25 July 2012

We Want a Stronger Currency!


I wanted to write a timely article on the effects of a strong currency. We are currently seeing the Australian Dollar (AUD) rise to lifetime record highs against the Euro as problems in the Eurozone continue to fester and investors look for perceived safe haven economies to park their money. The Australian economy is a very attractive location for capital because of its stable developed economy, stable political system, relatively low government debt and is generally business friendly.



Safe haven status takes years to attain but can be lost in few months. The most recent currency to lose some of their safe haven credibility is Switzerland, which pegged its currency to the Euro and now has to print unlimited amounts of Swiss Francs (CHF) to maintain the currency peg. Since the Eurozone fears lead people to buy CHFs, the Swiss are forced to increase their money supply to meet demand, which will eventually cause prices to rise as those newly created CHFs leak into the wider economy.

The economic pundits will tell you that the high AUD or CHF is hurting domestic industries and jobs are being lost. This fails to recognise that the fundamental goal for an economy is not to have more jobs but to increase productivity. Maybe every Swiss person could have worked for 35hrs a week instead of 40hrs a week since their purchasing power is increasing in EUR terms. That’s obviously a good thing and helps them achieve a higher standard of living by making their lives easier and more enjoyable to live.

The Swiss government fell for the myth that a weak currency stimulates exports. But what they continually forget to mention is the reduced cost of imports that benefits EVERYONE in Switzerland. There will be changes that will occur in an economy with a strong currency including job losses since marginally productive exporters will face greater competition through cheaper imports. Some businesses will close down but others will become more productive. The business that closes down will result in job losses but does that mean the newly unemployed will never work again? OF COURSE NOT! There is always a productive use for labour in an economy and as long as wages and labour regulations are flexible, the unemployed will find work elsewhere within the economy. Maybe new employment opportunities will come from a growing business reliant on imports that have seen demand rise as their products are now cheaper. The net result is an increase in the overall productivity of the economy and is an example of Schumpeter’s creative destruction, where the resources from a non-productive business are reallocated to a more productive business.

The other point touched on before was that a stronger currency will benefit everyone since they can buy goods from the rest of the world cheaply. Exporters may see stiffer competition but they too will see costs decline if they import supplies or raw materials from foreign businesses.



The Australian economy is a great example of an economy that has thrived despite seeing a rising currency. This does not mean the economy is completely healthy because households continue to have high debt levels due to large mortgages and we are likely to see the property market continue its slow decline. Australia is also heavily exposed to Asia and if there is a slow down or financial crisis our economy could be slammed. But things continue to function and we have not seen our economy die as a result of the strong Australian dollar. Next time you see the Aussie dollar make a new high, don’t frown, fist pump the air and shout YOU BEAUTY!

02 February 2012

Back to Surplus

So I'm back after my hiatus and will hopefully pick up where I left off...




Public debt has become a hot issue in the last few years as governments rack up enormous budget expenditure and finance it by borrowing from the private sector. Unfortunately for some governments this debt load has become unsustainable and will inevitably lead to a default unless harsh austerity is embraced. Since austerity is the least politically feasible option, governments will either print money or default/restructure their debts.

Thankfully Australia is not in this predicament with an electorate that has been conditioned to fear public sector debt, and rightly so, which has led politicians to pledge returns to surplus and debt reduction. However, there have been calls from pundits and economists to deprioritise repaying the debt and returning to surplus since it is "manageable" at these levels. So who is right? Are the politicians bowing to popular opinion or are the economists right? I am firmly in the camp of reducing the debt as fast as possible because of the following problems:

Firstly, there are limited funds available for entities to borrow and when the government borrows over $100 billion it crowds out private activity by preventing businesses from accessing that capital and therefore increases the cost of borrowing economy wide.

Secondly, it is generally accepted that the larger the size of government, the more inefficiencies in spending (diseconomies of scale if you like).

The benefits of returning to surplus and repaying the debt:

More funds are available to businesses which will lower borrowing costs and raise profits allowing the business to expand by hiring more people, for example.

Inefficiencies are reduced for the government leading to an improvment in the expenditure quality as the government is forced to trim expenses with the most wasteful spending likely to be cut first. A good example of this is when the flood levy was established and the cash for clunkers scheme was abandoned.

Future taxes are lower since interest on the debt decreases as the debt is repaid.

Puts the government balance in a good position to respond to future crises such as natural disasters (QLD floods) or economic crisis (GFC).

Although both sides of government have committed to achieving surplus and paying back the debt only one has said firmly that they will reduce the size of government. This week Tony Abbott outlined his view of Australia and vowed to “permanently [reduce] the size of government”. This is clearly a good policy for all supporters of freedom and will lead to greater prosperity. (Edit March 2013: Labour has abandoned its pledge to return to surplus).

I will say upfront that I usually vote Liberal because they are reducing the size of government and are committed to a greater level of freedom for everyone. Labor unfortunately believes in big government and spending, which will send Australia down the path towards Greece, Portugal and other fiscally irresponsible nations. If Australia wants to remain strong it will pay off the debt and run budget surpluses.