What's new

The Return of the Currency Wars

LeveragedBuyout

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
60
Country
United States
Location
United States
So much for the end of the USD as the global reserve currency.

---

The Return of the Currency Wars - Real Time Economics - WSJ
  • ed8a10028a02042c341332ed0dfd943a.gif
  • September 15, 2014, 10:26 AM ET
The Return of the Currency Wars
ByDavid Wessel
a1a9f5a38f95a3aea569948740fd4ec7.jpg

When a country’s economy grows too slowly, the standard short-term remedies are to increase government spending, cut taxes or reduce interest rates. When none of those options is available, governments often resort to pushing down their currencies to make their exports more attractive to foreigners (and, these days, to push up import prices and thus bring inflation back up to desired levels).

When the world economy is sputtering, and every big country increases spending, cuts taxes and reduces interest rates, the global economy benefits from the increase in demand. That’s the story of 2009.

But when individual countries lean heavily on pushing their currencies down, that tends to shift demand from one place to another rather than increasing the total. That is a “currency war.” And we may be on the verge of one. Last time, the emerging markets were doing the complaining; this time, it may be the U.S. (OK, I’m oversimplifying, but only a bit.)

Japan has already managed to depreciate its currency. The yen is at a six-year low against the dollar. There is a fine line between pursuing expansionary monetary policy which works (in part) by reducing a country’s currency, and making currency depreciation a primary goal. The U.S. and Europe have tolerated the sinking yen largely because they saw it as part of Prime MinisterShinzo Abe’s broader effort to resuscitate the Japanese economy.

Now the spotlight is shifting to Europe. Europe is growing painfully slowly, if at all. Unemployment in the countries that share the euro is 11.5%. Among the under-25 crowd, nearly one in four is out of work.

Standard economics, the sort pushed by the International Monetary Fund, among others, suggests that while Europe addresses its much-discussed structural impediments to economic growth, it also pursue low taxes, more government spending and more expansionary monetary policy. And since short-term interest rates are already at zero, that means something akin to theFederal Reserve’s quantitative easing, the purchase of huge amounts of assets by the central bank to get more money into the economy, rekindle inflation (now at 0.3% in Europe) and nudge investors into private-sector loans, bonds and stocks.

But what appears to be economically necessary is not politically possible. Germany is the heavyweight in the eurozone. It wants to keep the pressure on southern Europe to reform labor and other regulations, to work harder and to reduce their debts so it won’t bless more expansionary fiscal policy. And for those reasons, plus its historic anxiety about inflation no matter what the circumstances, it appears opposed to more aggressive European Central Bank action – or, at the very least, it is slowing the ECB’s efforts to move in that direction.

The politics are treacherous. As Europe leaders fumble and struggle to reach consensus, the public backlash against austerity and slow growth is building. Euro-skeptic Marie Le Pen (“I don’t want this European Soviet Union,” she told der Spiegel Online in June) has a shot at becoming the next president of France.

So what’s the ECB to do? Push down the euro to try to juice the eurozone’s exports. That appears to be one of ECB President Mario Draghi’s current objectives, and it’s one he can achieve with words even if he can’t get his policy council to agree on printing a lot of euros. It certainly is appealing to the French, who’ve long seen the currency as a useful economic instrument.

And the markets are getting the message. The euro, which was trading above $1.38 for most of the spring, has fallen below $1.30 – and Goldman Sachs economists predict it’ll fall to $1.15 by the end of 2015.

For now this isn’t a big threat to the U.S. economy. The U.S. dollar has been strengthening for some time, initially because nervous investors were looking for safety and more recently because markets expect the Fed to begin raising interest rates from rock-bottom levels next year, well before the ECB does.

Although there are always manufacturers complaining that the dollar is hurting their exports and there are long-standing complaints about China’s manipulation of its currency to favor its exports, the dollar hasn’t really been a big political or economic issue in the U.S. lately.

Perhaps because there has been so much else to worry about; perhaps because the dollar’s attractiveness has helped the U.S. Treasury lure foreigners to lend billions of dollars at very low rates. U.S. exports have been growing; they contributed 1.3 percentage points to the 4.2% annualized increase in gross domestic product in the second quarter. But that could change if Japan and Europe continue to nudge their currencies down as a substitute for economic policies more friendly to global economic growth.
 
America shouldn't worry. USD will forever be the world's number one currency. No need for the concerns at all :azn:
 
@LeveragedBuyout

Do you believe that dollar dominion is the source of the US hegemony ?

