The Prosaic Economics of Currency Manipulation
I’m going to toss the two-country, two-sector, two-period model to which I referred in earlier posts. The prose version of the argument about intertemporal comparative advantage turns out to be a lot simpler than what I said earlier.
Consider two countries, one still developing and the other already developed. Let’s call them the People’s Republic of Developing and the Developed States of America. They have two products, one called “current manufactured goods” and the other called “future manufactured goods”. Which country has the comparative advantage in producing future manufactured goods? If you recognize that developing countries tend to become rapidly more productive, while developed countries only slowly increase their already high productivity, it should be clear that the People’s Republic has the comparative advantage. Equivalently, the DSA has a comparative advantage in producing current manufactured goods. In the normal course of things, therefore, you would expect the DSA to sell current manufactured goods in exchange for future manufactured goods. In other words, the DSA should run a trade surplus, and the People’s Republic should run a trade deficit. (This is in fact the normal relationship between developing and developed countries and explains, for example, why superstar developing countries like South Korea used to run large trade deficits.)
So why is it that, in today’s world, the US runs a deficit, and China runs a surplus? Some might argue that it’s demographics. The US population is growing faster than China’s, so maybe the US actually has a comparative advantage in producing future goods. There are a couple of problems with this argument. First of all, both countries have a large nontradables sector which can employ the excess working population at any particular time, so it’s not as if all those extra workers in China today, or in the US in the future, will go to waste. Second, if you take into account both slower population growth and faster productivity growth, China’s total growth rate is still much faster than the US, and almost everyone expects that situation to continue for the foreseeable future.
A better explanation, I think, is that China is over-saving. Part of the reason for this over-saving is currency market intervention, whereby the People’s Bank of China saves newly minted money in the US. Part of the reason also is that taxes are too high, which forces Chinese people to save via their government. Part of the reason is that profits are high, and businesses tend to save their profits. Part of the reason is that the insurance system, particularly health insurance, is inadequate, so people have to save extra to allow for emergencies. Part of the reason is that the pension system is inadequate, so people have to save for a worst-case retirement scenario, and since all this saving pushes down returns on assets, the worst case gets even worse.
As I’ve said before, in the simple economics of it, China’s excess saving – including what is implemented through currency manipulation – clearly benefits the US. I’ve touched on reasons why Americans – in the not-so-simple economics of it – may actually be hurt, and my intention is to go into more detail later. When I get a round to it...
Consider two countries, one still developing and the other already developed. Let’s call them the People’s Republic of Developing and the Developed States of America. They have two products, one called “current manufactured goods” and the other called “future manufactured goods”. Which country has the comparative advantage in producing future manufactured goods? If you recognize that developing countries tend to become rapidly more productive, while developed countries only slowly increase their already high productivity, it should be clear that the People’s Republic has the comparative advantage. Equivalently, the DSA has a comparative advantage in producing current manufactured goods. In the normal course of things, therefore, you would expect the DSA to sell current manufactured goods in exchange for future manufactured goods. In other words, the DSA should run a trade surplus, and the People’s Republic should run a trade deficit. (This is in fact the normal relationship between developing and developed countries and explains, for example, why superstar developing countries like South Korea used to run large trade deficits.)
So why is it that, in today’s world, the US runs a deficit, and China runs a surplus? Some might argue that it’s demographics. The US population is growing faster than China’s, so maybe the US actually has a comparative advantage in producing future goods. There are a couple of problems with this argument. First of all, both countries have a large nontradables sector which can employ the excess working population at any particular time, so it’s not as if all those extra workers in China today, or in the US in the future, will go to waste. Second, if you take into account both slower population growth and faster productivity growth, China’s total growth rate is still much faster than the US, and almost everyone expects that situation to continue for the foreseeable future.
A better explanation, I think, is that China is over-saving. Part of the reason for this over-saving is currency market intervention, whereby the People’s Bank of China saves newly minted money in the US. Part of the reason also is that taxes are too high, which forces Chinese people to save via their government. Part of the reason is that profits are high, and businesses tend to save their profits. Part of the reason is that the insurance system, particularly health insurance, is inadequate, so people have to save extra to allow for emergencies. Part of the reason is that the pension system is inadequate, so people have to save for a worst-case retirement scenario, and since all this saving pushes down returns on assets, the worst case gets even worse.
