|
< Previous Post | Next Post >
Saturday, December 30. 2006Dollar versus EuroPosted by Joerg Wolf in International Economics on Saturday, December 30. 2006
"The dollar is not what it used to be. Over the past three years it has fallen by 35% against the euro and by 24% against the yen." writes The Economist (HT: Influx):
America has habits that are inappropriate, to say the least, for the guardian of the world's main reserve currency: rampant government borrowing, furious consumer spending and a current-account deficit big enough to have bankrupted any other country some time ago. This makes a dollar devaluation inevitable, not least because it becomes a seemingly attractive option for the leaders of a heavily indebted America. Policymakers now seem to be talking the dollar down. Yet this is a dangerous game. Why would anybody want to invest in a currency that will almost certainly depreciate? (...)• In another for subscribers only article (excerpt at European Tribune), The Economist explains: "Contrary to popular perceptions, America's economy has not significantly outperformed Europe's in recent years. And to achieve this not-much-better-than parity, America has had to pump itself full of steroids." • The Foreign Policy Magazine lists the news that "Petro Powers Drop the Dollar" as one of the "Top Ten Stories You Missed in 2006:" If you thought record oil prices this year were a pain in your wallet, there’s more bad news on the horizon. The latest Bank for International Settlements quarterly report, which tracks the investment trends of oil-producing countries, indicates that Russia and OPEC countries are moving their holdings out of dollars and into euros and yen. OPEC cut its holdings in the dollar by more than $5 billion during the first and second quarter of 2006. And Russia now keeps most of its new deposits in euros instead of dollars. That decrease is swift and significant—and helps to explain why the dollar recently fell to a 20-month low against the euro and a 14-year low against the British pound. Holding dollars while other currencies gain strength means less profit for oil producers. But if they rapidly divest themselves of dollars, it may weaken the currency and push up inflation in the United States. "This new trend may be bigger trouble for the United States than high oil prices and surging Chinese exports," says Nouriel Roubini, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business. If this year’s move away from the dollar is a sign of future thinking by oil producers, the pain felt at the pump may soon be the least of our worries.The other Top Ten Stories You Missed in 2006 include "Iran and Israel Hold Secret Talks" and "United States Funds the Taliban." Endnote: "German business confidence soars" titles the Financial Times: "German business confidence has unexpectedly surged to the highest level for at least 15 years, highlighting the strength of Europe's largest economy despite a stronger euro and a big VAT hike looming next month." Will this business confidence last? I doubt it. Will the US dollar continue to be the world's main reserve currency? Probably yes, but not as dominant as it used be. What do you think?
Comments (7)
Defined tags for this entry: Economics, European Union
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
2020
- #1 - 2006-12-21 06:45 - (Reply)
Since WW2 America's military budgets have never fallen back to any pre-war levels, in other words: America's economy got used to war-time growth. Problem is that investments in tanks, carriers and nuclear weapons generate security only but no profits - and that the investment in security is always financed through bonds. If you de facto have a war-time economy you shouldn't be surprised about the consequences, large budgets, larger deficits, inflation but also larger economic growth (but you better don't have a look at volume comparisons between bond and stock markets). Comments ()
Anonymous
- #1.1 - 2006-12-24 23:16 - (Reply)
Hmmm, seems to me that I have heard this analysis before. It makes sense theoretically. Comparing the US with the continental European countries we can see that the US has spent a larger proportion of it's GDP on 'useless' military spending and a much smaller proportion of GDP on 'social investment' for at least the last 30 years. Therefore they should be burying the US by now. Comments ()
Pat Patterson
- #2 - 2006-12-24 06:13 - (Reply)
"Since WW2 America's military budgets have never fallen back to any pre-war levels..." and rightly so considering that prior to 1940 the US spent less than 1.5% of its GDP on the military. While during the war 32% of GDP was spent on the war effort. Immediately after the war less than 2.5% to 3% of GDP per year was spent until 1952-1954 when there was a short but large uptick to 10% due to the Korean War. In 1949 the creation of NATO bound the US to spend around 3% of GDP which meant that the so-called peace dividend had already been spent on the national highway systems and education had been spent. Further cuts at that point would have elicited howls of protest from the other members of NATOand an increase in the temptation to appease both the domestic hard left and the Societ Union through some kind of rapproachment. Comments ()
Pat Patterson
- #3 - 2006-12-24 06:16 - (Reply)
Last sentence should read, "Plus investment in creating the internet, GPS, and much of the benefits of the dual-use technology of the space program has not hurt the US economy." Comments ()
joe
- #4 - 2006-12-28 18:19 - (Reply)
It is always a bit difficult to respond to a comment such as 2020’s which is spun in such a way as support a point of view that totally disregards facts. Comments ()
influx
- #5 - 2006-12-28 20:27 - (Reply)
This just in: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/27/business/dollar.php Comments ()
joe
- #6 - 2007-01-04 20:06 - (Reply)
Not being from the 2020 or Gunter Glass School of journalism, it is interesting to note the facts contained in the report released last Friday by the IMF. It seems the 114 central banks which make up the IMF increased their reserve dollar holdings. This seems to be at odds with the gloom and doom from M$M and the glee of many of the comments. Comments ()
|
Contact UsEmail Joerg Wolf and Kyle Atwell at:
ar-team AT atlanticreview.org We are available for interviews, and appreciate feedback and suggestions. Subscribe and FollowWelcome!
You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW, a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations combined with commentary and analysis. More about us. Follow Atlantic Review on Facebook or on Twitter. Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter. SponsorSUPPORT THIS SITEBlogrollHot TopicsClick on one of the following links to see all Atlantic Review posts about this topic in a chronological order with the latest post on top:
Afghanistan Anti-Americanism Economics Iran Iraq Merkel Polls Terrorism Click here for the full list of all topics. |
Home - About Us - Newsletter - Transatlantic Relations - US Foreign Policy - Various RSS Feeds Designed for Atlantic Review by Carl.