On the contrary, the US had to achieve hegemony in order to install the dollar as the global reserve currency. The dollar replaced the GBP, which had been the previous global reserve currency under the previous hegemon, the British Empire. I will be not be surprised if or when the RMB in turn displaces the dollar, but too many on this forum reverse the order. One does not break the USD reserve status to achieve hegemony; one achieves hegemony to break the USD reserve status.
 
So much for the end of the USD as the global reserve currency.

---

The Return of the Currency Wars - Real Time Economics - WSJ
  • September 15, 2014, 10:26 AM ET
The Return of the Currency Wars
ByDavid Wessel
View attachment 50727
When a country’s economy grows too slowly, the standard short-term remedies are to increase government spending, cut taxes or reduce interest rates. When none of those options is available, governments often resort to pushing down their currencies to make their exports more attractive to foreigners (and, these days, to push up import prices and thus bring inflation back up to desired levels).

When the world economy is sputtering, and every big country increases spending, cuts taxes and reduces interest rates, the global economy benefits from the increase in demand. That’s the story of 2009.

But when individual countries lean heavily on pushing their currencies down, that tends to shift demand from one place to another rather than increasing the total. That is a “currency war.” And we may be on the verge of one. Last time, the emerging markets were doing the complaining; this time, it may be the U.S. (OK, I’m oversimplifying, but only a bit.)

Japan has already managed to depreciate its currency. The yen is at a six-year low against the dollar. There is a fine line between pursuing expansionary monetary policy which works (in part) by reducing a country’s currency, and making currency depreciation a primary goal. The U.S. and Europe have tolerated the sinking yen largely because they saw it as part of Prime MinisterShinzo Abe’s broader effort to resuscitate the Japanese economy.

Now the spotlight is shifting to Europe. Europe is growing painfully slowly, if at all. Unemployment in the countries that share the euro is 11.5%. Among the under-25 crowd, nearly one in four is out of work.

Standard economics, the sort pushed by the International Monetary Fund, among others, suggests that while Europe addresses its much-discussed structural impediments to economic growth, it also pursue low taxes, more government spending and more expansionary monetary policy. And since short-term interest rates are already at zero, that means something akin to theFederal Reserve’s quantitative easing, the purchase of huge amounts of assets by the central bank to get more money into the economy, rekindle inflation (now at 0.3% in Europe) and nudge investors into private-sector loans, bonds and stocks.

But what appears to be economically necessary is not politically possible. Germany is the heavyweight in the eurozone. It wants to keep the pressure on southern Europe to reform labor and other regulations, to work harder and to reduce their debts so it won’t bless more expansionary fiscal policy. And for those reasons, plus its historic anxiety about inflation no matter what the circumstances, it appears opposed to more aggressive European Central Bank action – or, at the very least, it is slowing the ECB’s efforts to move in that direction.

The politics are treacherous. As Europe leaders fumble and struggle to reach consensus, the public backlash against austerity and slow growth is building. Euro-skeptic Marie Le Pen (“I don’t want this European Soviet Union,” she told der Spiegel Online in June) has a shot at becoming the next president of France.

So what’s the ECB to do? Push down the euro to try to juice the eurozone’s exports. That appears to be one of ECB President Mario Draghi’s current objectives, and it’s one he can achieve with words even if he can’t get his policy council to agree on printing a lot of euros. It certainly is appealing to the French, who’ve long seen the currency as a useful economic instrument.

And the markets are getting the message. The euro, which was trading above $1.38 for most of the spring, has fallen below $1.30 – and Goldman Sachs economists predict it’ll fall to $1.15 by the end of 2015.

For now this isn’t a big threat to the U.S. economy. The U.S. dollar has been strengthening for some time, initially because nervous investors were looking for safety and more recently because markets expect the Fed to begin raising interest rates from rock-bottom levels next year, well before the ECB does.

Although there are always manufacturers complaining that the dollar is hurting their exports and there are long-standing complaints about China’s manipulation of its currency to favor its exports, the dollar hasn’t really been a big political or economic issue in the U.S. lately.

Perhaps because there has been so much else to worry about; perhaps because the dollar’s attractiveness has helped the U.S. Treasury lure foreigners to lend billions of dollars at very low rates. U.S. exports have been growing; they contributed 1.3 percentage points to the 4.2% annualized increase in gross domestic product in the second quarter. But that could change if Japan and Europe continue to nudge their currencies down as a substitute for economic policies more friendly to global economic growth.

