Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
That is a fantastically stupidly scaled chart.

On the left axis we have a range of 0 to 9 with two currencies priced at around 1 USD and one currency priced around 8 USD. Big waste of space and depressed ranges.

On the right axis we have a range of 85 to 130 for the Yen value of 1USD.

The range of variation of the Yuan exchange rate is about 20%, comparable to the range of variation of the Australian Dollar and the Euro exchange rates. The range of the Yen exchange rate is about 30%, also comparable.

The difference between the Yuan and the other is in the daily volatility. The Yuan's rate is managed whereas the others are not. But the peg is sliding, the exchange rate is definitely not flat as you claim. It just has lower day to day volatility.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 10:42:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The range of variation has almost nothing to do with this.  Scale it however you want, and you get the same story -- the relationship between the dollar and the Yuan is essentially flat , while the relationship between the Yuan and anything else is variable and trending in one direction or another.  This proves that Chinese central bankers are pegging to the dollar first and foremost.  Sorry for the inclusion.  It's a tradeoff when trying to put too many things on one chart.
by santiago on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 12:19:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
sorry for the confusion, not "inclusion."
by santiago on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 12:19:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Now we're doing the proper comparisons, Yuan to USD compared with Yuan to EUR and yes China is actively managing its Dollar exchange rate and not its EUR exchange rate.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 12:22:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That FED chart starts in 2005. Here's the longer view (from my diary on the savings glut):

Compared to the 10-year poriod to 2005, China is letting its dollar peg slide.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 12:29:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, it is, as it has to because it becomes too expensive for the Chinese treasury to subsidize its exporting interest groups indefinitely, and that is who is really complaining when "China" says it wants a different reserve currency.  But the long flat segments that show up in this chart show dollar pegging interrupted by periods of float or devaluation (or vice versa), not pegging against other currencies.  If it were trying to switch it's peg to another currency we would have to see longish flat segments in exchange rates with other currencies, and I don't think that's the case. (I haven't checked well enough to say for sure, though.)
by santiago on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 02:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It doesn't cost the Chinese treasury anything except RMB¥ to discount its exchange rate - and that's not something that it runs out of the ability to produce, after all.

And its peg is to a basket of currencies, and they do not reveal the composition of the basket or the pegged rate, so they could definitely reduce the weight of the dollar in the basket but manipulate the peg to mask the move - where you would notice it is not in the exchange rate data but in the foreign exchange reserve data.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 06:12:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I disagree.  A peg is observed in the exchange rate -- if flat it's being pegged.  Nothing else can produce a flat exchange rate given that their rates observed in other currencies are anything but flat. And the data show that China is currently not using a basket of any kind -- just the US dollar. It appears to have given up on any semblance of either a basket or a float in mid 2008, so they're certainly not walking their talk if they still claim to be pegging to a currency basket.

It costs the Chinese either Yuan (buying power in China) or other currencies (buying power in other places) to prop up the value of the US dollar.  This is a policy subsidy that benefits a narrow exporting class in China, and it hurts those in China who would rather purchase more stuff made in Europe or save their purchasing power in Yuan for later years. (China suffers from high inflation, partly due to buying dollars with Yuan.)  Either the Chinese authorities are ignorant of this, or they must be shifting blame for their policy decisions regarding export-oriented growth onto the US.

by santiago on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 09:43:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... I disagree that a traffic circle should be called a traffic circle, because of all the openings in the circumference ... I think it should be called a traffic celtic cross ...

... but a peg is an immediate target in trading in some other currency. You can obviously walk the peg in order to target some other objective - including in order to maintain a stable exchange rate in another currency - so a currency peg can easily show up as a moving exchange rate.

What doesn't happen with a peg, if it is performed competently, is a lot of volatility in the exchange rate. A relatively stable exchange rate with a lot of "noise" along the way would be an indication that something other than direct pegging to maintain that exchange rate is taking place.

Mainstream economists, of course, get sloppy about it, since they can ignore the differences that make a difference with absurd assumptions about expectations and information - witness the neutrality of money assumption for an especially obviously absurd assumption completely unanchored in reality which is nevertheless the "normal" assumption to make.

However, when considering open money in the real world, you have to distinguish between the currency whose exchange rate you are targeting by buying and selling that currency, and the exchange rate management targets that you have.

We all assume that there is a substantial weighting of dollars in the composite currency peg that the Chinese in fact use, but the volatility in the exchange rate that you have shown suggests that there may not be as heavy a weighting as we have been assuming.

That is, what would you see if country A was pegging with currency B while trying to keep A:C exchange rates steady? In a period that B:C was moving rapidly, the peg would be reset frequently ... possibly daily, certainly once a week or more ... between each reset, the A:C exchange rate would move like the B:C exchange rate, and with each reset the A:C exchange rate would jump back toward the target A:C rate.

To infer which currency or currencies dominates the composite peg, you'd look for a currency or mix of currencies that show a rapid change in B:C exchange rates when there is a lot of volatility in the A:C rate, and slow change in B:C exchange rates when there is less volatility in the A:C rate.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Nov 7th, 2009 at 05:23:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series