The US winning just cements the dollar dominance in the world.
The US winning just cements the dollar dominance in the world.
This has fairly similar parallels to what happened in WW2 though. US entered the war mid way through after Pearl Harbour and helped win the war, theoretically India could do the same.
> The US winning just cements the dollar dominance in the world.
Again, in WW2 the UK was the dominant currency, was on the winning team, but lost dominant currency status because the debts amassed were too large that it no longer had enough money to maintain the infrastructure necessary and service the debt so other countries sold off their holdings of GBP debt in favour of the safer haven of the US.
It's difficult, if not impossible, to maintain that kind of global influence and service stratospherically high debts simultaneously. In that scenario, spending money to resolve internal problems always ends up taking precedent over global influence and other countries with rising bank balances step in to fill the void.