When China Exports, Everyone Pays

by: Paul Krugman, Krugman & Co. | Op-Ed

When China Exports, Everyone Pays
(Image: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Eastfrisian, helen.2006)

Recently, many commentators have equated recent European complaints about the weak American dollar with American complaints about the undervalued Chinese renminbi.

Take, for example, commentary published Oct. 14 in the Financial Times examining how expected quantitative easing by the United States Federal Reserve lowered the value of the dollar against the Chinese renminbi and European currencies. The editors wrote: "A senior European policy-maker, who asked not to be named, said a further aggressive round of monetary easing by the United States Federal Reserve would be 'irresponsible' as it made United States exports more competitive at the expense of its rivals."

In other words, this unnamed European policy-maker is essentially saying to the United States: How dare you act to protect your economy from deflation and double-digit unemployment? By doing so, you make our inappropriate austerity policy even more destructive!

This is a false equivalence, which is obvious if you think about the basics of this situation.

What the Fed is trying to do through quantitative easing, or releasing more money into the economy, is to foster an expansionary monetary policy and increase productivity in the face of a depressed economy and threats of deflation. What else can the United States do? Now, it is true that one effect of that policy, if it isn't matched abroad, is a weaker American dollar — but that is not the ultimate goal.

In fact, while the overall effect of quantitative easing in America is expansionary in the United States, the outcome is actually ambiguous for the rest of the world. Why? Because the weaker dollar tends to reduce the United States's trade deficit, but then a stronger American economy tends to increase the deficit, so the net effect is uncertain.

Now compare this with China's situation. First, China is pursuing a weak-yuan policy. And it is not fighting deflation; it is fighting inflation, so the undervaluation of its currency has to be accompanied by restrictive credit policies domestically. (As if to illustrate my point about the problems with this argument, China's central bank increased interest rates on Oct. 19.) The overall effect of the latter move is therefore to reduce, not increase, world demand to protect China's economy from overheating — and the overall effect of both policies on foreign economies is clearly negative.

So, basically, the United States is pursuing a policy that increases overall world demand; however, a side consequence of this policy is a weaker dollar. China is pursuing a weak-yuan policy, and to counter the inflationary domestic effects of that policy, it is pursuing a contractionary domestic monetary policy, reducing overall world demand.

The policies of these two nations are not at all equivalent.

The Fed is moving in the right direction, both in terms of American interests and for the sake of the world as a whole. China is beggaring its neighbors, which in this case means everyone else, and the world is worse off.

BACKSTORY: Marketplace Intervention

In mid-October, China's central bank unexpectedly raised interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point. It was the first such increase in three years — part of an effort to encourage personal savings and stop prices from soaring.

While most of the world's economies are trying to jump-start productivity and steer clear of deflation, which in some countries is causing declines in the prices of goods and services, China's problems are of a different order. A decade of unprecedented high growth has pushed the nation into a so-called inflationary zone.

Food and property prices are rising rapidly in China, and wages are not keeping up. In September, the nation's consumer price index — an inflation aggregate that weighs the average costs of goods — was up 3.6 percent compared to a year ago.

The rise is attributed mostly to escalating food prices, which have gone up by 19 percent over the last three years, and by 8 percent in September of this year alone.

So the rationale behind China's interest rate hike was simple: Higher rates equal less spending, which means prices won't be driven up further.

This should also help to cool the property market, which has been overheated by low interest rates and investor speculation. Many investors had turned to real estate as a financial safe haven, not wanting to see their interest-rate returns eaten away by inflation.

The International Monetary Fund applauded China's monetary tightening in October, and has gone so far as to call for more of it.

Chinese officials announced in June that they would begin to loosen controls over exchange rates, and through October the currency has slightly increased in value, by less than 3 percent. Still, economists contend the renminbi is undervalued by about 20 percent.

Truthout has licensed this content. It may not be reproduced by any other source and is not covered by our Creative Commons license.

