But the effect is also brutal on the rest of the world. The fall in current-account deficits will be partially compensated for by lower surpluses from oil and gas exporters, such as Middle Eastern countries and Russia. But the bulk of the adjustment would be borne by the worldâs largest exporters: Germany, China and Japan. Globally, current-account deficits and surpluses add up to zero â minus some statistical reporting errors. You can do the maths. If the US stops buying German cars, Germany will eventually stop making them.
If we had a simple U-shaped recession, we would still have a painful recession in Germany and Japan, for example. But under a U-shaped scenario, both countries would be among the first to benefit from the recovery.
In an L-shaped recession, however, recession gives way to depression, despite the fact that both countries thought they had done their âhomeworkâ. If nobody can afford to run a large deficit for a long time â which is what an L recession effectively implies â the economic models of Germany and Japan will no longer work. Germany had a current-account surplus of more than 7 per cent last year. It is the worldâs largest exporter. Exports constitute about 41 per cent of national gross domestic product â an extraordinary number, given the size of the country.
While I agree with you on your other points, how is having a 'strong currency' a 'better fundamental' for an export economy?Quote from Renegen:
Japan was fucked up before the crisis.
China has a horrible political system and unrest is always on their mind.
Germany? They're being begged by Europe to save them. Hell so is China.
Export driven countries might be vulnerable to a world wise economic slump, but their fundamentals are a hell of a lot better. Strong currency, low national debt. They still have "bullets" in their chamber if worse comes to worse.
Like America was in the 70s.
Quote from Martinghoul:
While I agree with you on your other points, how is having a 'strong currency' a 'better fundamental' for an export economy?
Agreed, we're talking about the same thing. I am saying that in the end a weak currency is a good thing, while you're saying that the forward-looking ability to devalue the currency is a good thing.Quote from Renegen:
They can lower interest rates, devalue their currency. Maybe embrace finance like the US did in the 80s.
Or like in the 1980s, you increase the national debt by trillions. Is it great economic policy? No, but it does stave off the catastrophe.
There are more economic tools at their disposal than a bad country like the US has today. I mean the US is in such dire shape that to protect their currency they are ready to go in global depression, every other option market participants can see through it and short the dollar.
Quote from Renegen:
They can lower interest rates, devalue their currency. Maybe embrace finance like the US did in the 80s.
Or like in the 1980s, you increase the national debt by trillions. Is it great economic policy? No, but it does stave off the catastrophe.
There are more economic tools at their disposal than a bad country like the US has today. I mean the US is in such dire shape that to protect their currency they are ready to go in global depression, every other option market participants can see through it and short the dollar.
Quote from zdreg:
"... a weak currency is a terrible thing and is a reflection of a nation's character. it reflects a nation on the decline.