CHINA’S YUAN STRATEGY: UNTENABLE, UNSUSTAINABLE, INDEFENSIBLE, UNSOUND
Must read here by Annaly Capital Management:
We don’t much trust statistics that come from China, just like we didn’t trust information that came from behind the Iron Curtain back in the Cold War days. But there’s been a lot of news from China in the past few weeks, and it has painted a picture of economic recovery and strength. At 8.7%, GDP growth was faster than expected in 2009. Production, exports and fixed-asset investment in urban areas are up 20.7%, 31.4% and 26.6%, respectively, in the first two months of 2010 versus the same year-ago period. M2 money supply grew at a 25.5% clip and consumer prices rose 2.7% in February.
Believe those numbers at your peril, haircut them as you see fit, but there is one number with regard to China that is unassailable and that makes their growth miracle possible: 6.83. The pegging of the yuan at this artificially low exchange rate is the cornerstone of the Chinese economic miracle. It is the modern-day mercantilist tool, a replacement for tariffs and taxes. In so doing, it allows the country to run an export-driven economy that competes on price, depends on foreigners’ propensity to consume, and builds up huge structural surpluses with which to keep its currency peg. It’s the Walmart of countries, the big box store and category killer that no local shopkeeper wants in his neighborhood. It is the other side of the coin from the United States and Europe at this stage in the global economic cycle – - consumer-based societies that are running huge structural deficits. Despite the obvious economic wisdom of letting the currency float, and the ample cover for doing so that the latest data provide, it is unlikely that China will significantly alter its dollar-peg policy any time soon.
This is a global macroeconomic issue, but for China it is a domestic issue: There is a labor shortage in China, and those workers want to be paid. “Migrant workers are a lot more fussy than before,” He Suwei, chairman of Hangzhou Weibang Airflow Spinning Co in Zhejiang province, told China Daily. “They don’t just talk money; they talk about working environments, holidays and other fringe benefits we have not even heard of before. Workers have more say than us now because they have a wider choice.” Workers at the factory are now being paid about $270 per month, up 40% from the beginning of the global recession. At a nearby textile mill, the owner came back from the Lunar New Year holidays to find that many of his skilled workers didn’t return to work. He reluctantly had to raise wages. “I had no choice but to raise the salaries of my less experienced workers from 750 yuan a month to 960 yuan,” said the owner, Cao Yakun. “Also, to make sure the workers who did return stayed, I boosted my skilled workers’ pay by 10 to 15 percent.”
The irony here about the exploited proletariat wanting better treatment from the bourgeoisie factory owners is historically mindboggling. All we can say to the Communist Party bureaucrats is ‘Welcome to capitalism.’ The genie is out of the bottle and you can’t put it back. You can’t raise salaries on your working class because margins are too low, you can’t raise prices to raise margins because you’ll be less competitive and you can’t let your currency float because your exports will decline and slow economic growth.
The other irony: the modern Chinese miracle would never have occurred without the US Dollar as a reserve currency. As Hugh Hendry has pointed out, for the Chinese, US Dollars were nothing less than the modern-day equivalent of the relief from a too constrictive gold standard that William Jennings Bryan decried in 1896. Imagine if back then the supply of gold had been as unlimited as dollars. The fact is, in modern economies either all trading partners of more or less equal size should be linked to a similar standard, like gold, or they should all be free floating and competing. A hybrid situation like we have now just leads to hazardous imbalances.
If history is a guide, however, economic growth and a free floating currency are not incompatible. The graph below shows the exchange rate of the Japanese yen; Japan eventually let it float and they recovered from World War II to become the second largest economy in the world. It’s only when the Bank of Japan began to sizably intervene to manage their currency that the country ended up with a lost generation of productivity. China, take note.







