The Chinese Disconnect

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/opinion/23krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

The Chinese Disconnect




By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: October 22, 2009
Senior monetary officials usually talk in code. So when Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, spoke recently about Asia, international imbalances and the financial crisis, he didn’t specifically criticize China’s outrageous currency policy.

But he didn’t have to: everyone got the subtext. China’s bad behavior is posing a growing threat to the rest of the world economy. The only question now is what the world — and, in particular, the United States — will do about it.
Some background: The value of China’s currency, unlike, say, the value of the British pound, isn’t determined by supply and demand. Instead, Chinese authorities enforced that target by buying or selling their currency in the foreign exchange market — a policy made possible by restrictions on the ability of private investors to move their money either into or out of the country.
There’s nothing necessarily wrong with such a policy, especially in a still poor country whose financial system might all too easily be destabilized by volatile flows of hot money. In fact, the system served China well during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. The crucial question, however, is whether the target value of the yuan is reasonable.
Until around 2001, you could argue that it was: China’s overall trade position wasn’t too far out of balance. From then onward, however, the policy of keeping the yuan-dollar rate fixed came to look increasingly bizarre. First of all, the dollar slid in value, especially against the euro, so that by keeping the yuan/dollar rate fixed, Chinese officials were, in effect, devaluing their currency against everyone else’s. Meanwhile, productivity in China’s export industries soared; combined with the de facto devaluation, this made Chinese goods extremely cheap on world markets.
The result was a huge Chinese trade surplus. If supply and demand had been allowed to prevail, the value of China’s currency would have risen sharply. But Chinese authorities didn’t let it rise. They kept it down by selling vast quantities of the currency, acquiring in return an enormous hoard of foreign assets, mostly in dollars, currently worth about $2.1 trillion.
Many economists, myself included, believe that China’s asset-buying spree helped inflate the housing bubble, setting the stage for the global financial crisis. But China’s insistence on keeping the yuan/dollar rate fixed, even when the dollar declines, may be doing even more harm now.
Although there has been a lot of doomsaying about the falling dollar, that decline is actually both natural and desirable. America needs a weaker dollar to help reduce its trade deficit, and it’s getting that weaker dollar as nervous investors, who flocked into the presumed safety of U.S. debt at the peak of the crisis, have started putting their money to work elsewhere.
But China has been keeping its currency pegged to the dollar — which means that a country with a huge trade surplus and a rapidly recovering economy, a country whose currency should be rising in value, is in effect engineering a large devaluation instead.
And that’s a particularly bad thing to do at a time when the world economy remains deeply depressed due to inadequate overall demand. By pursuing a weak-currency policy, China is siphoning some of that inadequate demand away from other nations, which is hurting growth almost everywhere. The biggest victims, by the way, are probably workers in other poor countries. In normal times, I’d be among the first to reject claims that China is stealing other peoples’ jobs, but right now it’s the simple truth.
So what are we going to do?
U.S. officials have been extremely cautious about confronting the China problem, to such an extent that last week the Treasury Department, while expressing “concerns,” certified in a required report to Congress that China is not — repeat not — manipulating its currency. They’re kidding, right?
The thing is, right now this caution makes little sense. Suppose the Chinese were to do what Wall Street and Washington seem to fear and start selling some of their dollar hoard. Under current conditions, this would actually help the U.S. economy by making our exports more competitive.
In fact, some countries, most notably Switzerland, have been trying to support their economies by selling their own currencies on the foreign exchange market. The United States, mainly for diplomatic reasons, can’t do this; but if the Chinese decide to do it on our behalf, we should send them a thank-you note.
The point is that with the world economy still in a precarious state, beggar-thy-neighbor policies by major players can’t be tolerated. Something must be done about China’s currency.
 
Last edited:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/opinion/23krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

The Chinese Disconnect




By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: October 22, 2009
Senior monetary officials usually talk in code. So when Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, spoke recently about Asia, international imbalances and the financial crisis, he didn’t specifically criticize China’s outrageous currency policy.