As I’ve said before, in the simple economics of it, China’s excess saving – including what is implemented through currency manipulation – clearly benefits the US. I’ve touched on reasons why Americans – in the not-so-simple economics of it – may actually be hurt, and my intention is to go into more detail later. When I get a round to it...
Labels: China, economics, exchange rates, international trade, macroeconomics
12 Comments:
They have two products, one called “current manufactured goods” and the other called “future manufactured goods”. Which country has the comparative advantage in producing future manufactured goods?
Im not sure, knzn. Isnt it the other way round. Like the way Asian countries copy production techniques from the West etc. Leaving the West to concentrate on biotech, these "future goods".
"First of all, both countries have a large nontradables sector which can employ the excess working population at any particular time, so it’s not as if all those extra workers in China today, or in the US in the future, will go to waste."
I think not. China has a tiny nontradable sector. As countries develop services rise relative to all else.
"Part of the reason for this over-saving is currency market intervention, whereby the People’s Bank of China saves newly minted money in the US"
If I give 100 dollars to a Chinese exporter. And suppose he sells them to the central bank of china in exchange for yuan. The central bank just print the yuan. Then he spends the yuan in china. And the central bank buys us treasuries.
Knzn, its semantic point, I suppose, but wheres the saving? The Chinese man spends all the yuan in China, right?
Marty Feldstein has an article in Foreign Affairs about these issues. Might be worth looking at.
mvpy:
“If I give 100 dollars to a Chinese exporter. And suppose he sells them to the central bank of china in exchange for yuan. The central bank just print the yuan. Then he spends the yuan in china. And the central bank buys us treasuries.
Knzn, its semantic point, I suppose, but wheres the saving? The Chinese man spends all the yuan in China, right?”
If the intervention is unsterilized, yes, but in practice it is partially sterilized. I would argue that, on a “velocity-adjusted” basis, it is fully sterilized. They PBoC needs to slow down domestic demand just enough to make room for the additional export production. In the end, in real terms, a certain amount of production is shifted from domestic use to export, and there is a Treasury note to offset the domestic use they’ve given up. That’s saving.
I will think about your other points. The bottom line is, though, China’s production is growing much faster than the US, so it must be getting easier for them to produce stuff, more rapidly than it’s getting easier for the US. Hence optimal trade would produce stuff in the US now, where it’s comparatively (and absolutely) easy, and in China in the future, where it will be comparatively (but not absolutely) easy.
knzn,
Thank you again knzn.
Regarding your points, you are, of course, referring to conditional convergence or catch up which is straighforward. But your analysis seems to intimate that the Chinese have higher productivity than the US. But its higher productivity growth, not productivity per se. Its only the latter thatd give them an absolute advantage in the "future goods" you're talking about.
Actually, theres another thing called "leapfrogging" that might accord with your analysis, though. Put simply, the Chinese would be able to develop new techniques whereas, in the US, we're still stuck with old methodologies etc; "stuck in our old ways", as it were. However, with a country as large as China wheres theres still much impoverishment, this doesnt seem that plausible.
Anyhow, knzn, have a nice day.
酒店喝酒,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店領檯,便服店,鋼琴酒吧,酒店兼職,酒店兼差,酒店打工,伴唱小姐,暑假打工,酒店上班,酒店兼職,ktv酒店,酒店,酒店公關,酒店兼差,酒店上班,酒店打工,禮服酒店,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店經紀,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店小姐,酒店傳播,酒店經紀人,酒店,酒店,酒店,酒店 ,禮服店 , 酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,暑假打工,招待所,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒假打工,酒店上班,暑假打工,酒店公關,酒店兼職,禮服店 , 酒店小姐 ,酒店經紀 ,酒店兼差,暑假打工,酒店,酒店,酒店經紀,酒店領檯 ,禮服店 ,酒店小姐 ,酒店經紀 ,酒店兼差,暑假打工, 酒店上班,禮服店 ,酒店小姐 ,酒店經紀 ,酒店兼差,暑假打工, 酒店上班,禮服店 ,酒店小姐 ,酒店經紀 ,酒店兼差,暑假打工, 酒店上班,酒店經紀,酒店經紀,酒店經紀
Coach handbags outlet,The relations between two elementsCheap Coach
handbag, in the composition may be considered as two aspects – Discount Coach handbags,we are like fashion
handbags and oter thingsDiscount Coach handbag,we have all kind od goods as you likeNewest Coach handbags musical instrument capable of establishing love it or you don't.LVBefore anotherexperts and designersDiscount LV Outletthey might be back in fashion again?
