Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
G-20 leaders not inclined to compromise
At the Group of 20 summit in Seoul, Obama's effort to win consensus on a unified approach to boost the world economy appears doomed, raising the specter of countries pursuing their own interests.
Reporting from Seoul
President Obama appeared to fall short in his attempt to forge a unified approach to boosting the global economy as a frequently rancorous meeting of world leaders seemed set to conclude in Seoul on Friday without agreement on specific steps to avert damaging currency and trade wars.
Leaders of the world's biggest economies showed that they were in no mood to compromise during the two-day summit. Instead, they were headed toward broad, general pledges that did little to mask their inability to find common ground for immediate action.
That failure to find consensus among the Group of 20 nations a self-appointed steering committee of the global economy raised the specter of countries pursuing their own interests at the expense of coordinated and balanced global growth.
British Prime Minister David Cameron warned of the risks of that route at the summit opening, saying failure by the G-20 to accomplish some sort of global accommodation could lead to "a return to what happened in the 1930s: protectionism, trade barriers, currency wars, countries pursuing beggar-thy-neighbor policies; trying to do well for themselves but not caring about the rest of the world."
Many countries, however, appeared to be doing just that. In particular, they took aim at the Federal Reserve's recent decision to pump $600 billion into the U.S. financial system, a move that critics saw as an attempt to lower the value of the dollar and therefore make U.S. exports more competitive.
i dont know if this is reason for concern or for celebration.
True but hopefully this time we will stay neutral.sure, willie. But this time they couldn't fend off the protectionism that led to WWII.
True but hopefully this time we will stay neutral.sure, willie. But this time they couldn't fend off the protectionism that led to WWII.
True but hopefully this time we will stay neutral.sure, willie. But this time they couldn't fend off the protectionism that led to WWII.
we should have stayed neutral in WWII?
I am not one, and Germany is not one, who says growth and fiscal consolidation are contradictory, she said during a lunchtime address in Seoul. They can go together, and it is essential to return to a sustainable growth path.
She also suggested that it was the job of deficit countries like the United States and Britain, though she diplomatically avoided citing them to increase their competitiveness rather than put limits on countries that had figured out how to get the world to buy their goods. In the task ahead, the benchmark has to be the countries that have been most competitive, not to reduce to the lowest common denominator, she said.
True but hopefully this time we will stay neutral.sure, willie. But this time they couldn't fend off the protectionism that led to WWII.
FDR's oil embargo against Japan in the summer of 1941 and the lend-lease programs were de facto declarations of war.True but hopefully this time we will stay neutral.sure, willie. But this time they couldn't fend off the protectionism that led to WWII.
we should have stayed neutral in WWII?
Next world war..
CRICKEY! Time to build those shelters folks..and get gold.
(Note to self: Invest in bomb shelters and gold)