Paul Krugman joined The New York Times in 1999 as a columnist on the Op-Ed page and continues as a professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University. He was awarded the Nobel in economic science in 2008.

 Mr Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes, including "The Return of Depression Economics" (2008) and "The Conscience of a Liberal" (2007). Copyright 2010 The New York Times.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



I think Paul Krugman

I think Paul Krugman generally has this right, except that with worldwide excess productive capacity, we are entering a period of competitive currency devaluations among nations. The U.S. is probably doing what is immediately necessary, but there will be unintended consequences. In general, every nation wants to get richer (or at least out of debt) by exporting, and devaluing one's currency is a ready means to further that goal. The fiat currency race to the bottom has begun.



I agree with everything you

I agree with everything you say. My question is: how does this translate into (a) lower unemployment and (b) job creation? Until we fix the education provided to the next generation(s) of workers, we'll crank out unqualified people without the skills either to innovate or to make a creative contribution to an existing business as an employee.
Let me know your thoughts!



Another day, another article

Another day, another article full of off-the-wall Krugmania.

The beggar-thy-neighbour policies that the US is clearly pursuing is to weaken the dollar to a) stealth default on its mountainous debts and b) put itself in a more competitive position when it comes to exports.

As for Americans now being 'world improvers' by printing money, this is absurd. No-one is ever called an idiot by saving too much, and no-one is ever called clever by spending beyond their means, fabricating ever more complex lies (i.e. QE2, soon to be QE3, QEx) to cover up a farce, wrapped in joke, inside insanity.

I pose to you a question, Mr Krugman: Tell me, please, which average American is better off with the dollar at all time lows against various countries worldwide? It isn't, at least not in a reality outside of Krugman's stinking, suffocating self-justificating santiy-deficient sinkhole. When the dollar hits all time lows agaisnt currencies across the board - Japanese Yen, Swiss Franc, Aussie Dollar, etc etc - Americans are, yes you guessed it, WORSE off.

This man is dangerous, as is his partner in crime Helicopter Ben. Between them they are capable of bringing down any credibility America and the dollar has left.



I think Mr. Krugman wants a

I think Mr. Krugman wants a job at the Federal Reserve.



Phil doesn't bother with any

Phil doesn't bother with any facts, he just spouts off "what everybody knows" statements and calls people names. Krugman has a Nobel. What you got, "Phil"?



I find Micheal Hudson's

I find Micheal Hudson's perspective on Quantitative easing, at Global Research, far more truthful and interesting than Krugman piece.



Money is not the problem.

Money is not the problem. Trade is the problem. "Free trade" is killing us all. We need to have FAIR TRADE across the board . We cannot get jobs in the US and elsewhere because the corporations and money managers have outsourced our jobs and destroyed our workforce to compete because of the so-called cheaper labor in undeveloped nations. Until that imbalance is dealt with in an honest way, we are doomed to capitulating to the corporate crooks currently bleeding our economy to death.

Even as we read and write this, Democrats are still thinking of working "with" Republicans! If our Senate does not allow the tax cuts on the wealthy to expire, the next thing will be raising taxes on the poorest of the poor as well as the somewhat wealthier middle class. What a prospect. How do we get out of that Mr K?



O.k. lets get this

O.k. lets get this straight. Every time the FED prints money and "releases" it into the economy, guess what? The dollar buys less and less. The more paper in the system, the less its worth. The FED has been doing this since we got off the gold and silver standard. Simply printing and circulating more paper. The dollar now buys 1/3 what it would buy at the end of WW2. This is due to the double whammy of fiat paper money and the over printing of it. You work harder for your dollars but prices have out grown earnings for 7 decades by far.



roger - I'm not sure which

roger - I'm not sure which are these 'everybody knows' statements are. Englighten us.

And as for facts, what are you looking for? The fact that your purchasing power is now the lowest it has been in the history of all those wonderful green dollars that you own? The fact that feeding dollars through the economic fan isn't preventing 10% unemployment? A continued decline in house prices? Record government debts? Record imports? Record numbers of people on food stamps?

