もし中国がスーパーパワーを持ちたいなら、相応の規模の自国通貨を発行せねばならず、かつ世界の為替市場に価格発見能力を持たせねばならない。 Quick history quiz: in all of recorded history, how many
superpowers pegged their currency to the currency of a rival superpower? Put another way: how many superpowers have made their own currency dependent on another superpower's currency?
Only one: China. China pegs its currency, the yuan
(RMB) to the U.S. dollar. It adjusts the peg a bit here and there, but
the yuan's value is set by the Chinese state, not by the market of
buyers and sellers.
(Yes, various nations have used gold coins minted by rival powers
(Spanish pieces of eight were money everywhere, for example) but we're
talking about fiat currencies, backed by nothing but supply and demand, not intrinsically valuable gold coins.)
Second question: is pegging your currency to a rival power's currency a sign of strength? The
obvious answer is no. It's a sign of weakness. A real financial power
issues its own currency and let's the global FX (foreign exchange)
market discover the relative price / value of the currency. The
financial power trusts the market to discover the value / price of its
currency, and it responds by raising or lowering the yields on its
government bonds and other pricing inputs. If the issuing nation won't allow users and owners of its currency price discovery, few will want the currency because they can't trust the state's arbitrary, non-market price. This
reality is reflected in the chart below of global currencies' relative
share in global payments, loans and reserves. China's currency, the yuan
(RMB) is basically signal noise: its global role in payments, loans and
reserves is near-zero.
Why does China cling to state control of its currency's valuation? The
obvious answer is that China's economy and global role are too fragile
to absorb a major revaluation of its currency up or down: a major loss
in purchasing power would raise the cost of energy and other imports,
while a major strengthening of the yuan would crush the global
competitiveness of China's goods and services. As for the idea that China will unpeg its currency when it
backs it with gold, recall that "backed by gold" means "convertible to
gold." If the yuan weakens and other nation-state owners of the
currency decide gold is the safer bet, China will have to exchange yuan
for gold if it wants to make good on its claim to be backing its
currency with gold.
どうして中国は自国通貨価値の国家支配にここまでこだわるのだろう？答えは明らかで、中国経済とその世界での役割はあまりに脆弱で通貨評価の上下を吸収できないということだ：大きく購買力が下がるとエネルギーや他の輸入コストを上げることになる、一方でRMBが大きく強くなると中国製品の世界的競争力を急落させてしまう。中国がペッグを止めてゴールド裏付けとする議論に関しては、「backed by gold」というのは「convertible to gold」ということだ。もしRMBが弱くなり他国が持つRMBをゴールドに変えたほうが安全と思うと、中国はRMBをゴールドに変えざるを得ない。
If the currency isn't convertible to gold, it isn't backed by gold at all; it's just another fiat currency backed by nothing.
ゴールド変換ができないなら、backed by gold とは全く言えない；全く裏付けのない別の管理通貨ということだ。
If China wants superpower status, it will have to issue its currency in size and let the global FX market discover its price. Anything less leaves China dependent on the U.S. and its currency, the dollar.
If China is so powerful, why doesn't it let its currency float on the
FX market like other trading nations? Until its currency floats freely
like other currencies and the yuan's price is discovered by supply and
demand, China's global role in currency payments, loans and reserves
will remain near-zero. That is a weakness that appears to be
insurmountable. もし中国が底まで力強いなら、どうして他国のように為替市場の変動相場通貨にしないのか？他国と同様にRMBが変動相場となりRMB価格が需給で決まるようにならないかぎり、支払い・債務・準備金における中国の通貨の役割はほとんどゼロのままだろう。これは明らかに克服できない弱さだ。
* * *
Amazonで買物をしてContrarianJを応援しよう Albert Edwards: This Was The Final Recessionary Shoe, And It Has Now Fallen by Tyler Durden Thu, 06/27/2019 - 12:45 Exactly three months ago, in late March, the 3 month-10 year spread inverted for the first time since 2007... ちょうど３か月前の３月遅くのことだ、３M10Yスプレッドが２００７年以来初めて反転した・・・・ ... an event which sparked near-panic in the market as historically curve inversion has preceded the last 7 recessions. ・・・市場は準混乱状態になった、というのも歴史的に見てイールドカーブ反転が過去７回の景気後退の前兆となっているからだ。 However, while the inversion was certainly a memorable event, the question on everyone's lips is how do risk assets perform once the curve flattens and/or inverts. According to backtests from Goldman, since the mid-1980s, significant stock drawdowns (i.e. market crashes) began only when term slope started steepening after being inverted. ...
今の地球地球温暖化モデルはどれも地球が受ける太陽エネルギーが一定と仮定しています。たとえスーパーコンピュータを利用しようともモデルを超えた計算はできません。しかし太陽の輻射エネルギーは時間とともに変動していますし、太陽と地球の距離は他の惑星の影響で変動、摂動しているのです。過去の温暖化寒冷化はこの摂動でとてもよく説明できます。月の明かりの変化を引き起こすスーパームーン現象も他の惑星の摂動効果による地球・月間距離変動によるものです。こちらはテレビでも解説するのに太陽・地球間距離の摂動変化は決してテレビで解説されることがありません。 いまテレビを賑わしているあの女の子もちゃんと学校に言って科学を勉強すれば自らの愚かさを理解するでしょうに。 Martin Armstrong: The First Clean Air Act Was In 535AD by Tyler Durden Sat, 09/28/2019 - 12:30 Authored by Martin Armstrong via ArmstrongEconomics.com, To me, all this propaganda that humans are responsible for climate change implies that somehow the climate is static and would not be changing but for human activity. This may make great headlines and inspire youth to create strikes and march upon the institutions of capitalism demanding their closure. However, any unbiased review of history reveals a shocking fact – the climate has...
China Injects Gargantuan 1.1 Trillion In Liquidity This Week by Tyler Durden Wed, 01/16/2019 - 22:19 Following what Bloomberg calculated was a record net reverse repo liquidity injection on Wednesday, when the PBOC injected a whopping 560 billion yuan of liquidity into the financial system via open market operations, the Chinese central bank has done it again and in Thursday's open market operation, it sold 250BN yuan in 7 Day repos (slightly below yesterday's record 350BN), and 150BN in 28 Day repos, which net of maturities resulted in a whopping net 380BN yuan ($56.2BN) liquidity injection. ブルームバーグの算出によると水曜に記録的なリバースレポ流動性注入が行われた、PBOCがなんと公開市場操作で金融システムになんと５６０B人民元を注入した、中国中央銀行は再び木曜に公開市場操作を行った、２５０B人民元の７日決済レポを売却した（昨日の３５０B人民元よりも少し少ない）、そして２８日決済のレポを１５０B人民元注入した、結果としてなんと３８０B人民元（＄５６．２B)の流動性注入となる。 (訳注：なんか足し算すると辻褄が合いません、ブルーム...
