Hypocrisy is the defining element in all the wrangling over China’s currency.
The debate seems deceptively simple: As China booms and the US implodes, how much blame does Beijing’s undervalued currency get for chronic US unemployment? China says none — it is a developing nation and needs to create the hundreds of millions of jobs to keep the peace and satisfy its citizens. A vocal chorus in Washington says China’s trade advantage hogs all the growth.
The trouble with these disparate views is that they are both partly correct. The yuan does hinder growth, as US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke points out.
It is “blocking what might be a more normal recovery process in the global economy,” Bernanke said earlier this month.
Meanwhile, the risks of social upheaval in China are rising. Subsidizing exports is an obvious way to avoid it.
The real question is: What can Americans do? Three things: Blame the Jon Huntsmans in their midst, focus on trade access and rediscover their entrepreneurial soul. The doublespeak from the corporate US is breathtaking and few personify it better than Huntsman, the Republican presidential candidate and former US ambassador to China. As Huntsman pledges to create millions of US jobs and touts his business acumen as proof he will deliver, the namesake Huntsman Corp, a chemical maker, downplays the central role that cheap Chinese labor played in building a fortune partly “made in China.” After the US, China is Huntsman’s biggest market.
Sure, the US Congress can slap tariffs on Chinese goods. More success might come from naming and shaming the politicians, business leaders and companies making piles of money by moving jobs to China while demanding lower taxes and denouncing US President Barack Obama as an economic simpleton. The US long championed the globalization model that it now blames for its woes.
Hypocrisy is also at play in how Bernanke and his Chinese counterparts are embroiled in a race to the bottom.
“It’s pretty evident that a weaker dollar is part of US policy, so they are hardly in a position to throw the first stone,” said Simon Grose-Hodge, head of investment strategy for South Asia at LGT Group in Singapore. “Even though China overtly manages its currency, a stronger yuan isn’t going to bring back the jobs American companies willingly exported.”
Perhaps the real indignity for Washington is that China is winning the currency war. US lawmakers facing re-election next year will find China a convenient scapegoat for bad economic data. For all its growth, China’s model isn’t benefiting the world as some had anticipated.
Market access, not exchange rates, is the critical issue. If the yuan jumped 30 percent tomorrow, Germans would sell more cars, French more wine and cheese, Italians more shoes and handbags, Australians and Canadians more raw materials. The US would sell China more soy, corn, cotton and apples. What kind of wealth does this trade create as companies move jobs to China?
Apple would love to sell more iPads and iPhones in China. However, then, much of the content in these products is made by low-wage workers there who cannot afford the finished goods. And Americans would lose it if the cheap wares they gorge on suddenly shot higher in price. The US will just shift jobs to India and Vietnam if costs in China go up.
Here, it’s worth noting a recent report from the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank. Economists Galina Hale and Bart Hobijn say that “made in China” is not taking over US consumption as much as believed. Of every US dollar US consumers spend on a Chinese-made product, about US$0.55 pays for services in the US. When you spend US$90 on Nike sneakers, only a fraction of it flows to China and even less to workers there.
The real issue is US companies creating jobs at home and gaining access to Chinese markets. It is challenging for US corporations to compete in China, bid for contracts and protect intellectual property. China lavishes advantages and subsidies on national champions and limits access of foreign financial firms. Corruption complicates business.
Valid concerns all around and none of them hinge on the dollar-yuan rate. If the US could compete on even terms, there would be ample money to be made in China and jobs would be created back home. Sadly, the US Congress is more obsessed with exchange rates than trade talks that might actually boost job growth.
The extraordinary reaction to the death of Apple’s Steve Jobs reminds us how the US loves its innovators. China’s growing influence should be a call to arms to do what the US has typically done best. Rather than being inspired to think big or forced to reconsider their unreflective policy stands, many lawmakers are pointing fingers eastward.
It is hypocritical to blame China for what ails the US economy. If you think currency rates alone are going to restore US prosperity, think again.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US