OP-ED: Chinese New Year, By PAUL KRUGMAN, New York Times, December 31, 2009
Some compelling logic from Krugman on Chinese mercantilism as reflected in the pegged yuan:
I usually hear two reasons for not confronting China over its policies. Neither holds water. First, there's the claim that we can't confront the Chinese because they would wreak havoc with the U.S. economy by dumping their hoard of dollars. This is all wrong, and not just because in so doing the Chinese would inflict large losses on themselves. The larger point is that the same forces that make Chinese mercantilism so damaging right now also mean that China has little or no financial leverage.Again, right now the world is awash in cheap money. So if China were to start selling dollars, there's no reason to think it would significantly raise U.S. interest rates. It would probably weaken the dollar against other currencies -- but that would be good, not bad, for U.S. competitiveness and employment. So if the Chinese do dump dollars, we should send them a thank-you note.
Second, there's the claim that protectionism is always a bad thing, in any circumstances. If that's what you believe, however, you learned Econ 101 from the wrong people -- because when unemployment is high and the government can't restore full employment, the usual rules don't apply ...
The bottom line is that Chinese mercantilism is a growing problem, and the victims of that mercantilism have little to lose from a trade confrontation. So I'd urge China's government to reconsider its stubbornness. Otherwise, the very mild protectionism it's currently complaining about will be the start of something much bigger.
I am progressively moving toward accepting this position, primarily because I can't see the sustainability of the current policy trajectory China is on, given the recent severe correction.
| Permalink |
