2010-10-20 23:59:27frank

[經濟] 如何避免各國捲入貨幣戰爭

經濟學人的論點是雖然有貨幣戰爭的態勢,但是這些小摩擦還稱不上是貨幣戰爭。但是也的確有三大"戰場":中國不願讓人民幣大幅升值(短時間內),美國印鈔票刺激經濟,開發中國家對歐美熱錢流入的反制。

今天央行總裁到立法院備詢,也特別針對外匯波動與外國資金流入作說明,我也將相關新聞摘錄於下,也加上一些自己的看法。

在思考這可能的貨幣戰爭時,直覺上,如果人民幣升值不就解決了大半的問題了嗎?經濟學人這篇文章也提醒如果只把這看成中美之間的問題就大大忽略的問題的本質。事實上,鄰國日本八零年代貨幣大幅升值的慘痛經驗歷歷在目,中國不太可能重蹈覆轍--接替日本世界第二大經濟體的地位,卻不一定要循著日本經濟發展的軌跡。


The global economy
How to stop a currency war

Keep calm, don’t expect quick fixes and above all don’t unleash a trade fight with China


IN RECENT weeks the world economy has been on a war footing, at least rhetorically. Ever since Brazil’s finance minister, Guido Mantega, declared on September 27th that an “international currency war” had broken out, the global economic debate has been recast in battlefield terms, not just by excitable headline-writers, but by officials themselves. Gone is the fuzzy rhetoric about co-operation to boost global growth. A more combative tone has taken hold (see article).  Countries blame each other for distorting global demand, with weapons that range from quantitative easing (printing money to buy bonds) to currency intervention and capital controls.

Behind all the smoke and fury, there are in fact three battles. The biggest one is over China’s unwillingness to allow the yuan to rise more quickly. American and European officials have sounded tougher about the “damaging dynamic” caused by China’s undervalued currency.Last month the House of Representatives passed a law allowing firms to seek tariff protection against countries with undervalued currencies, with a huge bipartisan majority. China’s “unfair” trade practices have become a hot topic in the mid-term elections.

A second flashpoint is the rich world’s monetary policy, particularly the prospect that central banks may soon restart printing money to buy government bonds. The dollar has fallen as financial markets expect the Federal Reserve to act fastest and most boldly. The euro has soared as officials at the European Central Bank show least enthusiasm for such a shift. In China’s eyes (and, sotto voce, those of many other emerging-market governments), quantitative easing creates a gross distortion in the world economy as investors rush elsewhere, especially into emerging economies, in search of higheryields.

A third area of contention comes from how the developing countries respond to these capital flows. Rather than let their exchange rates soar, many governments have intervened to buy foreign currency, or imposed taxes on foreign capital inflows. Brazil recently doubled a taxon foreign purchases of its domestic debt. This week Thailand announceda new 15% withholding tax for foreign investors in its bonds.


Jaw-jaw, please

jaw-jaw (slang) To talk at length; to chatter or jabber.

For now, these skirmishes fall far short of a real currency war. Many of the “weapons” look less menacing on closer inspection. The capital-inflow controls are modest. In the rich world only Japan has recently resorted to currency intervention, and so far only once. Nor is there much risk of an imminent descent into trade retaliation. Even in America, tariffs against China are still, with luck, a long way off—both because the currency bill is milder than it sounds and because it has yet to be passed by the Senate or signed by Barack Obama.

Still, there is no room for complacency. Today’s phoney war could quickly turn into a real dogfight. The conditions driving the divergence of economic policies—in particular, sluggish growth in the rich world—are likely to last for years. As fiscal austerity kicks in, the appeal of using a cheaper currency as a source of demand will increase, and the pressure on politicians to treat China as a scapegoat will rise. And if the flood of foreign capital intensifies, developing countries may be forced to choose between losing competitiveness, truly draconian capital controls or allowing their economies to overheat.

draconian  adj. of a law, punishment, etc. 法律、懲罰等 extremely harsh and severe 嚴厲的;殘酷的

Why will employ capital control lead to losing competitiveness?  Huge capital inflow will creat bubble, too much money lead to hike of asset price, over expansion of credit .... and will consequently result in a financial crisis.  Of course, the inflow of capital will also bring in investment creat more jobs.

What needs to happen is fairly clear. Global demand needs rebalancing, away from indebted rich economies and towards more spending in the emerging world. Structural reforms to boost spending in those surplus economies will help, but their real exchange rates also need to appreciate. And, yes, the Chinese yuan is too low (see article).That is hurting not just the West but also other emerging countries (especially those with floating exchange rates) and indeed China itself, which needs to get more of its growth from domestic consumption.

It is also clear that this will not be a painless process. China is right to worry about instability if workers in exporting companies lose their jobs. And even reasonable choices—such as the rich world’s mix of fiscal austerity and loose monetary policy—will have an uncomfortable impact on small, open emerging economies, in the form of unwelcome capital inflows. This flood of capital will be less devastating to them than the harm they would suffer if the West descended into deflation and stagnation, but it can still cause problems.


