DXY and exports


[Skip to the end]

2008-06-03 Dollar Index vs US Exports

Dollar Index vs US Exports

Right – seems to me the dollar will fall until it’s at a level where the trade gap goes to about zero. So even though exports are way up and the trade gap down, there could be a lot more to go.

A nation can only run a trade deficit to the extent non-residents (governments and private sector agents) desire to net accumulate its financial assets (or buy its domestic assets such as real estate).

Seems to me Paulson, Bush, and Bernanke have successfully kept the world’s CBs, monetary authorities, and portfolio managers from actively accumulating USD financial assets.

Doesn’t seem like jawboning is going to alter foreign ‘savings desires’ apart from short term trading responses.


[top]

Comments on 8:30 numbers

Retail sales weak today, but exports up over 16% earlier this week, and jobless claims now settling in around 350,000 – far from recession levels. That’s what export economies look like.

Meanwhile, non oil import prices up 0.6%, and export prices up 0.9%.

US GDP growth may be hovering around zero, but no collapse yet.

Meanwhile, Bush/Bernanke/Paulson engineered USD collapse/inflation/export boom is underway and accelerating.

It was like yelling fire in a crowded theater.

The world was happily accumulating over $700 billion per year in financial assets, and had a total of over $2 trillion, when our leadership yelled ‘fire’ and caused a reverse stampede.

Imports are real benefits and exports are real costs, and now we’re paying the price.

Tax cuts, oil prices, and gasoline consumption

Oil prices jump after Bush, Congress reach agreement on economic stimulus plan

by John Wilen

Oil futures jumped more than $2 a barrel Thursday after the Bush administration and Congressional leaders agreed to an economic stimulus plan that will give most Americans tax rebates of $600 to $1,200, or even more if they have kids.

With Bernanke’s blessings and with the mainstream seeing demand already strong enough to be driving prices well above the Fed’s comfort zone, the response is no surprise. Gold shot up as well as other commodities, and the $ fell.

Prices were already higher after the government reported a drop in heating oil supplies and as investors anticipated a stimulus plan. But futures took off, posting their largest gains in over three weeks, on word that an agreement had been reached.

“What’s boosting us up today is a little economic optimism because people are going to get a little free money,” said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp., in Chicago.

Yes, and a turnaround in housing probably is underway as well.

Light, sweet crude for March delivery rose $2.42 to settle at $89.41 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

(SNIP)

The high prices may be having an impact on consumer behavior. Demand for gasoline fell last week by 152,000 barrels, though demand over the past four weeks _ which included the busy holiday travel period _ rose by 1.1 percent over the same period last year.

Real demand up for the month year over year.

Looking forward to see how a ‘nimble’ Fed responds.


Why I expect US exports to continue to be very strong..

The desire to accumulate $US financial assets has been diminished for at least the following reasons:

  1. Treasury policy – Paulson is actively pushing both a strong yuan and threatening any other CB that buys $US with the label of ‘currency manipulator.’ CB’s had been perhaps the largest source of $US financial assets accumulation and are now limited to compounding of interest.
  2. US foreign policy is probably driving CB’s in less than friendly nations to diversify their reserves away from $US financial assets.
  3. Fed policy has the appearance of a ‘beggar thy neighbor’/’inflate your way out of debt’ policy, as the Fed aggressively cuts rates in the face of inflation not seen in 25 years.

This all sets in motion a downward pricing of the $US as non residents sell them to each other at lower and lower prices in this effort to lower their rate of accumulation of $US financial assets. But these financial assets can only ‘go away’ when they get spent or invested in the US, when US prices are low enough to cause this to happen. The rapid rise in exports and accelerated non resident buying of US real estate and other assets is anecdotal evidence this is taking place as theory predicts.

This is a very large cyclical force that should continue to drive rapidly rising exports for perhaps a year or more. Weak foreign economies should have little effect on this process, as that weakness doesn’t reduce the desire of portfolio managers to shift out of $US financial assets.

This is also highly inflationary for the US. This buying by non residents both drives down the $US and drives up the prices of US exports, now rising at a 7% clip last I checked.

The desired shift is probably well over $1 trillion which means exports will increase by a good part of that to facilitate this transfer.

This can sustain US GDP in the face of falling domestic demand, which will stay relatively low until housing picks up. Employment will remain reasonably good, but standards of living fall as we produce as much, but export more and consume less. We get paid to work but can buy less due to high prices, with our remaining production exported to those wishing to reduce their accumulated $US financial assets.

We’ve been talking about this possibility about a long time, but seems our trade negotiators have finally got their wish.

Meanwhile, Saudis continue to act the swing producer. In fact, they told Bush today they have 2 million bpd capacity in reserve, and that markets are well supplied. At their price, of course.

Probably have been some year end allocations out of crude by pension funds as with the price hikes they would need to sell some to keep the same ‘weight’ in their portfolios. That should be ending soon.

And I agree with Karim, the Fed is not likely to act on inflation until core starts to rise or their measures of inflation expectations start to rise, despite the fact that mainstream theory clearly says if any of that happens it’s too late. Seems to me the senior FOMC members are putting their jobs on the line by taking that kind of systemic risk, which their own theory tells them is far higher than the risk of any lost output from a .


♥

Re: fiscal response

On 04 Jan 2008 22:29:03 +0000, Prof. P. Arestis wrote:
> Dear Warren,
>
> Many thanks.
>
> This is all interesting. The sentence that caught my eye is this: “A fiscal

> package is being discussed to day by Bernanke, Paulson, and Bush. That

> would also reduce the odds of a Fed cut”. This would indeed reduce the odds
> of a rate cut. But would Bernanke accept such a proposition when he
> believes passionately that crowding-out in fiscl policy is very much the
> order of the fiscal day? I am curious to see the result of this discussion.

Dear Philip,

Very good point!

Warren

>
> Best wishes,
>
> Philip
>


♥