Current Writing
In ages past the money markets of the world used to obey well-known classical
rules. Whenever a country suffered substantial current-account deficits, for
instance, its currency faced devaluation pressures. In recent months this rule
seems to have lost its force. The United States suffers huge deficits while the
dollar sparkles in strength. And while European countries report large trade
surpluses, which used to signal currency strength, the euro actually lingers in
weakness. It now is worth less than 90 cents to the dollar.
Interest
rates quoted by central banks used to affect the currency exchange rates. After
all, interest rates guide credit markets, influence goods prices and thereby
move trade and commerce. A central bank that sets its rates below market rates
used to weaken its currency. Yet, since the beginning of this year, the Federal
Reserve System lowered its rates five times, but the dollar has retained its old
luster.
Economic expansion used to affect the exchange rates. Rapid
economic growth not only attracted foreign investments but also exerted a
downward pressure on goods prices and an upward pressure on the currency. But
although European growth rates presently may be higher than the U.S. rate, they
obviously fail to give support to the euro.
The currency markets seem to
follow new rules, new cause-and-effect relations that confuse many economic
analysts. The confusion is heightened by the heavy losses suffered on euro
investments, which have bred deep distrust not only in the euro currency but
also in European ability to reform and adjust. It may take many months, perhaps
years, of euro stability to recover a margin of trust. Some confused analysts
now annunciate the very opposite of the classical rules. If only the European
Central Bank would lower its rates in concert with the Federal Reserve System,
they contend, the euro would rise and sparkle like the dollar. According to
these market analysts, to imitate the Fed and expand credit is to give strength
to a currency!
Actually, there are two important reasons that are
keeping the euro in a state of chronic depression. First, the governments of the
twelve euro-zone countries (Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, The Netherlands) are using the
introduction of the common currency as an opportunity to seize and confiscate
funds acquired illegally. They are determined not only to prevent money
laundering, that is, making illegally acquired cash look as if it were acquired
legally, but also to obstruct or even close the black markets, that is, illicit
markets in which goods are sold in violation of tax laws, price controls or
other restrictions. All euro-zone commercial banks, which are scheduled to
handle the exchange of new money for old, therefore, are required to report
every exchange of "large sums" to the authorities. No matter what they may
report, many savers of illicit savings, no matter how small, may be fearful of
being reported by name. They are seeking to avoid criminal prosecution and loss
of funds by spending their savings or converting them into dollars. The euro is
an unintended casualty.
Second, there are millions of people outside the
euro-zone who are holding European currencies. Merchants, farmers and workers in
Poland, Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, and other European countries have savings in
trusted German marks. They may have heard rumors about the coming currency
reform that will render their savings worthless, but may not know where to
exchange them for new euros. Their own governments may want to seize them, which
are scarce foreign reserves, or want to tax them for reasons of tax evasion.
Helplessness and fear may force the savers either to spend their holdings or
convert them into dollars. The conversion itself is bound to be rather costly as
foreign commercial banks will have to work through euro banks and report the
names of depositors to euro authorities. Only black markets which command high
risk premiums do handle the conversion without a question.
It is
difficult to estimate the magnitude of both sources of funds seeking exchange.
The amounts involved are huge. The black-market economy of the euro zone has
been estimated at some 16 percent of official gross domestic product (GDP). As
it cannot use the banking system and is forced to use cash only, its stock of
cash is bound to be way above the 16 percent of illegal GDP. If we assume it to
be only 25 percent, with some 256 billion euros of bank notes presently in
circulation (European Central Bank, Monthly Bulletin, April 2001), some
64 billion euros are serving the black market . A flight into dollars of such
amounts alone would depress the euro. In addition, the old stock of convertible
money held in the non-euro parts of Europe is estimated at some 50 billion
euros. (The outstanding German mark holdings alone are estimated between 30 and
45 billion.) Altogether the stock of European currency seeking U.S. dollars is
significant; it is bound to depress the euro and lift the dollar.
The
poor reception of the European currency could have been avoided if the euro
countries would have conducted a simple currency reform without waging war on
money laundering and black-marketeering. The war is a never-ending conflict that
ensues from the very nature of political authority over the economic lives of
individuals. No government has ever won it, however brutally it waged its
battles. But such wars do irreparable harm to economic life and social
cooperation. Since January 1, 1999 when the euro was launched, the conflict has
cast much doubt on European productivity and the future of the euro. Worst of
all, it may inflict immeasurable harm on millions of individuals throughout
Europe whose savings may become worthless or who are forced to exchange them at
steep black market discounts. The weak euro and the strong dollar are visible
symptoms of this damage.
A simple currency reform would have exchanged
old notes and coins for new currency without spreading uncertainty and fear. It
would have avoided the three-year delay between the currency launch and the
issue of notes and coins and, above all, have extended the two-month grace
period of exchange to five or 10 years. It is inconsiderate and even harsh to
demand that many millions of individuals deposit their old money in euro banks
and exchange them for new euro notes within the short period of two months, in
January and February of 2002. A simple reform would have been mindful of
uninformed individuals in Poland, Croatia, Slovena, Hungary and any other
country of the world.
It undoubtedly is too late to speed up the
exchange process, but the euro governments could at least rescind their
reporting and naming orders and allow commercial banks to handle the exchange
without acting as policemen. Such a rescission would lend instant strength to
the euro and attract new capital to the euro economy. The European Central Bank
(ECB) could develop clear exchange procedures for foreigners wherever they may
live, procedures that would allow individuals to exchange their savings at their
convenience. It also could devise procedures that would allow the new money
quickly to penetrate the black markets inside and outside the euro-zone, which
would reduce the extraordinary demand for U.S. dollars and remove the pressures
on the euro.
Instead of limping after the Fed which forever is trailing
the business cycle, the European Central Bank could lead the way in averting the
cycles by attaching its policy to the anchor of the ages, to gold. Economic
cycles made their appearance with the dawn of central banking and fiat money and
have disrupted economic life ever since. There never has been a shortage of
gold; but the world frequently has suffered from an abundance of paper money,
which in many countries is counted by the thousands and millions of units.
The euro attached to gold immediately would overshadow the U.S. dollar
which is managed by seven political appointees. Instead of lingering at deep
discounts to the dollar, a gold euro would soon rise to a premium and may even
replace the dollar as the world's primary reserve currency. But such a policy
undoubtedly is alien to the Governing Council of the ECB as it is to the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve. Guided by theories of central banking and
credit management, both spurn the use of gold. It may take many more business
cycles and monetary crises to appreciate the stability of gold. Experience may
be the only teacher.