It is too simplistic to attribute China’s growth to cheap labor and the currency peg. There’s plenty of cheap labor in poor countries of the world that could be exploited. If China can peg it’s currency at what’s judged to be an artificially low level, so can these countries. I would love to have the chance to poll industrialists who chose to have their products manufactured in China and ask them if there were any factors other than low cost that influenced their decision. How about the work ethic and intellect of the people? The lack of a social safety net so people are free to choose between working and starving? A totalitarian regime not afraid to maintain stability by force? A pragmatic people more interested in pursuing individual prosperity as opposed to making sacrifices for the sake of realizing ideologies?
All this whining about Chinese mercantilism is lame and pointless. Nobody stuck a gun to Steve Jobs’ head to have iPods made in China. Likewise, nobody stuck a gun to Joe America’s head to keep buying crap made in China.
China is playing the ultimate intervenionist role. They manipulate their currency, they intervene in the downturn with a massive stimulus when aggregate demand is still relatively robust, etc etc.
If ever there was a place where the government played too far a role in a supposedly capitalist market then China is a glaring example. The two seem to contradict. Will it all end well?
“China is playing the ultimate intervenionist role. They manipulate their currency …”
Huh? Like the US government is not by running its greenback printing press and socializing private losses?
I followed the naked capitalism link above and found the following comment from someone from the US who does business in China. Here are some excerpts:
jdmckay says:
February 18, 2010 at 10:47 pm
“I do business there. Our small group has had a number of parts (all engineered materials to high specs) manufactured there for 5+ years now… relatively low quantities, suffieciently low that competing US companies wouldn’t give us time of day (not enough volume for them).
Our Chinese product has gotten better over this time… improving regularly. Stress testing, engineering, everything… first rate. Over this time, through about 7 design revisions on some carbon fabbed stuff, never single item (out of 15k +) arrived below spec.”
“I’m a customer for this stuff… I know it, I know what we need, and I evaluate availability world wide regularly. Reading most any US econ stuff in last year, one would never know there are 1000’s of little guys like us getting really top product from China. And doing so for a price that allows us to compete. And doing so because stuff we need we just can’t get on US shores.”
—-
I’d like to make an important disclaimer: I think China has a lot of short-comings that deserve criticism. However, I just don’t see how finger pointing can solve America’s problems. Are you suggesting that all of America’s economic problems are caused by China, and that there’s nothing Americans can do to solve them?
I never said the US wasn’t guilty of many of the same interventionist manipulations. But China is truly taking it to a new level.
Let’s say China is truly taking it to a new level. What’s America to do? My suggestion is to out-manipulate China. All is fair in love and war.
not true China is doing the manipulations without the need.
China has huge overcapacity problem and a worker class who don’t make much and has not enough safety net.
I think US is doing more unnecessary manipulations than China if consider the need.
I think we’re attacking this problem with different assumptions and the same conclusions.
I think China’s comparative advantage over its competitors is larger than that accounted for by currency manipulation. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make. It’s way more productive for the US or any competitor of China to solve their internal problems to increase competitiveness because that’s totally within their power to do so. That’s the meaning behind the saying “God help those who help themselves.”
I agree, Chinese quality for export consumption improved dramatically in the last 3-4 years. To put it simply – we transferred the US know-how to them and now we have left nothing to compete with. China has it all.
US companies and many americans keep talking how chinese quality is inferior. I disagree. At the same time, US quality is dropping, though, because the skilled workers are not being replenished and there isn’t enough demand for US products becauser China can produce the same quality 30-50% cheaper. To compete with China on comparable price while having high cost of labor US has to use inferior materials, which further erods the quality of US products.
Employers have a major incentive to either shift those jobs to places where labour costs are low or to eliminate those jobs via automation. In fact manufacturing employment has declined precisely because low-skilled workers were earning high wages. It’s odd to imagine that wages could diverge from productivity over the long-term; that’s simply not sustainable.
The trade surplus is not caused by the renminbi exchange rate. The trade surplus is an outcome and phenomenon of globalization. It will exist for a time.
Should China thus be attacking Japan and South Korea for the trade deficits it runs with those nations?