The G-20 meeting which ended over the weekend and in rather
unusual terms ended with some sort of accord on what economic indicators
should be used in the future to detect economic imbalances between the
member nations. We should remember that nothing was agreed
upon concerning what to do regarding these imbalances; the only agreement was on the accounting of the
imbalances… and even then the discussions were “frank [and] sometimes tense” according to Ms. Christine
Legarde, the French Finance Minister and the ostensible chairperson of the meeting given the location of the
event and given that France holds the Presidency of the European Union at the moment.
In the delicate world of foreign affairs and global economics there are words used that have special
meanings, and “frank” is one of those words. Foreign affairs officials do not use the term “frank” unless they mean
to say that the discussions were heated, that tempers flared, that any agreement reached was reached only
after a great, good deal of anger on both sides et al. “Frank” discussions are not discussions that were pleasant
honest, although almost always they are “honest.” “Frank” discussions were those that ended on nearly the
worst of notes.
To quote Ms. Legarde,
The negotiations were frank; sometimes tense
and led to a final compromise which cannot
attribute to any one delegation but which I can
say represents a spirit of compromise and of
ambition.
In other words, she and the others at the meeting had
had quite enough of one another and were content
simply to find something upon which they could all agree
beyond simply that Paris is a beautiful city.
North America and Europe had wanted the “indicators” to include… and indeed perhaps to focus upon… the
current account. China, rather obviously, was opposed to having the current account account for much of anything.
China obviously is concerned that its current account shall continue to increase for some while into the future,
and feared that the other members would use that current account surplus as a reason to demand policy
changes from Beijing that Beijing would not and could not agree to. The compromised reached was that a
nation’s current account would be used as one of many other indicators that should be looked upon when considering policy changes,
and that interest payments earned upon foreign securities held would not be counted in the current account in the future.
Further, China was opposed to the wish on the part of most other nations in the G-20 to view the “real
effective” exchange rate for one’s currency as evidence of the over-or-under valuation of that currency. No
decision was arrived at in this regard, apparently. Finally, the street thought it fascinating just how little was accomplished
at the meeting, for some traders were taken to task by some on Friday when they said that these meetings almost always
“raise a great hue and cry a’forehand, but end with platitudes and confusion.” Some Traders Stated Friday that the street was fully
expecteing “nothing of consequence to come of this meeting other than create avenues of cooperation and
communication between the world’s monetary and fiscal
leaders.”
VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.6_1107]