During President Obama’s high profile visit to China this week, the most frequently discussed, yet least understood, topic was how currency valuations are affecting the economic relationship between the United States and China. The focal problem is the Chinese government’s policy of fixing the value of the renminbi against the U.S. dollar. While many correctly perceive that this ‘peg’ has contributed greatly to the current global imbalances, few fully comprehend the ramifications should that peg be discarded.The common understanding is both incomplete and naive. Most analysts simply see the peg as China’s principal weapon in an economic struggle for global ascendancy. The peg, they argue, offers China a competitive advantage by making its products cheaper in U.S. markets, thus allowing Chinese firms to gobble up market share and steal jobs from U.S. manufacturers. The thought is that were China to allow its currency to rise, American manufactures would regain their lost edge, and both manufacturing firms and the jobs formerly associated with them would return. In this narrative, the struggle centers on the United States’ diminishing leverage in persuading the Chinese to lay down their unfair weaponry. It’s a sympathetic picture, but it tells the wrong story.
While the peg certainly is responsible for much of the world’s problems, its abandonment would cause severe hardship in the United States. In fact, for the U.S., de-pegging would cause the economic equivalent of cardiac arrest. Our economy is currently on life support provided by an endless flow of debt financing from China. These purchases are the means by which China maintains the relative value of its currency against the dollar. As the dollar comes under even more downward pressure, China’s purchases must increase to keep the renminbi from rising. By maintaining the peg, China enables our politicians and citizens to continue spending more than they have and avoiding the hard choices necessary to restore our long-term economic health. Read More »
Ron Paul took his anti-Fed, anti-regulatory, pro-transparency message to the CNBC Squawk Box crew today. This is another winning appearance from Ron Paul. He outlines his views fairly well and makes extremely good arguments for his side of the Fed transparency debate.
His appearance was so positive that they end up telling him that he should come on the show as a special guest (as they have from time to time) for the full 2 hours of the show. Paul makes a joke in response. Check it out below.
Ron Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve (HR.1207) has over 300 cosponsors, well above 2/3rds of the House, including every single House Republican. A few days ago an opinion piece appeared in the Wall Street Journal arguing that the Federal Reserve is already transparent enough and that a full audit would be overkill and dangerous. They write:
Economic theory and massive amounts of empirical evidence make a strong case for maintaining the Fed’s independence. When central banks are subjected to political pressure, authorities often pursue excessively expansionary monetary policy in order to lower unemployment in the short run. This produces higher inflation and higher interest rates without lowering unemployment in the long term. This has happened over and over again in the past, not only in the United States but in many other countries throughout the world.
The Fed’s independence is critical to its credibility. During the financial crisis, this credibility allowed the Fed to take extraordinary action to prevent a possible depression without triggering inflation. But eventually the Fed will have to scale back its unprecedented monetary accommodation. When it does move to tighten monetary conditions, it must be allowed to do so without political interference.
This is a tired argument at this point. The bottom line, once again, is that the Fed cannot “maintain its independence” when it is not independent to begin with. It is politicized already and it is plainly obvious to most observers without an axe to grind. The fact that this opinion piece appears in the WSJ at all is evidence in itself of this. It’s always important to consider the sources. The authors of the piece are both “in bed with the Fed”, so to speak.
Anil Kashyup was “an economist for the Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve System. He currently works as a consultant for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and serves as a member of the Economic Advisory Panel of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and as a Research Associate for the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).” His faculty bio page is here.
Frederic Mishkin is a former member of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve (2006-2008). Perhaps more telling is the following juicy bit:
In 2006, Mishkin co-authored a report called “Financial Stability in Iceland”. The report maintained that Iceland’s economic fundamentals were strong. The report was commissioned by the Icelandic Chamber of Commerce in response to critical coverage of the Icelandic economy and certain Icelandic companies in the international business media.
Iceland subsequently experienced a spectacular collapse within a year of Mishkin’s good report.
So, considering the sources, this WSJ opinion piece should be ignored and ostracized as the comments on the article are already showing.
Ron Paul appeared on MSNBC this morning to discuss the latest developments on his Federal Reserve Audit bill, which now has 310 cosponsors in the House and 30 in the Senate.
In defense of Rep. Watt, however, it’s not totally his fault. His district is the most obviously gerrymandered in North Carolina, following I-85 like a snake from Charlotte to Winston Salem. It is overwhelmingly Democratic, and his re-election has never been seriously challenged. Why should he represent the people when he is electorally invincible?
While we may not be able to hold Rep. Watt accountable, we can fight back. His attempt to eviscerate HR 1207 must be approved by the full Financial Services committee.
We can block that approval, and restore the original bill. It is especially important that each member of the Financial Services committee hear from their constituents the clear message that Rep. Watt’s proposed changes are unacceptable. And you must act now because . . .
Ron Paul questioned Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today on Capitol Hill. Both men seemed to be talking past each other a bit. Geithner reminds me of a friend who never gives you a concrete answer; thus, he is perfect for his position as tax collector. I cannot resist asking the question… what is going on with his hair? Did it always look like that or is it just due to poor video quality?
Ron Paul was interviewed by Tavis Smiley on his PBS show last night. I remember really enjoying Smiley’s questioning and demeanor throughout his questioning during one of the GOP primary debates during the campaign of 2008. A debate that some of us here at Liberty Maven attended.
In this interview they discuss the U.S. foreign policy in Afghanistan, Ron Paul’s new book “End the Fed“, and how the Fed can be audited and eventually abolished.
by John Browne – Senior Market Strategist, Euro Pacific Capital
In a small bit of Washington irony, a government panel convened this week under the guise of ensuring ‘expressive freedom’ on the Internet, while at the same time the Obama Administration put Fox News on notice that ideological rectitude would be a prerequisite for White House engagement.
This heightened wrangling with the media comes at a time when ordinary Americans are rapidly becoming disillusioned with the major parties. Their disgust is evident in innumerable web discussion sites that, for many, have replaced the major media outlets as the primary source of information. In its focus to keep control of the conversation, the Administration is seeking to disguise the fact that the ‘change’ Mr. Obama promised in the election is unlikely to materialize.
Wishful thinking of the Nobel committee aside, what we have seen thus far from Obama is simply more of what had been delivered by the prior administration.
Obama renewed our military commitment to the quagmire that is Afghanistan. But he is hesitating now that the United Nations has uncovered fraud in the recent presidential elections there. Whether or not one believes the war is winnable, this type of hollow chest-pounding did not help anyone under G. W. Bush, and will not under Obama.
Well, it was only a matter of time before this happened. Actions such as these are the reason the word “cynic” was created. Ron Paul’s HR.1207 (S.604 in the Senate) which would require a complete audit of the Federal Reserve has 303 cosponsors in the House and 30 in the Senate. Yesterday, a new bill was introduced by obviously bought and paid for lawmakers that is a “waterboarded” version of Ron Paul’s bill.
“The Federal Reserve Accountability Act” was introduced by Democrat Jeff Merkley and Republican Bob Corker yesterday. The bill takes the cake out of Paul’s bill and leaves nothing but the frosting.
The bill avoids review of the Fed’s regular lending programs, such as the longstanding discount window, and its interest-rate decisions.
So, it excludes the fundamentals, the very actions 75% of the American people say they want to know about. The attitude of these so-called representatives is reprehensible.
I’m willing to bet that Merkley and Corker have some large donors in the banking industry.
This may be expected, but it doesn’t mean those of us that support a full audit as outlined in Ron Paul’s bill should just lay down. If anything, the fight has just begun. Please call your representatives and make sure they understand the difference between the full audit and the waterboarded audit introduced yesterday. Tell them that you will not accept anything other than a full audit. It is time to take off the gloves and fight. It’s going to get dirty in DC. Well, more dirty than it already is.
This morning Ron Paul appeared for an interview on the state of the economy and the Goldman Sachs “bailout” on CNN “American Morning”.
As usual Dr. Paul defends the free market even when asked rather convoluted questions about “how much” the government should support the market. I found the interview a bit odd. In that both the host and Paul were trying to find some kind of middle ground between a government managed economy and a free market position. The common point implied that the government shouldn’t be bailing out these big Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs yet they continue to use tax payer money to do so.
Check out the video below. NOTE: The audio/video sync appears to be off as is custom on some videos processed by Youtube.
Liberty Maven
by Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of Crash Proof 2.0: How to Profit from the Economic Collapse
“, and how the Fed can be audited and eventually abolished.
by John Browne – Senior Market Strategist, Euro Pacific Capital
Follow LM on Twitter