But he didn’t have to: everyone got the subtext. China’s bad behavior is posing a growing threat to the rest of the world economy. The only question now is what the world — and, in particular, the United States — will do about it.
Some background: The value of China’s currency, unlike, say, the value of the British pound, isn’t determined by supply and demand. Instead, Chinese authorities enforced that target by buying or selling their currency in the foreign exchange market — a policy made possible by restrictions on the ability of private investors to move their money either into or out of the country.
There’s nothing necessarily wrong with such a policy, especially in a still poor country whose financial system might all too easily be destabilized by volatile flows of hot money. In fact, the system served China well during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. The crucial question, however, is whether the target value of the yuan is reasonable.
Until around 2001, you could argue that it was: China’s overall trade position wasn’t too far out of balance. From then onward, however, the policy of keeping the yuan-dollar rate fixed came to look increasingly bizarre. First of all, the dollar slid in value, especially against the euro, so that by keeping the yuan/dollar rate fixed, Chinese officials were, in effect, devaluing their currency against everyone else’s. Meanwhile, productivity in China’s export industries soared; combined with the de facto devaluation, this made Chinese goods extremely cheap on world markets.
The result was a huge Chinese trade surplus. If supply and demand had been allowed to prevail, the value of China’s currency would have risen sharply. But Chinese authorities didn’t let it rise. They kept it down by selling vast quantities of the currency, acquiring in return an enormous hoard of foreign assets, mostly in dollars, currently worth about $2.1 trillion.
Many economists, myself included, believe that China’s asset-buying spree helped inflate the housing bubble, setting the stage for the global financial crisis. But China’s insistence on keeping the yuan/dollar rate fixed, even when the dollar declines, may be doing even more harm now.
Although there has been a lot of doomsaying about the falling dollar, that decline is actually both natural and desirable. America needs a weaker dollar to help reduce its trade deficit, and it’s getting that weaker dollar as nervous investors, who flocked into the presumed safety of U.S. debt at the peak of the crisis, have started putting their money to work elsewhere.
But China has been keeping its currency pegged to the dollar — which means that a country with a huge trade surplus and a rapidly recovering economy, a country whose currency should be rising in value, is in effect engineering a large devaluation instead.
And that’s a particularly bad thing to do at a time when the world economy remains deeply depressed due to inadequate overall demand. By pursuing a weak-currency policy, China is siphoning some of that inadequate demand away from other nations, which is hurting growth almost everywhere. The biggest victims, by the way, are probably workers in other poor countries. In normal times, I’d be among the first to reject claims that China is stealing other peoples’ jobs, but right now it’s the simple truth.
So what are we going to do?
U.S. officials have been extremely cautious about confronting the China problem, to such an extent that last week the Treasury Department, while expressing “concerns,” certified in a required report to Congress that China is not — repeat not — manipulating its currency. They’re kidding, right?
The thing is, right now this caution makes little sense. Suppose the Chinese were to do what Wall Street and Washington seem to fear and start selling some of their dollar hoard. Under current conditions, this would actually help the U.S. economy by making our exports more competitive.
In fact, some countries, most notably Switzerland, have been trying to support their economies by selling their own currencies on the foreign exchange market. The United States, mainly for diplomatic reasons, can’t do this; but if the Chinese decide to do it on our behalf, we should send them a thank-you note.
The point is that with the world economy still in a precarious state, beggar-thy-neighbor policies by major players can’t be tolerated. Something must be done about China’s currency.

Considering the US owes China a lot of money what would happen if the Chinese Yuan increased in value? If it stopped being pegged to the US$ that's similar to a variable interest rate and we know what that did to housing.

As the Yuan increased the amount owed would increase. Who would want that?
 
If it stopped being pegged to the US$ that's similar to a variable interest rate and we know what that did to housing.

Apple, nearly every currency in the world is freely floating. It's not similar to a variable interest rate loan, because currency exchange rates are not freely floating. What you are saying is similar to saying that the price of gold is similar to a variable rate interest loan.

And an increase in the value of the Yuan would not increase the amount we owed.
 
Considering the US owes China a lot of money what would happen if the Chinese Yuan increased in value? If it stopped being pegged to the US$ that's similar to a variable interest rate and we know what that did to housing.

As the Yuan increased the amount owed would increase. Who would want that?

If the yuan increased in value, other countries would be cheaper to export from, and we might actually be able to produce and export things.

I want it.

And we don't have to pay them back what we owe them. We can just refuse to and aim a nuke at them if they have a problem with it. This the way they act, we should do the same.
 
"There’s nothing necessarily wrong with such a policy, especially in a still poor country whose financial system might all too easily be destabilized by volatile flows of hot money. In fact, the system served China well during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s."

The Chinese can do whatever they want with their currency .. just as we do .. whatever we want.
 
"There’s nothing necessarily wrong with such a policy, especially in a still poor country whose financial system might all too easily be destabilized by volatile flows of hot money. In fact, the system served China well during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s."

The Chinese can do whatever they want with their currency .. just as we do .. whatever we want.

Right. We just need to draw the line on where we go along with their decisions.

When did our leadership decide that assrape from stumpy yellow dick was in the best interests of the nation. Who decided that?

Who decided to trade with them when their purposefully keeping their currencies low to corner the market on production? This was stupid.

Whoever made that decision should be strung up by his dick. Was it kissinger? What a fag.
 
Right. We just need to draw the line on where we go along with their decisions.

When did our leadership decide that assrape from stumpy yellow dick was in the best interests of the nation. Who decided that?

