
by Chris Anderson
The IMF announced today that the dollar is “overvalued” and encouraged currency traders to keep selling the dollar. At the same time the IMF also said the Chinese renmimbi and the Japanese yen are undervalued. The IMF is now verbally trashing the dollar in an open attempt to destroy the U.S. currency and economy.
The IMF’s comments come in the wake of a US dollar that has already been steadily declining for the last 5-6 years. Despite what other economic indicators (stock market, interest rates, etc.) might show, this is not good news for Americans.
One of the biggest fears right now regarding the dollar is China’s extreme amount of control over it. Part of China’s control of the U.S. dollar stems from its large holdings of U.S Treasury Securities. If China should decide to dump a large portion of these holdings the U.S. economy would certainly feel the effects, and the IMF announcement today only encourages this.
China has also held back their own currency’s value in order to maintain itself as the factory for US companies’ goods. This has allowed the U.S. to export manufacturing to the less expensive Chinese market. But now as the Chinese currency increases they will need to pass on the price increases to U.S. companies. The IMF’s declaration of an undervalued renmimbi may now cause China to permit an accelerated increase of the currency’s value. This will also significantly hurt the U.S. economy.
Adam Kritzer explains the scenario that would unfold from a Chinese currency revaluation:
Now, if China was to suddenly revalue its currency by the 25%-30% that western policy-makers are demanding, prices on a whole host of Chinese products would jump up overnight. This would adversely affect American purchasing power and limit consumption to such an extent that the US would be in danger of slipping into recession. While the trade deficit that is the bane of American politicians’ existence might decrease in the long-term, it would skyrocket in the short-term. Besides, as many analysts have been quick to point out, there is not much overlap between Chinese and American production. Thus, a more expensive Yuan would send production to other parts of Asia, rather than back to America. While the US-China trade deficit might narrow, it would be offset by increased imbalance with the rest of Asia.
The bottom line here is that China has the power to manipulate the U.S. dollar (and therefore the US economy) at their will and pleasure, and with the recent announcement from the IMF, the world’s economic policy-setter, China has the go-ahead to do it.
My previous post regarding the U.S. dollar noted how a weak dollar has led to a string of foreign buyouts of US companies. This is a scary proposition given that the only real economic power of the U.S. comes from U.S. companies, not the government. If the companies are sold to foreign entities, our national strength and sovereignty is diminished.
Now with foreign countries like Vietnam, Qatar, Kuwait, and possibly China and Japan dumping our dollar as the standard behind their own currency, the dollar decline will only accelerate.
Charlies Blaine details What the falling dollar means for you in his recent article. Among these effects are increased prices at the pump, more expensive international travel, higher interest rates and more expensive foreign imports.
The dollar has steadily lost value compared with other major currencies since the end of 2002. Result: The euro has risen more than 70% against the dollar. The Canadian dollar, affectionately known as the loonie, is up more than 60% — to parity for the first time in more than 30 years. The yen is up about 16%.
The dollar is falling partly because Americans import way more goods than they sell abroad — especially oil — and must borrow to close the gap. Another factor:
Higher interest rates in Europe and elsewhere make those countries’ currencies more valuable.
In contrast, the falling dollar is giving U.S. stocks and exports a boost. These rises are very deceptive however, given that the boost in the stock market is merely a reflection of the inflated dollar and the rise in exports will most likely do little to benefit the rest of us (the middle class) with the dollar’s decreased buying power.
Ultimately questions are now being asked about whether the sad state of the dollar will help usher in a North American currency, the Amero, which will be touted as the only alternative to return to stability and to compete in overseas markets.
Dan Gabriel talks about how the dollar’s weakness is all part of Setting The Stage For a North American Union Currency.
A single North American currency is nothing new as the idea has been floated around for some time. In 1999 , economist and former Canadian Member of Parliament Herbert G. Grubel published his paper, “The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union.” It is interesting that he gives 2010 as the possible timetable for the introduction of the amero. This happens to coincide with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) task force’s report, “Building a North American Community,” which also states the target year of 2010 for the implementation of their recommendations in matters of economics, politics and security.
Here’s an excerpt from an article detailing the history of why the dollar is collapsing.
(written in 2002)
Why is there going to be an implosion in the US dollar? For the past 31 years, since the USA closed the “gold window” and the world embarked upon a worldwide experiment in fiat currencies (money created by Government decree), the world has existed on a US dollar standard. Every prior experiment with fiat currencies throughout history has ended in disaster because Governments could not resist creating ever-increasing quantities of their fiat currencies, to the point where citizens lost confidence in those currencies.
In this, the world’s first ever experiment in worldwide fiat currencies, the US Dollar has been the lynch-pin. It has been the currency that other countries have been prepared to accept as a “standard”, as a store of value. The result of this universal acceptance is that the USA has been exempt from the disciplines that are automatically imposed upon other countries. If country “X” runs a trade deficit, it has to somehow achieve a capital inflow to counter balance the trade deficit outflow. It generally does this by a combination of currency depreciation (which gradually assists in eliminating the trade deficit), higher interest rates or foreign borrowings.
