> In the long version of the paper
>
> http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/cid/cidpublications/darkmatter_051130.pdf
>
> they actually list 3 things that they think give rise to dark matter:
>
> 1) Superior FDI performance
> 2) Seignorage
> 3) The differential in return between Treasury bonds and bonds for the rest
> of the world
>
> even though the op-ed version seems to only emphasize (1). [Etc.]
Good points.
My thought is that, given the uncertainty, clinging too much to that asset ('hegemony') is an extremely risky bet for Americans, even in the medium run. Most Americans, including the elites, would benefit from some diversifying -- i.e., adopting different foreign and domestic economic policies. Or people should perhaps use a much higher discount rate than the one used by Hausmann and Sturzenegger, to account for the higher risk premium. Who knows, but it seems to me that much of the 'dark matter' is hot air ready to burst. I'm with the IMF on this one.
Julio