Have you considered that all the facts above could, in fact, be exacerbated by these misguidedly pernicious efforts?

To your other point: Does someone having a Nobel prize mean that everything they ever said, say and will say ad infinitum is definitively right? That all that mutter in contrast to their views are definitively wrong? Before Krugman had won the prize, presumably you could have used that very argument against him?!!



I'm not too sure why

I'm not too sure why Truthout runs Corporate Klugman. This is more economic nonsense and gratuitous China-bashing. And he's got a Nobel? Plenty of clowns before him have got Nobels, and these are the guys that got us into this mess in the first place. Economic orthodoxy has proved punishing to billions of people, and Noble winners have been the perennial champions of it.



I wonder if Mr Krugman would

I wonder if Mr Krugman would read this:
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/fan20/English
As an assessment of Chinese policy, it interests itself in what he leaves out - the people. Eocnomists always just discuss abstract economic numbers (and sometimes corporate interests). If I'm going to a Nobel winner, I think I'll stick with Stiglitz, who tends not to do that.



The guys that got us into

The guys that got us into this mess are the guys that believe in deregulation, trickle down economics (cut taxes for the rich) and small government. The fact is middle class income and buying power had increased growth from after WW2 until Reagan excessively deregulated the financial industry. Afterwards we had major banks failures on every Republican watch and middle class income and buying power has gone down. Deregulation and disproportional tax cuts have only made the wealthy even wealthier with out any benefit to our society.



According to Krugmanspeak,

According to Krugmanspeak, high prices are good, low prices are bad. Kruggy the court jester would have us believe that shifting more production to the US is better for all, when, it is obvious that Americans are fat, lazy, and corrupt, while the Chinese, are considerably more hard working and inspired.



AMERICA IS COMMIE

AMERICA IS COMMIE CONTROLLED
A national crime syndicate controls American political whoredom. From the Wilsonian Presidency unto the Obama administration,the pro-Marxian precepts of social engineering, through public and private education, has been some what infiltrated with a line of preselected individuals, of whom, as a class, undermine our Republic via being wire pulled, by an invisible government of universal pseudo religious philosophies, of Oriental occidentalism. This eastern world consortment of multiple gods has a contrast to western civilization,in operation for thousands of years. And now, our Republican way of existence is to be litterally hammered out of influence, as now having authority invested within the United States Constitution.
The commie perception is to never take one step backwards, in subduing all people who give in step by step. The first move was to get absolute control of the national news media. This has been accomplished. Education was to be controlled and to tuckered away, as a tool through mind bending,on procedural liberalism.



My main concern with the

My main concern with the Fed's actions stem from a side effect of the t-bill purchasing plan in which they intend to advertise in advance of their t-bill buys so that investors may buy them up from the Treasury dept at the going sale rate and sell them to the Fed at full price. This has the net effect of enriching the buyers at the top of the market who can afford to make large purchases of t-bills, so once again enriching the already wealthy, while some argue passing on the long term debt to the government itself.



Why does Krugman refer to

Why does Krugman refer to the yuan, while many writers talk about the Chinese currency as the renminbi?



"Until we fix the education

"Until we fix the education ...we'll crank out unqualified people ...."

This assertion by firms in the US that there are not enough qualified people is simply untrue. There are plenty of qualified individuals who are ready, willing, and able to do what is required, but most big firms have been reaping what they sow in terms of frozen wages.

They kept wages frozen, and then claimed to be "wronged" when their hires leave after a year or two, and started to refuse to hire labor that wasn't canned, and round and round it goes.

Until they're willing to give raises to people as they gain in experience and productivity within the firm, they will get a raise the only way they can, but hopping jobs and asking for higher starting salaries, which are usually the same as their ending salaries.



