Select Page

From The Financial Times, Benn Steil and Manuel Hinds explain that the dollar’s reserve status is bad for the world and for the U.S.

At Forbes, Brian Domitrovic suggests the IMF has little purpose without fixed exchange rates.

In The WSJ, Stanford’s Ronald McKinnon sees stagflation in the economy.

Not having an exchange-rate constraint, the Fed can conduct a more independent monetary policy than other central banks can. How it chooses to exercise this independence is crucial to the stability of the international monetary system as a whole. For more than two years, the Fed has chosen to keep short-term interest rates on dollar assets close to zero and—over the past year—applied downward pressure on long rates through the so-called quantitative easing measures to increase purchases of Treasury bonds. The result has been a flood of hot money (i.e., volatile financial flows that are subject to reversals) from the New York financial markets into emerging markets on the dollar’s periphery—particularly in Asia and Latin America, where natural rates of interest are much higher.

Wanting to avoid sharp appreciations of their currencies and losses in international competitiveness, many Asian and Latin American central banks intervened to buy dollars with domestic base monies and lost monetary control. This caused a surge in consumer price index (CPI) inflation of more than 5% in major emerging markets such as China, Brazil and Indonesia, with the dollar prices of primary commodities rising more than 40% world-wide over the past year. So the proximate cause of the rise in U.S. prices is inflation in emerging markets, but its true origin is in Washington.

In India’s Free Press Journal, S.S. Tarapore discusses the gold standard and that nation’s economy.

In The Washington Times, Richard Rahn reports on a destructive banking regulation that would require U.S. banks to report the names of foreign account holders to their home governments.

From Alhambra Investments, Joe Calhoun suggests Fed Chairman Bernanke has turned the U.S. into a nation of speculators – again.

At CNBC, supply-side foe Peter Peterson talks about the need for higher taxes to fight the debt, but doesn’t mention growth:

Bloomberg notes Grover Norquist’s clout in opposing tax increases as part of a budget deal.

The Washington Post reports Paul Volcker saying that we need tax reforms that raise more than 19 percent of GDP.

Cato’s Steve Hanke challenges Keynesian claims about deficits and growth.

The Washington Post explains how Chinese manufacturers evade U.S. tariffs.

On Forbes, Ralph Benko sees politics behind a recent IRS rules change to tax donations to 501(c)(4) organizations.

Chris Powell of GATA comments on our WSJ article on Mundell.

At Asia Times, David Goldman disagrees with some elements of Mundell’s analysis.

The National Foundation For American Policy reports that children of immigrants drive U.S. achievements in science and math.

In The NYT, Bruce Bartlett critiques the Fair Tax.