Louis VuittonWhen my heart was hardened and my courses constrained Cheap
Louis Vuitton Outletbut when I measured it by Your forgiveness Lord, newest Louis Vuitton 2010 It can be
incredibly Its about materialism and can make you or break you. It means getting excited about Fall and Spring. Keep it in check or it love affair.cheap rain wearthey should be kept for the future. Who knows when discount
rainwearthey should be kept for the future. Who knows when dog rain jacketsthey should be kept for the future.
Who knows when colorful rain bootsi think fashion is something you wear obvouisly, or however that word is spelled
Cheap Jeans outletthey should be kept for the future. Who knows when Diesel
Jeansthey should be kept for the future. Levis Jeansthey should be kept for the future. Wholesale Ed Hardy Jeansthey should be kept for the future.Discount Jeans outletImagine this
Certainly not!cheap abercrombie fitchthey should be kept for the future. Who knows when discount abercrombie & fitchthey should be kept for the future. discount abercrombie and
fitchthey should be kept for the future. abercrombie fitch outletthey should be kept for the future. wholesale abercrombie fitchIn fact these days, clothes are stain-resistant and even waterproof.ed hardy wholesalecheap ed hardy wholesalethey should be kept for the
future. discount ed hardy wholesalethey should be kept for the future. Who knows when wholesale ed hardythey should be kept for the future. Who knows when ed hardy outlet
I think this is one of the most interesting articles I’ve read on this subject
---
five nights at freddy's | five nights at freddy's download | fnaf
I am an avid reader who likes engaging content.
----
play game juegos kizi online and play game jogos do friv
ray ban sunglasses, cheap uggs, uggs, michael kors outlet, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet, prada handbags, ugg boots clearance, oakley sunglasses cheap, longchamp handbags, air max, michael kors outlet, jordan shoes, polo ralph lauren, gucci outlet, christian louboutin, replica watches, louboutin shoes, louis vuitton, ray ban sunglasses, polo ralph lauren outlet, kate spade outlet, burberry outlet, tiffany and co, louis vuitton outlet, louboutin, nike shoes, oakley sunglasses, air max, uggs outlet, cheap oakley sunglasses, tory burch outlet, louis vuitton handbags, ugg outlet, longchamp handbags, louboutin outlet, rolex watches, michael kors outlet, michael kors outlet online sale, burberry outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, prada outlet, tiffany and co, oakley sunglasses, chanel handbags, longchamp outlet
michael kors, air max pas cher, kate spade handbags, longchamp, true religion outlet, nike free pas cher, ralph lauren, abercrombie and fitch, coach purses, lululemon outlet online, sac burberry, louboutin, air jordan, nike air max, sac longchamp pas cher, timberland, nike roshe run pas cher, coach outlet, nike roshe, air max, true religion jeans, nike free, nike tn, polo ralph lauren, nike blazer, replica handbags, polo lacoste, oakley pas cher, ray ban sunglasses, ray ban pas cher, vanessa bruno, hogan outlet, mulberry, converse pas cher, michael kors outlet, michael kors pas cher, vans pas cher, sac hermes, true religion outlet, coach outlet store online, hollister, true religion jeans, michael kors uk, air max, new balance pas cher, nike air force, sac guess, north face, north face, hollister
ugg, sac louis vuitton, moncler, pandora charms, pandora charms, montre homme, moncler, ugg boots, barbour, moncler, ugg, moncler, supra shoes, louis vuitton uk, barbour, canada goose outlet, marc jacobs, abercrombie, converse, air max, canada goose, moncler, canada goose, juicy couture outlet, wedding dresses, hollister, juicy couture, rolex watches, sac louis vuitton, moncler, canada goose, canada goose, canada goose, moncler outlet, coach outlet store online, toms shoes, gucci, ugg pas cher, moncler, vans, links of london, canada goose uk, pandora jewelry, ugg, ray ban, canada goose jackets, converse shoes, louis vuitton, karen millen, pandora jewelry, sac lancel, louis vuitton
Great post. Thanks
Jual Kelinci
Kelinci
http://twitxr.com/johnmike879/
http://codepad.org/users/johnmike879
https://peatix.com/user/4688790/
https://www.intensedebate.com/people/johnmike879
https://www.idolbin.com/iprofile/849775967630000128
Post a Comment
<< Home