"In the long run, we are all dead." --John M.
Fourth sorrow: "There is bankruptcy, as the United
States pours its economic resources into ever more grandiose military projects
and shortchanges the education, health, and safety of its citizens."
--Chalmers Johnson, (Sorrows of Empire)
"The moral and constitutional obligations of our
representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world,
precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to
our people." --Ron Paul, U.S. Representative (R
In 2004, it was revealed
that Saudi Prince Bandar had promised President George W. Bush that Saudi
Arabia would increase oil production and lower
oil prices in the months before
the 2004 presidential election -- to ensure that the U.S. economy was strong on
election day. This was exposed in Washington journalist Bob Woodward's 2004
book �Plan of
In the weeks
leading up to the November 7 (2006) midterm elections, there is renewed
optimism that falling oil and commodities prices, coupled with a soft housing
market, will persuade the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates next year,
and not raise them further. The bond market, while also sending messages that
inflation is not an immediate threat, seems to forecast slower economic growth
in the coming years, and possibly negative growth for one quarter, while the
risk of a recession (two consecutive quarters with negative growth) is not
negligible. The downturn in the housing market alone would account for a big
chunk of this decline in economic growth, as capital spending slows down and as
banks see their mortgage business contract.
Because of the
aggressive low interest rate policy that the Fed pursued after 2001 and because
of such financial innovations as interest-only
mortgages, construction and its related industries are one of the
three economic sectors which have created new employment since 2002, the other
two being the health and military sectors. However, as a consequence, many
over-leveraged homeowners risk being caught in a 'negative equity' trap in the
coming months, when the value of their mortgaged assets is not sufficient to
cover the amounts borrowed. In the past, such squeezing has resulted in
increased foreclosures and banking difficulties.
A downturn in
construction would have the negative impact of removing one of the three
pillars of employment growth in the U.S. Therefore, we can understand why the
Fed is weary of raising interest rates further. The Fed, in fact, is caught in
a dilemma: it cannot raise interest rates much higher for fear of creating an
unmanageable collapse in the housing market. However, the U.S. is running large
current account external
deficits ($791.5 billion in 2005). And,
because the American economy needs to draw a large amount of capital from
abroad to finance its deficit spending, American interest rates must remain
under the Bush administration,
a combination of large tax cuts and large increases
in military outlays to wage costly wars abroad have stimulated the economy, in
a Keynesian way. However, this has also pushed the U.S. budget deficit to
record current-dollar levels. In five years, from 2002 to 2006, the cumulative
federal budget deficit has exceeded one and a half trillion (1.5 trillion)
dollars. Since the rest of the U.S. economy was also in deficit, the only
exit was to borrow abroad the necessary cash. The United States is still
borrowing abroad more than $2 billion a day just to keep this binge of expenses
going. From whom? Mainly from China, Japan and some oil-rich Middle East
countries which hold tons of U.S. dollars.
As a consequence,
foreigners own an increasing share of the federal public debt, that share
presently being estimated at $2.1 trillion or about 42 percent of all the
public debt held outside the government (about $5.0 trillion in a total debt of
$8.6 trillion). These foreign holdings represent an amount that is 17 percent
of GDP ($12.3 trillion), a share that is increasing fast toward 20 percent of
GDP. Keep in mind that this percentage was less than 1.5 percent in 1970 and
less than 1 percent in 1946.
What does it all
mean for the U.S.
dollar? As a reserve currency, there is a built-in demand for the
dollar from central banks and from worldwide operators, such as oil traders,
who deal in dollars and who are big buyers of U.S. securities. These purchases
have the double benefit of shoring up the dollar and of keeping U.S. interest
rates low. That is why the foreign demand for U.S. dollars is not going to
collapse overnight, even if relative American interest rates were to stay flat
for a while. In this sense, it can be said that the U.S dollar has some
resilience. This is one of the "seigniorage"
benefits that accrue to the United States because its currency is held
abroad as a reserve currency. In the short run, measured in months, the U.S.
dollar should continue its rebound against other major currencies, as long as
oil and commodities prices are soft and as long as U.S. interest rates remain
firm. However, in the longer run, measured in years, the dire external
financial situation of the United States should begin to weigh more heavily on
against which the U.S. dollar is expected to decline is the Chinese
yuan. Since July 2005, the yuan tracks a
basket of currencies that includes the yen, the euro, the Hong Kong dollar and
the South Korean won. Previously �pegged� to the dollar at the rate of
about eight yuans for one dollar, the yuan has begun a slow appreciation toward
the dollar and stands at a value of 7.9 yuans for one dollar, or at a price of
about 12.6 US cents.
But, at this rate,
the yuan is way undervalued and should be revalued substantially more to
reflect China's huge external trade surpluses. Indeed,
China has accumulated foreign exchange reserves in excess of $950 billion, which are invested roughly
three-quarters in U.S. Treasury bills and other dollar-denominated assets, the
rest being invested in other currencies. However, the Chinese government has
expressed a wish to
diversify somewhat its pool of foreign exchange reserves toward the euro or
the yen and even increase its strategic stocks of oil.
In 2005, China
attempted to spend some of its U.S. dollars to buy an American oil company, Unocal,
for about $18.5 billion. However, the Chinese offer was unceremoniously
rebuffed by the U.S. Congress.
A similar fate was
met by Dubai-owned Dubai Ports World in early 2006, when it bought a British
company (Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co or P&O for $6.8
billion) that happened to manage six U.S. ports. The company was forced to
disinvest itself from its American interests by the U.S.
Congress. The message sent to foreign lenders was loud and clear: if
you accumulate American dollars, deposit the
money in our banks or buy U.S. government securities (Treasury
bills), but do not attempt to invest them in income-generating real
American industrial assets. How long will that scam last? Nobody knows. But, it
most likely won't last forever.
question is how long will confidence in the U.S. dollar hold in the face of all
these factors. If you add the widespread unpopularity that
the Bush administration has bestowed upon the United States around the world,
it is more likely than not that the value of the U.S. dollar, after the current
show of strength, will continue eroding in the coming years. A lower currency
translates into more imported inflation and makes it difficult to maintain low
interest rates. The stage would then be set for a bout of stagflation,
that is to say creeping higher inflation and slower economic growth.
Rodrigue Tremblay is
professor emeritus of economics at the University of Montreal and can be
reached at rodrigue.tremblay@
yahoo.com. He is the author of the book 'The
New American Empire'. Visit his blog site at www.thenewamericanempire.com/blog.