Collective Seoul-searching

All this cries out for a multilateral approach, in which institutions such as the IMF and the G20 forge consensus among the big economies. The hitch is that the multilateral route has, so far, achieved little. Hence the chorus calling for a different line of attack—one that focuses on getting tough with China, through either retaliatory capital controls (such as not allowing China to buy American Treasury bonds) or trade sanctions. And it is not just the usual protectionist suspects: even some free-traders reckon that economic violence is the only way to shock China out of itsself-harming obstinacy (and to stop a more wide spread protectionist reaction later).

This newspaper is not convinced. The threats look like either unworkable bluffs (how can China be stopped from buying Treasuries, themost widely traded asset in the world’s financial markets?) or dangerous provocations. Confronted with a trade ultimatum, the Beijing regime, puffed up in its G2 hubris, may well reckon it is cheaper politically to retaliate to the United States in kind. That is how trade wars start.

hubris  n.  the fact of somebody being too proud. Inliterature, a character with this pride ignores warnings and laws andthis usually results in their downfall and death. 傲慢;狂妄

Anyway, to focus on America and China is to misunderstand the nature of the problem. The currency wars are about more than one villain and one victim. Rather, redouble multilateral efforts behind the scenes, especially by bringing in the emerging countries hurt by China’s policy. Brazil and others have only just begun to speak out.  South Korea is hosting the G20 next month. Use the Seoul summit as a prompt, not to create some new Plaza Accord (today’s tensions are too complex to settle in a grand peace treaty of the sort hammered out by just five countries in New York in 1985) but as a way to clarify the debate and keep up the pressure. It will get fewer headlines; but this is a war that is best averted, not fought.

This is actually nice.  Once a target rate was set, then those notorious forex speculators will easily take great advantage from such obvious target and gain handsome benefit from forex market by buying and selling our currency.
Chinese people has been suffering serious inflation, the appreciation of RMB might help to ease the growth of inflation;however, the most effective and efficient way to curb inflation is toraise the interest rate.  So, this is in fact qutie foreseeable.  Ihave no idea why Ms. Yen, the reporter, would have put "surpringly" when wrote this repor.  Well, it might be possible that she thought China would like to keep RMB pegging on USD; therefore, instead of raising the interest rate to invite more capital inflow, China should keep low interest rate.
In China, the real (de facto) interest rate is negative, which naturally leads to more consumption, and then consequently cause higher inflation.  Although Chinese official said the shortage of labors mainly due to decrase of population bonus, the shortage at coastal cities should be resulted from high inflation, which made migrant workers from rural areas could hardly make a liviing in those cities.
This is rather amazing, 未來透過央行道德勸說,預計此一金額還可再降至零。I do not think any dealer or trader would have offered deposit (guarantee money) for its security trading voluntarily but required by law or authorities.  This does not make sense at all.

IMF改口支持亞洲資本管制

  • 2010-10-20
  • 工商時報
  • 【記者蕭麗君/綜合外電報導】

     華爾街日報報導,國際貨幣基金(IMF)秘書長史特勞斯卡恩,周一出席上海央行行長會議時警告,資金湧入亞洲將威脅該區的經濟穩定。因此他建議實行資本管制,可作為避免新一波金融危機發生的方式之一。

     IMF從過去對於資本管制秉持強力反對姿態,到如今罕見的對該措施進行背書,凸顯出在全球各地的經濟表現差距不斷加大之際,已經促使決策官員改變他們的方向與看法。

     史特勞斯卡恩表示,流入亞洲的資金恐將導致「匯率過度波動、信用擴張、資產價格泡沫與金融動盪」,因此他認為對熱錢實施資本管制,將有助於緩和龐大的熱錢流入。

     史特勞斯卡恩是在上海召開的央行行長會議上發表這樣看法。他還補充決策者目前正對當前經濟減緩必須聯手合作因應,逐漸達成共識。

     當美國、歐洲與日本正把利率維持在歷史低點,以支撐依然疲弱的復甦動能時,亞洲經濟卻迅速從衰退中反彈。這也導致投資者為尋求較高報酬率下,相繼把資金投入亞洲新興市場,推升該區的貨幣與市場價格飆高。

     不過面臨熱錢大軍壓境,亞洲政府卻積極透過各種方式,以遏止這些資金流入。他們憂心貨幣升值,將侵蝕出口業者獲利,此外劇烈波動的資本流動,也會對他們的金融系統造成傷害。

     史特勞斯卡恩認為,為避免未來危機再度發生,各國需要有多項政策選項,包括調降利率、增加外匯存底、緊縮財政政策與在部分情況下,實行資本管制。

     中國人民銀行副行長易綱,在央行行長會議後的記者會上,重申中國將謹慎推動貨幣改革。他強調雖然人民幣與美國掛鉤政策宣告結束,不過人民幣匯率改革必須循序漸進。

     他並且還呼應史特勞斯卡恩的看法。易綱指出資本流動導致系統性風險產生,因此應該考慮透過合適的舉動,來預防該風險的發生。

http://news.chinatimes.com/world/0,5246,11050401x122010102000203,00.html