What a pile of cap this

What a pile of cap this article is from someone who is out of touch with reality. Gee..Paul..maybe we should focus on cutting our out of control spending on useless wars. Trillion of dollars on wars spent for the benefit of big oil and the Israeli lobby..but not for the American people. Or the bailout of wall street firms and Banks that should have been allowed to fail and whose CEO's should be in jail for the fraud that they perpetrated. No matter what the FED cartel does the US will sink like the titanic unless we cut useless spending, jail those responsible for the financial fraud, and get policies in place to reward savers and not spenders. Remember Paul..he who has the money rules..and today China has all the money. Not because they stole it or used their military to expand their empire and steal others treasure, but because they are beating us at out own game, Capitalism, and doing it better.



bubbling smelly crap

bubbling smelly crap



Mr. Krugman, I never

Mr. Krugman,

I never understand this particular blind spot of yours.

The entire reign of Greenspan & Bernanke and the consequences to the U.S. economy should demonstrate the utter failure of monetary easing untethered to a strong fiscal policy designed to direct the extra dollars to productive, job creating domestic investment. Without that what you get, and Japan should be the guide, is empty speculation - a stock market out of touch with reality, a thriving carry trade and international tensions. Banks are not capable of directing real investment when they are left free to make money with little or no risk by programmed trading and seeking the advantage of the carry trade. The economy you get is what we currently have.

I know that you are a supporter of strong fiscal policy. But you miss the fact without it all the Fed can do is create the world you see now.



Scrolling through this

Scrolling through this article and the comments that follow show you the irrationality and miseducation of people at all levels. Krugman wants a race to the bottom, his critics want to defund the government.

Krugman asks, "what else can the United States do?"

TARIFFS, motherfucker!

You don't like being flooded with Chinese imports? Tax them until our manufacturers can compete without destroying our living standards. You may remember this concept from when you were being trained as an economist.

While you're at it, learn something from the Chinese, who are following the American tradition – keep speculators the fuck out of your economy, and build some infrastructure! Bankrupt Wall Street's derivatives, kill the futures markets by supporting producers, protect real banks and corporations from hot money and stock market pressures, and negotiate fixed-rate exchange agreements with China, Russia, India and other real nations.

We've had this fight many times throughout history, and it just takes someone with balls (Hamilton, Lincoln, FDR) to put the program in action. While we're at it, we can cut funding and ties to Israel and Britain, and start forming healthy relationships to countries that want to be our partners and not our parasites.



I can't believe people are

I can't believe people are saying unemployment is only 10%. From the many homeless and jobless in my state, I'd say it's closer to 20%. I think the gov't and media are really glossing over how bad the unemployment really is.



Paul Krugman is a moron to

Paul Krugman is a moron to the nth degree.



An interesting article, and

An interesting article, and I now know more than I did before I read it. Of course, I don't have a PhD in economics, therefore I am not qualified to argue about its main premises. I do know that Krugman's books written several years ago have proved to be more correct than not.



I really don't care about

I really don't care about the economic, monetary & other tricks which abound in the fiat money, fractional reserve various rip off schemes. Even a war with Iran which is seeming less out of the question than I once thought which would destroy the entire world economy does not really scare me because money, economics, law, trade etc. are man made systems that go up & down. My concern & at 67 I don't know why I care is the catastrophic climate change which is rapidly approaching the tipping point where the feedback mechanisms will overwhelm anything we puny humans can do & no one in a position where they could do something is doing anything substantiative. Utter madness, made worse with the election of Republic-deniers to the house. We have gone from a slim chance of stopping the climate mess to essentially zero chance. Yes, I know the rich & even the middle class will just pay more for AC but water & food will be in short supply & many will live lives of abject misery; wars over water & food & land(there will be less) will break out & although I know this is good for business, especially American business in the short run, it will be worse in the long run. Truly, woe is me!



"I really don't care about

"I really don't care about the economic, monetary & other tricks which abound in the fiat money, fractional reserve various rip off schemes."

Fractional Reserve is how banking has worked since its inception in the first cities created by man. Without it, there is no incentive to loan, and without the money multiplier effect from it there will be no means of growing the economy.

