My letter to the NY Times re: No, it’s NOT a better way!

Re: Better Ways to Deal with China

Dear Sirs:
Eduardo Porter’s recommendations for “dealing with our trade deficit with China”–a multilateral approach using carrots and sticks–assumes that China’s manipulation of its currency causes harm to its trading partners.  It does not.  The sole harm is to its own citizens, who pay for the manipulation in the form of higher prices.  China’s trading partners get bargains.  Mr. Porter’s mercantilist philosophy was disproven first by the classical economists and later by the Austrian school economists.  Nevertheless, this upside down thinking–in which a weaker currency is deemed to be “better” than a stronger one–has been embraced by exporters, who lobby politicians to intervene to help them make more sales.  Since inflation is a delayed phenomenon and its source is poorly understood, the gullible public buys into the fallacy that getting a bargain from an overseas supplier is bad for them.  Patrick Barron

This entry was posted in News/ Lessons. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to My letter to the NY Times re: No, it’s NOT a better way!

  1. Great letter Patrick. What the NY Times fails to realize, as do so many mainstreamers, is that China isn’t even manipulating their currency. They are merely maintaining the peg to the debased U.S. dollar. So, who’s the currency manipulator?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s