The anticipated
intervention has been widely criticized, but for all the wrong reasons.
Fed chairman Ben Bernanke knows that adding another $1 to $1.5 trillion
to bulging bank reserves will likely have little effect on aggregate
demand. Nor will it lower unemployment now hovering at 9.7%.
It will,
however, send a message to trading partners (re: China) that the Fed is
serious about reducing destabilizing trade imbalances that siphon-off
domestic stimulus, increase unemployment and keep the dollar perilously
overvalued. In other words, the Fed's action is the first volley in what
is likely to be a protracted currency war that leads to the final
demise of Bretton Woods 2.
Here's a summary of this weekends IMF meetings of Finance Ministers in New York from Bloomberg:
"Leaders
of the world economy failed to narrow differences over currencies as
they turned to the International Monetary Fund to calm frictions that
are already sparking protectionism….
“Global
rebalancing is not progressing as well as needed to avoid threats to
the global economic recovery,” Geithner said. “Our initial achievements
are at risk of being undermined by the limited extent of progress toward
more domestic demand-led growth in countries running external surpluses
and by the extent of foreign-exchange intervention as countries with
undervalued currencies lean against appreciation.”
So, what does that mean in plain English?
It
means the US is determined to stave off deflation by forcing China to
let its currency appreciate. It also means that the Obama administration
finally realizes that its attempts to reduce unemployment or spark a
recovery will continue to fail as long as stimulus is effectively
negated by the surge in imports.
Here's a blurp from Angry Bear which explains what's going on:
"Last
quarter real domestic consumption rose at a 4.9% annual rate. That was
an increase of $162.6 billion( 2005 $). But real imports also increased
$142.2 billion (2005 $). That mean that the increase in imports was
87.5% of the increase in domestic demand.
To
apply a little old fashion Keynesian analysis or terminology, the
leakage abroad of the demand growth was 87.5%. It does not take some
great new "freshwater" theory to explain why the stimulus is not working
as expected, simple old fashioned Keynesian models explain it
adequately." (Trade in the national accounts, angrybearblog.com)
So,
the stimulus--that would have been generating jobs and demand within
the US--is being exported to countries that want to keep the dollar
propped up to maintain the present arrangement, that is, they want to
continue to expand their manufacturing base and keep unemployment low
while the US languishes in a permanent recession.
Bretton
Woods 2, by the way, is the arrangement under which the US willingly
runs large current account deficits with the assurance that trade
partners would recycle the proceeds into US Treasuries, Agencies and
equities. Naturally, this turned out to be a real boon for Wall Street
as surplus capital has helped to fuel massive bubbles in all manner of
garbage bonds that enriched the principles at the big brokerage houses.
So, what is Bernanke's strategy?
First,
we have to understand what the Fed is doing and the effect it's having
on global finances. Here's an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal which
provides a good summary:
"Emerging-market
economies from South Africa to Brazil to Thailand are bearing the brunt
of easy-money policies in the developed world, as money flows to
higher-yielding markets, pumping up currencies and complicating economic
policy.
The
Fed is flooding markets with liquidity, Japan is flooding the markets
with liquidity and the U.K. is flooding markets with liquidity. The
trouble is, a lot of that money isn't staying where it was put," says
David Carbon, an economist at DBS in Singapore.
Investors
borrow money at near-zero interest rates in the struggling economies of
the developed world, and shuttle it to countries such as Indonesia,
Brazil and South Africa, where interest rates are higher and growth
rates more robust....
"The
current policies of the developed countries are leading to very
significant capital flows into some of the emerging countries. This is
putting upward pressure on exchange rates," said South African Finance
Minister Pravin Gordhan, chairman of the Group of 24." (Easy Money
Churns Emerging Markets, Alex Frangos, Wall Street Journal)
Bernanke's
zero-rate policy and the prospect of ongoing rounds of quantitative
easing have put finance ministers everywhere in a frenzy. Some
countries--notably South Korea and Brazil--have already taken steps to
slow capital flows. As yet, the effectiveness of these measures remains
unknown.
Naturally,
capital seeks the best rate of return, which is why it is exiting the
US (which is in the throes of a long-term slowdown) for greener pastures
in China and emerging markets. That movement drives up the value of
local currencies and creates lethal asset-price bubbles. The Fed is
intensifying this process (via QE) to break the back of Bretton Woods 2
and force the dollar down. Eventually, the flood of liquidity will force
foreign trade partners to accept a cheaper dollar thus restoring US
export competitiveness and a way out of recession without raising
workers wages. (The Fed's approach is grounded in class warfare.)
Tim
Duy sums it up in a brilliant post that shines a light on the Fed's
real objectives. The article should be read in its entirety, but here's a
brief clip:
"The
time may finally be at hand when the imbalances created by Bretton
Woods 2 now tear the system asunder. The collapse is coming via an
unexpected channel; rather than originating from abroad, the shock that
sets it in motion comes from the inside, a blast of stimulus from the US
Federal Reserve. And at the moment, the collapse looks likely to turn
disorderly quickly. If the Federal Reserve is committed to quantitative
easing, there is no way for the rest of the world to stop to flow of
dollars that is already emanating from the US. Yet much of the world
does not want to accept the inevitable, and there appears to be no
agreement on what comes next. Call me pessimistic, but right now I don't
see how this situation gets anything but more ugly." (The Final End of
Bretton Woods 2?, Tim Duy, Fed Watch)