I really, really don't understand why so many finance ministers think that devaluing their currency is a viable long term policy. For manufacturers, this pushes up raw material costs from abroad and the potential gains to exports are dependent on price elasticity. For everyone, this means oil is more expensive - never a good thing.

The problem is agency. Finance ministers and central bankers probably look to short term gains to boost their popularity and they are influenced by business leaders who are even more short-term focused as their pay is related to performance in the short-term.

In the long run it's very simple. You should always want your currency to be worth as much as possible as this would maximise the value of your assets. And I don't think the role of the dollar as the world's reserve currency will change any time soon.

On the contrary, the US had to achieve hegemony in order to install the dollar as the global reserve currency. The dollar replaced the GBP, which had been the previous global reserve currency under the previous hegemon, the British Empire. I will be not be surprised if or when the RMB in turn displaces the dollar, but too many on this forum reverse the order. One does not break the USD reserve status to achieve hegemony; one achieves hegemony to break the USD reserve status.

Exactly!
 
Last edited:
I really, really don't understand why so many finance ministers think that devaluing their currency is a viable long term policy. For manufacturers, this pushes up raw material costs from abroad and the potential gains to exports are dependent on price elasticity. For everyone, this means oil is more expensive - never a good thing.

The problem is agency. Finance ministers and central bankers probably look to short term gains to boost their popularity and they are influenced by business leaders who are even more short-term focused as their pay is related to performance in the short-term.

In the long run it's very simple. You should always want your currency to be worth as much as possible as this would maximise the value of your assets. And I don't think the role of the dollar as the world's reserve currency will change any time soon.

Agreed on all counts.

Currency devaluation does not work well in a free trade environment, precisely because of the factors you mention. Input costs are guaranteed to go up, but exports are not guaranteed to increase as a result of the relatively cheaper price in terms of other currencies. Japan learned this the hard way through its devaluation, which has helped its goal of increasing inflation (via increased import costs), but not much else, since manufacturing has already been sent off-shore.

The only solution for slow economic growth is reform and restructuring (reducing regulation, reducing taxes, reducing friction costs), because only reform and restructuring can increase productivity growth. Productivity growth is the true source of wealth creation, and leverage through government spending is an unsustainable illusion.

Finally, only a "hard" currency can qualify as the reserve currency, so this worldwide devaluation and manipulation further removes the possibility of the USD losing that status in the medium term.
 
On the contrary, the US had to achieve hegemony in order to install the dollar as the global reserve currency. The dollar replaced the GBP, which had been the previous global reserve currency under the previous hegemon, the British Empire. I will be not be surprised if or when the RMB in turn displaces the dollar, but too many on this forum reverse the order. One does not break the USD reserve status to achieve hegemony; one achieves hegemony to break the USD reserve status.


We don't want RMB to be the reserve currency, in the sense that it is used for transactions between parties that have nothing to do with us. Likewise, it should not be a store of value. These qualities all unnecessarily inflate its value. Instead, we have always supported SDRs to gradually assume the role of reserve status.

Anyway, your article negligently omits to mention the recent plans for the US Fed to taper QEIII, which would completely explain its recent appreciation.
 
We don't want RMB to be the reserve currency, in the sense that it is used for transactions between parties that have nothing to do with us. Likewise, it should not be a store of value. These qualities all unnecessarily inflate its value. Instead, we have always supported SDRs to gradually assume the role of reserve status.

Anyway, your article negligently omits to mention the recent plans for the US Fed to taper QEIII, which would completely explain its recent appreciation.

The 2014 tapering of QE3, which was introduced at the end of 2012, is the reason why USD has been strengthening since 2011? Interesting.
 
Last edited:
The 2014 tapering of QE3, which was introduced at the end of 2012, is the reason why USD has been strengthening since 2011? Interesting.

Perhaps contributing to the rise in 2011 were wild expectations that euro would collapse and general abysmal performance of EU economy around that time. Investors previously putting money in eurozone gov. bonds panicked and ran to US to invest there when interest rates over here didn't look like the best mix of safety and return. Although iirc 2011 wasn't particularly stellar year for US as well.

04164d00f959e26bbfab5312d32b093d.png
 
We don't want RMB to be the reserve currency, in the sense that it is used for transactions between parties that have nothing to do with us. Likewise, it should not be a store of value. These qualities all unnecessarily inflate its value. Instead, we have always supported SDRs to gradually assume the role of reserve status.