View USD charts here:
USD vs CAD — beyond parity, USD vs EUR, USD vs GBP, USD vs CNY (CHINA)
Filed under: Economy—US Dollar | Tagged: business, declining currency, economy, US Dollar





SUBSCRIBE TO RSS FEED



[...] nyletterpress wrote an interesting post today on Continuing Fallout From the Declining US DollarHere’s a quick excerptI’ve found a few answers from some economic experts. The bottom line: the dollar iis dropping and despite what other economic indicators (stock market, interest rates, etc.) say, this is not good news for the US economy. … [...]
This is a really interesting tie-together of a lot of different economic issues that the dollar and the US are facing. Sadly, I think that the establishment of a NAMU or a similar NA alliance with the US, Canada and Mexico? would be met with a great deal of resistance from less informed nationalist factions in all of these countries. It makes a lot of sense to do a serious evaluation of the merits of developing such a union, considering the complex social, economic and cultural ties between these three countries.
I’d be interested to hear what you feel the merits of a NAU would be, engelfluglen. What is the more informed position on this?
I hope it is met with resistance by anyone informed, uninformed, or even the “nationalists” among us. I do agree however, that the pros and cons of such a union need to be examined and analyzed thoroughly on an open, mainstream, international scale. The secrecy surrounding the NAU only suggests its criminal nature.
Of course, in a perfect world where government leaders always looked out for the best interest of the people and where each individual actively worked for the welfare of the entire world, an NAU might be desirable.
But in our imperfect world of corruption and greed, we have to be constantly on guard to defend our liberties. The NAU will only amplify the power government has to overthrow freedoms to serve their own interest. Nationalism is one of the few tools of “checks and balances” that we have against widespread corruption. Did I really have to explain that?
“We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.” D&C 121:39
I am an American living in Germany, and with the benefits that I see the EU member countries are reaping, I think that NA would be stupid not to consider the trade and economic benefits that would come from a NA alliance. While Canada, Mexico and the US exist as 3 separate nations, there is a huge “transition zone” along the borders. Who hasn’t been in San Diego and thought that this could be Mexico? Or in El Paso? And the only reason I would know that I crossed into Canada would be a small, *maybe* manned checkpoint! (And the signs are in French on the bottom).
I think that a NA alliance would encourage a more favorable balance of trade for America, cut down on immigration and residency hassles, and allow businesses to legitimately look towards foreign labor sources. In the long run, a NA alliance could also lead to a more stable rate of growth on the continent by parlaying American growth into Mexico, as the Bush Administration keeps saying. I think that a unifying currency and a more mobile work force would allow for real wage increases, increased local specialization and an overall growth in our region.
@ Chris: It all depends on the structure of the overseeing body, as does anything. And I think that an NA alliance has the potential to grant individuals more freedom when it comes to work and economic choices than our current setup. Ideally, the best facets of each country could rub of on our sister countries (freedom of speech in US to Mexico, nationalized healthcare from Canada to the US….)
engelfluglen, again I would have to echo my previous comment, it would only work if the leaders were truly committed to looking out for the best interests of the people which I believe is not the case, else why the lack of public debate on the issue?
To suggest that Mexico needs the U.S. for economic growth would be to completely ignore the fact that Mexico is one of the wealthiest nations in the world. The Mexican public however is in relative poverty due to the consolidation of the wealth within the corrupt upper crest of their society. Do you really want the U.S. to merge with that? If Mexico would simply root out the corruption they would become an economic power.
I lived in Canada for a few years and I know how Canadians feel about being a separate, distinctly different sovereign nation from the U.S., and I don’t see them liking this at all.
Nationalized healthcare in Canada was laughable at times, the waiting lines, the lower quality care. I went to a Canadian healthcare facility once and was completely misdiagnosed. I ended up reading some medical books in order to diagnose myself correctly. Many of the better Canadian doctors come to the U.S. to work for better pay. A friend of mine in Canada had to come to the U.S. because the Canadian system failed to diagnose and treat a very serious gastrointestinal problem he had, which U.S. doctors were able to handle, so obviously you can see my opinion of nationalized healthcare, and I’m someone who can’t afford to regularly pay for insurance, I still prefer the U.S. system.
Dissolving the borders may create “wage increases” but at the same time the Canadian and U.S. currencies will have to decrease in order to absorb the Peso——in other words the increase in wages would be offset by a decreased currency. Over-all Americans would be less wealthy and for that reason alone (decreased currency) I see this being a bad economic move for each country except possibly Mexico.
The best facets of each country will be watered down, and at the same time each country will have to accept the worse facets of the other countries.