Who decided to trade with them when their purposefully keeping their currencies low to corner the market on production? This was stupid.

Whoever made that decision should be strung up by his dick. Was it kissinger? What a fag.

But where would we be without Chinese money?
 
We'd be with a manufacturing base.

don't worry so much, brother, you can survive without yellow dick in your mouth.

Dude, are you a child?

Are you incapable of having a discussion as if you are a man .. who isn't fascinated by the thought of other men's dicks in your mouth?

And the Chinese didn't destroy our manufacturing base. That's moronic.
 
Dude, are you a child?

Are you incapable of having a discussion as if you are a man .. who isn't fascinated by the thought of other men's dicks in your mouth?

And the Chinese didn't destroy our manufacturing base. That's moronic.

Devaluing currency is done precisely to spur exports. Learn things. You'll be smarter.
 
Devaluing currency is done precisely to spur exports. Learn things. You'll be smarter.

Capitalism and greed destroyed the US manufacturing base you idiot.

Did the Chinese send troops here and force Walmart to buy their products in droves?

Did they force the American public to buy their products?

Capitalism is ONLY concerned about the bottom line .. getting as much as you can for as little as you can. The end.

American companies are less competitive because our businesses have to factor in healthcare costs when most nations we compete against do not.

There is a plethora of reasons for the loss of US manufacturing .. but none of them can fit on a bumper-sticker .. which seems to be the source of your "logic."
 
china is doing whats good for them right now. They don't care about unions and fair pay.. they care about keeping there products cheap. Its an effective method to grow a nation until the people become enlightened.
 
The good folks at CATO, the Chamber of Commerce, and titans of Wall Street did, through their Puppets Ronnie Reagan and the other enablers of reaganomics in both parties.

Applause :hand:

Dumb people look out the window for what's wroing with them .. intelligent people look in the mirror.
 
china is doing whats good for them right now. They don't care about unions and fair pay.. they care about keeping there products cheap. Its an effective method to grow a nation until the people become enlightened.

... then once they become enlightened they can not care about unions and fair pay like we don't.
 
... then once they become enlightened they can not care about unions and fair pay like we don't.

I am totally an advocate of unions and fair pay. We needed them to build this country. Problem is when they become too powerful like some are today and have to much political control. Good first step is to outlaw PAC money for campaigns. Same with endorsements. It should be illegal to promise things or pay for an endorsement.
 
Paul is a pussy like most democrats, grow a fucking pair for christ sakes.

Housing bubble was china's fault. LOFL
They should worry about our defecit what a douchebag.
when you have tools running the ship and saying we need to buy foreign oil instead of using our own It's even more funny to blame someone else.
Paul Krugman=Toolious Maximus
 
I am totally an advocate of unions and fair pay. We needed them to build this country. Problem is when they become too powerful like some are today and have to much political control. Good first step is to outlaw PAC money for campaigns. Same with endorsements. It should be illegal to promise things or pay for an endorsement.

Unions have nowhere near the political power of corporate entities. To make that case is laughable. Wall street got a Trillion dollar bailout, hardly any strings attached. The government is lightening quick to take care of the interests of wealth. A unionized manufacturing entity like GM had to beg and jump hurdles for a 50 billion dollar loan. And what has the government done with respect to protecting or strengthening wage laws, pension protection laws, or health care for workers? Nada. Zilch. Unless one is a Sean Hannity parrot, the clear evidence in the real world is that the interests and power of wealth and capital is orders of magnitude greater than the power of workers collectively.


Glad to hear you like unions. Unions have always been the only viable entity in a capitalist market that balances the interest of profit, against the interest of workers.

Our union participation in this country is around 10%. In other democratic developed countries, I believe its near 50% or higher. And curiously, those countries have many institutions and laws that benefit workers above and beyond what we have here: mandatory vacation laws, mandatory maternity leave laws, subsidized day care, and universal health care.

What would be you solution to increase union participation in this country? Do you think it's just an accident that union participation cratered during and after the Reagan era? Or, were their deliberate policies put in place to restrict or reduce the power of collective bargaining?
 
Apple, nearly every currency in the world is freely floating. It's not similar to a variable interest rate loan, because currency exchange rates are not freely floating. What you are saying is similar to saying that the price of gold is similar to a variable rate interest loan.

And an increase in the value of the Yuan would not increase the amount we owed.

Of course an increase in the value of the Chinese Yuan would mean an increase in the amount owed. Today, 6.82 Yuan equal one US$ If the value of the Yuan increased compared to the US$, say it increased in value so that 5.12 Yuan equaled one US$ , that would mean we would owe 1.5 times as much.

In May 2009, the US owed China $772 billion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt)

The US debt would be $1158 billion because it would require $1158 billion to pay the equivalent value in Yuan.
 
Back
Top