Anyway, your article negligently omits to mention the recent plans for the US Fed to taper QEIII, which would completely explain its recent appreciation.

Don't you think raising the value of RMB should be a long term goal for China? Do you not agree with the gradual flotation of the RMB?
 
Perhaps contributing to the rise in 2011 were wild expectations that euro would collapse and general abysmal performance of EU economy around that time. Investors previously putting money in eurozone gov. bonds panicked and ran to US to invest there when interest rates over here didn't look like the best mix of safety and return. Although iirc 2011 wasn't particularly stellar year for US as well.

View attachment 50884

Agreed. In other words, several factors contributed to the strengthening of the dollar, and the tapering of QE3 would not "completely explain its recent appreciation" as @Raphael asserted.
 
On the contrary, the US had to achieve hegemony in order to install the dollar as the global reserve currency. The dollar replaced the GBP, which had been the previous global reserve currency under the previous hegemon, the British Empire. I will be not be surprised if or when the RMB in turn displaces the dollar, but too many on this forum reverse the order. One does not break the USD reserve status to achieve hegemony; one achieves hegemony to break the USD reserve status.


An important fact that "Dollar is doomed" naysayers need to keep in mind is that locus of USA's power lies within it's territory, compared to Pax Britannica which was dependent on it's overseas territories.

USA is a continent size country rich in both human and material resources. It has one of world's largest reserve of various resources like Anthracite/ bituminous coal,shale gas, Iron ore ...... and is an immigrant magnet which provides it with steady stream of human resource. Foundation of US's hegemony are much deeper than that of Europe's in last century. European empires was dependent on exploitation of resources of their colonies. They lose their colonies, their empire crumbles.

US by virtue of it's resource base would remain one of the strongest country at any point of time. China may come close but would find it exceedingly difficult to surpass US. Russia in all probability would stagnate ( especially if it is not able to increase it's native population, not one of Kazakh immigrants ), India and Brazil would become strong countries but none of them have potential of surpassing US.

In foreseeable future, dollar is bound to remain a reserve currency.
 
The 2014 tapering of QE3, which was introduced at the end of 2012, is the reason why USD has been strengthening since 2011? Interesting.

Is this the logic?
USD appreciate -> countries start to buy US bonds -> Bonds interests rate go lower -> US debt is reduced?

Recently, the 15 year USD bonds rate is higher than before. If Federal Reserve stopped printing money, the mortgage rate
will be higher.
 
Don't you think raising the value of RMB should be a long term goal for China? Do you not agree with the gradual flotation of the RMB?

1. No. A high value currency penalizes manufacturers. The increased cost of energy is negligible (in the long-term) in the face of increased demand for manufactured goods. If we were merely an exporter of raw materials (esp. oil), then yes, we would want to appreciate the value of our currency because of the price inelasticity of raw material/energy imports. But we are resolutely a manufacturing nation.
2. To me, a floating, liberalized currency only has the advantage of the reassuring foreign holders that they can liquidate/exchange it at will, so they don't mind receiving it and are consequently more likely to buy Chinese goods. Otherwise, the disadvantages (X-rate unpredictability, speculators hoarding it and inflating its value) are great too. The Asian financial crisis of 1998 was an important lesson for the region.

China has recently focused on bilateral "currency swaps" - limited liberalization for the express purpose of encouraging others to buy Chinese goods. This is the way to go for us.

Agreed. In other words, several factors contributed to the strengthening of the dollar, and the tapering of QE3 would not "completely explain its recent appreciation" as Raphael asserted.

I'm not sure that would strengthen your position. The gist of your argument is that the inherent strengths of the USA propel the USD to global reserve currency status (this is the causal relationship, according to you) and cause its value to appreciate. The weakness of the Eurozone would seem to cast doubt on this position, because it suggests that appreciation is caused by the weaknesses or policies of others, and not your inherent strengths. Note that around the time QEIII was started, Japan also began their own ill-fated monetary easing project, which explains USD appreciation since 2012 to an extent.

Anyway, I stand by my statement that recent appreciation is caused by (rumors of) tapering. By recent, I don't mean the secular trend suggested by the WSJ graph that charts the USD's value over the past few years, but more the appreciation in the latest months. See this chart, and how it shows the USD's rapid appreciation against the XDR since July.
XE.com - USD/XDR Chart

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=XDR&view=1Y
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom