The New York Times / May 14, 2009

Op-Ed Contributor
The Almighty Renminbi?
By NOURIEL ROUBINI

THE 19th century was dominated by the British Empire, the 20th century
by the United States. We may now be entering the Asian century,
dominated by a rising China and its currency. While the dollar’s
status as the major reserve currency will not vanish overnight, we can
no longer take it for granted. Sooner than we think, the dollar may be
challenged by other currencies, most likely the Chinese renminbi. This
would have serious costs for America, as our ability to finance our
budget and trade deficits cheaply would disappear.

Traditionally, empires that hold the global reserve currency are also
net foreign creditors and net lenders. The British Empire declined —
and the pound lost its status as the main global reserve currency —
when Britain became a net debtor and a net borrower in World War II.
Today, the United States is in a similar position. It is running huge
budget and trade deficits, and is relying on the kindness of restless
foreign creditors who are starting to feel uneasy about accumulating
even more dollar assets. The resulting downfall of the dollar may be
only a matter of time.

But what could replace it? The British pound, the Japanese yen and the
Swiss franc remain minor reserve currencies, as those countries are
not major powers. Gold is still a barbaric relic whose value rises
only when inflation is high. The euro is hobbled by concerns about the
long-term viability of the European Monetary Union. That leaves the
renminbi.

China is a creditor country with large current account surpluses, a
small budget deficit, much lower public debt as a share of G.D.P. than
the United States, and solid growth. And it is already taking steps
toward challenging the supremacy of the dollar. Beijing has called for
a new international reserve currency in the form of the International
Monetary Fund’s special drawing rights (a basket of dollars, euros,
pounds and yen). China will soon want to see its own currency included
in the basket, as well as the renminbi used as a means of payment in
bilateral trade.

At the moment, though, the renminbi is far from ready to achieve
reserve currency status. China would first have to ease restrictions
on money entering and leaving the country, make its currency fully
convertible for such transactions, continue its domestic financial
reforms and make its bond markets more liquid. It would take a long
time for the renminbi to become a reserve currency, but it could
happen. China has already flexed its muscle by setting up currency
swaps with several countries (including Argentina, Belarus and
Indonesia) and by letting institutions in Hong Kong issue bonds
denominated in renminbi, a first step toward creating a deep domestic
and international market for its currency.

If China and other countries were to diversify their reserve holdings
away from the dollar — and they eventually will — the United States
would suffer. We have reaped significant financial benefits from
having the dollar as the reserve currency. In particular, the strong
market for the dollar allows Americans to borrow at better rates. We
have thus been able to finance larger deficits for longer and at lower
interest rates, as foreign demand has kept Treasury yields low. We
have been able to issue debt in our own currency rather than a foreign
one, thus shifting the losses of a fall in the value of the dollar to
our creditors. Having commodities priced in dollars has also meant
that a fall in the dollar’s value doesn’t lead to a rise in the price
of imports.

Now, imagine a world in which China could borrow and lend
internationally in its own currency. The renminbi, rather than the
dollar, could eventually become a means of payment in trade and a unit
of account in pricing imports and exports, as well as a store of value
for wealth by international investors. Americans would pay the price.
We would have to shell out more for imported goods, and interest rates
on both private and public debt would rise. The higher private cost of
borrowing could lead to weaker consumption and investment, and slower
growth.

This decline of the dollar might take more than a decade, but it could
happen even sooner if we do not get our financial house in order. The
United States must rein in spending and borrowing, and pursue growth
that is not based on asset and credit bubbles. For the last two
decades America has been spending more than its income, increasing its
foreign liabilities and amassing debts that have become unsustainable.
A system where the dollar was the major global currency allowed us to
prolong reckless borrowing.

[Here's the rub. The US must put its "financial house in order,"
including the ending of bubbles and the prevention of the recurrence
of the kind of bubble economy that prevailed up to 2006-7. But without
such a bubble economy, the stagnancy of mass consumer spending -- due
to stagnant wages -- would drag the US economy down. With stagnant
wages (relative to labor productivity), the only way that we can see
mass consumer spending is via credit expansion, based on a bubble of
some sort (or significant reduction in the standards of consumer
credit issuance). The only way that we can see mass consumer spending
buoying up the US economy is via "reckless borrowing." But, as Roubini
says, such reckless borrowing threatens to end the special and exalted
reserve status of the US$....

[The stagnancy of US wages is based on the one-sided class war, of
course, but it also involves the "creep to the bottom." US workers who
produce internationally tradeable goods are competing with the low
wages in China and elsewhere. The stagnancy of these wages pulls other
wages down, too. The political economy seems destined to lead to (1)
US stagnation and (2) the end of the privileged status of the US$.]

Now that the dollar’s position is no longer so secure, we need to
shift our priorities. This will entail investing in our crumbling
infrastructure, alternative and renewable resources and productive
human capital — rather than in unnecessary housing and toxic financial
innovation. This will be the only way to slow down the decline of the
dollar, and sustain our influence in global affairs.

[The circle can be squared, perhaps, if the government does the kind
of investment that Roubini proposes. But to be successful, this would
also involve massive government deficits. It's not just the
supply-side stimulus that he wants that's needed. It's also
demand-side stimulus.]

Nouriel Roubini is a professor of economics at the New York University
Stern School of Business and the chairman of an economic consulting
firm.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
-- 
Jim Devine / "If heart-aches were commercials, we'd all be on TV." -- John Prine
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to