Quote from TraderZones:
I think he means that if you don't quote your sources, you are basically plagarizing, which is a pretty low thing to do. It cannot be confirmed, it looks like you are trying to present the work of others as your own, as well as a host of other problems.
Ivanovich is properly doing his mod job.
So in reality, Source: From Below 
I remember posting a link to a thread of southamerica (Central banks and US dollar, etc...). It was an article about calls by UNTACD for a global reserve currency and the author mentioned how people underestimated the powers of the bankers - that they would not anytime soon relinquished their prized power over the world's monetary system. This is a rather general, and reasonable, idea. I don't think anyone can claim to be the first to have formally stated it as a postulate on a thesis in international finance.
The Great Depression of the 1930s' could have contributed to the social environment that went through World War II. But it is just instinct on my part that there would not be a WW III. Without a world war, the only way western bankers would have their powers taken away is, by default, natural attrition - just as the Roman Empire ended over time.
No one likes to hold deposits in banks, but people have no choice. Most would not want to bank with a foreign bank with exchange risks added. Why the extra risks? But current circumstances may not provide much options to minimize such added risks. People will attempt to find a way.
Prejudice is the destiny of the majority of man and those who can reasonably be free from it are the "meek and the blessed who inherits Heaven". Meek means humility. Without humility, true knowledge cannot come. Do not be surprised that many scholars of old who contributed knowledge that have been recognized are people with faith in the Creator. It may be hubris that blinds a man the moment he thinks "I know".
Because of natural prejudice, one can easily be trapped in the "labyrinth" of ideas that are the random and habitual objects of the imagination, ideas that do not accord to reality. Take the current floating exchange regime that has evolved after Gold convertibility was scrapped in 1971. A closer examination would probably reveal it cannot work. Geithner said the dollar need to be strong. An economist, Paul Samuelson, recently wrote Obama was correct to send a message to the Chinese by raising tariffs for tires - that the Chinese should be told they manipulated the Yuan to levels that are unacceptable. But no one ever gave a yearly time schedule to the Peoples Bank of China to follow and for say how many years they have to follow. We have over a hundred currencies and each wanted to be "strong" or "weak" or whatever. You don't need to come out with a model using non-linear differential equations before you decide it just cannot work.
Then we have SDR from IMF. But this is only as good as the "good faith" and "promise" of the parties to the basket. By accepting SDR, it may happen that the portion Rupee.SDR may be frozen when we offend New Delhi. So a "basket of currencies" is as solid a currency as what a basket is traditionally - woven reed.
So we are left with only Gold and Silver, the choice made by our great ancestors.
The way the US dollar wound its way into the center arena of the world monetary order would be the way Gold would also go to gain as much influence as it could muster or to regain what should have been its rightful role - as international money.
