NWO.

I strongly agree with you that the world is no were near ready for it. I'm not going to say that it won't be ready a thousand years from now, because things do change. But today most of the world is poor and a enemie against our freedoms and libertys. We must deman fair trade for our country if we do anything...Lets hope they are not black mailing us.