The online campaigns against fractional reserve lending are spurious at best, and I've done some leg-work and traced them to neo-nazi front sites.



Its about "free trade" just

Its about "free trade" just like others said. I don't know if you saw Donald Trump on the news the other night but he was bang on about China's flooding our market with goods that are sub-par but that we cannot price-compete with. We need immediate tariffs on countries that do not set their currencies on the open market and that volume/population and governmental systems must be taken into account when evaluating tariffs. Allowing a country that does not conform to monetary standard OR pay its citizens at the same rate as our own to DUMP product onto our market at ridiculously cheap prices is criminal.



Why does this site publish

Why does this site publish articles written by lackeys of the same corporate interests that it complains about? Quantitative easing is little more than a scam to give backdoor bailouts to the big banks without having to go through Congress.
 
1) The big U.S. banks have huge quantities of mortgage-backed securities that are worth much less than their book value, and they want to get rid of these toxic assets.
 
2) They convince the Federal Reserve to buy these toxic assets at book value.
 
3) The Federal Reserve creates hundreds of billions of dollars out of thin air to buy up all of these toxic assets. The public is told that all of this quantitative easing is necessary to stimulate the U.S. economy.
 
4) The big banks are re-capitalized and have gotten massive amounts of bad mortgage securities off their hands, the Federal Reserve has found a way to pump hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of dollars into the economy, and most of the American people are none the wiser, even tho they have now assumed the loss in value of all those toxic assets.
 
And, why does Krugman (and every other talking head) keep pretending that the CPI has any relation to the actual inflation/deflation as experienced by the public? By excluding energy and food, it's useless, as these two categories make up a large percentage of people's daily expenses. If these two categories are factored in, we are experiencing moderate inflation (4-6%). Causing more inflation to fight the non-existent deflation will result in high inflation.
 
The Democrats shouldn't feel bad about the beating they took in the recent election; thanks to Demublican economic policy, in two more years our economy is going to be severely tanking again (it never really improved), the Republicans will be blamed, and the Democrats will get their majority back. Sadly, they will continue the same disastrous course that the government has been on for the last 90 years.
 
 



Krugman is a corporate

Krugman is a corporate propagandist and the Board at Truthout is highly suspect. Just where is the new Truthout Board of Directors coming from?... and who is funding their salaries... directly or indirectly.



Krugman may be a corporate

Krugman may be a corporate ally but he is primarily a Keynesian, neo-liberal propagandist. That is why truthout loves him so much. But yes, both power centers - capital and unions - want to maintain the status quo, which is what he stands for.

Krugman finally asks, "what else can the US do"? Even though he means it purely rhetorically because he is brainwashed. The alternative policy is to allow the debt-deleveraging that wants to happen and ultimately cannot be prevented. How about some honest austerity measures? Going back to self-reliance and focusing on allowing an (honest) equity-based monetary system rather than a (dishonest) manic debt-based one.

Only problem is, government - whose primary purpose should lie in protecting the consumer/ citizen, but in fact exists to accumulate power - would lose some of its control and therefore this does not suit its purposes.

Nevertheless, we will see the limits of Krugman's approach within the next few years, even though he will cry uncle (Uncle Sam), claiming that his views are not repudiated b/c Bernake was not extreme enough!



You guys who keep crying

You guys who keep crying about fair trade and "so called cheaper labor" are incredibly delusional. You know how poor countries like China and India really are? There will ALWAYS be much cheaper labor in the developing world. This isn't some kind of make believe trick.

As for Donald Trump, he's a moron. All you whiners who cry about poor quality cheap crap from China--really? Name the product. You just like shooting your fat mouth off. The truth is, they have a ton of highly skilled workers who work hard and don't cry and complain all the time. If the product was so bad, people wouldn't buy it. Who in the right mind says to themselves, "these socks are crap, but since it's cheap, I'll buy it anyway"?