Saturday, December 02, 2006

The Dollar Plummets against major currencies – Is this important?

Turn on the television, read any newspaper and every opinion will be supported by the fall of the dollar. There are those who say the dollar falls because US interest rates are low while other countries have higher rates. There are those who will say the exchange rate shows that the US economy is tanking while turn the page or wait for the next news story and this idea will be refuted, forcefully declaring, “The dollar’s decline is perception, it is driven down by those who hate America, it has nothing to do with the goldilocks economy, the greatest story never told.”

The fact is that a currency is simply a representation of equity. If the country produces or saves more and keeps the same number of monetary shares (dollars in the case of the US) then the currency increases in value. If the country spends more than it produces or prints more money while equity remains the same then the value falls. This is like a stock split, more stock, each worth less.

In a country’s equity is “goodwill”. This is the same for companies. Goodwill is the value of the name, the existence of products, procedures and other intangibles. Goodwill indicates an arbitrary value for future reduced costs for an established company when compared to a new company. A simple example of Goodwill is that if Microsoft creates a new spreadsheet at the same time as Apple, Microsoft will sell more with fewer advertising dollars. This is the value of Goodwill.

Financial markets look at exchange rates based on what will happen in the future. So current exchange rates do not reflect today’s value but a value moved out about 12 months. In this way the economy affects exchange rates or more appropriately, the exchange rate reflects the perception of future tendencies. Today’s decline in the dollar could be seen as the perception that the US economy will perform poorly over the next twelve months while the trade deficit or saving’s rate will remain at the current dangerous levels. To say it simply, those with money think that in the near term future the equity value of the US will be less than it currently is.

Is this really important to you and me? Unfortunately the answer is yes. Our government, over the last 30 years, has taken us away from a production economy into a smoke and mirrors service economy. Over 60% of what we consume comes from foreign sources. As the dollar loses value our products increase in cost. While increasing labor costs are more than offset by productivity thus inflation negative, the falling dollar is inflationary. This will cause the Federal Reserve to increase interest rates, slowing consumption, creating greater instability with a great risk of StagFlation. Yes, the worse case scenario for any economy.

Our only solution to this situation is to reduce imports, recreate our infrastructure and production facilities, bite the bullet, increase taxes to pay down debt, and suffer for a few years. Reaganomics has dilapidated the wealth of our nation. Our current leaders are pushing ever harder to take this to the next level. I can only assume that since Mr. Bush’s Presidential legacy of stabilizing the Middle East did not happen that he is working on something else to be remembered by. I personally believe that the failure in the Middle East is bad but the consequences of these economic policies are significantly worse. No it is not all his fault, our country has been under attack by corporate raiders since Reagan, but it is his fault continuing on this path.

Our politicians criticize Europe for “Disastrous Economic Policy” yet their share value (the Euro) has increased 80% since 1998. The United States share value (the Dollar) has lost 50% of its value. This is not a short-term manipulation. It is a longstanding trend.

Tags:

Labels: , , , , , ,

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting, David. As I read this I wondered about the comparison with the start of the seventies. One thing I did not say when I wrote stuff here - http://belshaw.blogspot.com/2006/11/changes-in-public-administration-notes.html - was the impact of the growing US deficit.

There are many differences between the two periods. But a key lesson was just how vulnerable the US economy was to the combination of internal structural problems with a serious external shock.

One thing that I have not checked on for some time is the relative importance of foreign trade (imports plus exports) to the US economy. It used to be quite low. My feeling is that it is probably much higher now than it was then for reasons you point to.

Higher trade percentages, other things being equal, increase wealth but also make an economy more vulnerable to external shock.

9:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim I think we oversimplify when we say that commerce (trade import/export) raises the economy. I believe that balanced trade increases the economy. Export trade increases the economy but as in all things when forces are applied something gives to those who take. In this case it is net equity in the US economy because we are not balancing import/export. The US send $1 trillion every 15 months out of the US, just in trade. If we count for the $ 550 billion from foreign workers sending money home, you see our net is a problem.

But I could live with that, redistribution of income can be a good thing. The problem is that the US no longer produces any significant quantity of any physical good.

Housing and Healthcare represent just under 70% of US GDP, 18% is retail. That means that the remaining 12%, which also includes earnings from the financial institutions, covers everything from Microsoft to GE.

The US must play the bully on world scenes. It has no choice. If it does not, it will not be able to feed or clothe the population.

The US is squandering its equity. We must stop now and rebuild our internal production capabilities. The greatest terrorist attack would not be against a populated area, It would be something against our ports or shipping lanes.

With just in time, we have no inventories, no production to ramp up, no capability to do anything. We store oil for strategic purposes. I am more worried about food.

4:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

David, if you think the US is in bad shape, you should look at Australia and its balance of trade figures. I could say without exaggeration that other than primary produce exports,iron ore and minerals, Australia really doesn't have much in terms of product to export. Did you know that Australia's biggest export earner(after primary produce) is The Wiggles? Australia adopted a free trade policy back in the seventies where tariffs and import restrictions started to be gradually removed. The immediate result was local industries that had been growing in a hothouse protected environment closed down or moved production to third world countries (China, Taiwan, Vietnam) as well as Hong Kong,Korea, Indonesia.
I'm not against free trade as such. There are still countless regulations and restrictions and taxes/tariffs still in place, not to forget the disaster that is the AWB. The problem is that the government is NOT actively encouraging the growth of home grown enterprise. If they are, it's not merely enough. There is need for tax reform, there is need for less red tape. What does the government do instead? They bring in the work relations act and make unionism irrelevant. The thinking is that it's only the trade unions that have been an obstacle to Australia's economic growth - ignoring the fact that the local workforce cannot compete with third world labor. So, we are in a mess.

12:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lexcen Sounds like the common denominator is the push for globalization at all costs. It also seems that the herd mentallity is alive and well with politicians. Prodi is trying the same thing in Italy but the government will fall over his position and I doubt that the next government will attempt it.

While the buzz word is "protectionist policies", I believe that a wise manager does not follow the herd. He evaluated the upside and downside risk and attempts to mitigate the downside risk while maximizing the upside. Unfortunately politicians are not good at this so a few "good thinking people" trying to make a mark in history have exposed our economies to extreme risks.

Fortunately, those that do not like the free world do not understand the international nature of the distribution system otherwise the 1930s would seem like a fantastic economic period when confronted to what we would face.

8:57 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home