Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Английский для экономистов. Учебное пособие
.pdf
Australians, actually). China, for example, had a – very unpopular – fixed
exchange rate up until fairly recently. Even now, the degree to which is manages
its currency is still unpopular.
The key to managed floats is that, with a floating dollar, one’s domestic
economy is exposed. In Australia, for example, our currency:
AUD exchange
Did fairly well, up until around a month ago when speculation died down
and/or the speculators took their profits. I used a longer time trend in my previous
post – it was much more impressive. The pressure has died off a bit, now that we
have had the interest rate increase.
Now then, what happens if the Australian dollar gets too high? Australian
exporters take a big hit, because our prices become too expensive on the world
market. Our macroeconomy slows down some as those declining export incomes
kick in. Meanwhile, if speculation is the cause of the appreciating currency, there
can be a liquidity problem, because foreign companies are borrowing up all of our
money, rather than domestic firms and households. If they drive interest rates up,
that too slows down our macroeconomy via consumption and investment. Our
Current Account Deficit also deteriorates.
So the Reserve Bank of Australia steps in to manage our floating currency.
Specifically it will sell off reserves of Australian dollars, lowering their value on
the ForEx market.
If, on the other hand, the Australian dollar were to depreciate too far (as per
the Asian currency crisis), we have trouble attracting foreign capital because the
return on those loans are too low. Our Current Account Deficit benefits but our
debt becomes much worse (if it is in, say, US dollars, which is often the case). In
this case the Reserve Bank enters the ForEx market and buys up Australian dollars,
so that its value appreciates.
The key to a managed float is market invervention (as opposed to
interference) designed to prevent external pressure getting through to a domestic
economy. As a rule, this «getting through» is considered bad when the domestic
211
economy would be thrown out of whack. In the case of China, for example, their
economy was already out of whack – prospering from a low Renminbi, which is
being kept low to keep exports selling. Managed floats that are designed to sustain
non-equilibrium conditions for a domestic economy relative to the rest of the world
are the «dirty» kind. Given the level of international trade these days, almost all
the AUD appreciating has been the commodities boom, driving up legitimate
demand for our currency, in order to buy our commodities). As a result most floats
are managed.
This, finally, is where my comments about US borrowing come in. With a
level of debt equal to USD 29,551.77 per citizen, and a Congress continually
raising the debt cap (feeling fat? Let your belt out!), more and more money needs
to come into the country as lending. For the US a depreciating dollar helps their
debt, kind of, but they have to pay it off with predominantly US dollars anyway,
so. Along the way, a depreciating dollar makes getting loans more difficult (except
from China, who can extend lines of credit to the US all day long, if they’re buying
their plastic crap. Same with Saudi Arabia and their oil), necessitating interest rate
increases to attract capital. However, at the moment, those interest rates are under a
hell of a lot of fire from financial and housing markets.
It can become a mess very rapidly. In a managed float, the Federal Reserve’s
incentive is to go and buy up US dollars to shore up their value. The trouble with
that is the downward pressure is fairly strong these days, and a central bank cannot
manage a float forever (usually – even China’s will be unsustainable, eventually).
If China really does go through with diversifying it’s portfolio, that pressure will
certainly increase.
Basically there’s only so much tide a central bank can hold back. Immediate
crises? Fixable. Long-term pressure? Not so fixable, but softenable, at least. Hence
my comment on the previous post, that we’re seeing aggressive central bank
activity, but not float-managing. Principally, this is because currencies are not the
vector for this contagion – international trading of frankendebt CDOs among
212
companies is. If it carries across to currency, these banks will need some more
fancy moves, but for now they just have the much more difficult task of trying to
manage liquidity drying up because everyone’s selling debt that nobody wants.
EXERCISES
1. Sum up the main ides of the text and retell it in Russian.
2. Fill in the missing words from the box into the text below.
floating exchange foreign automatically keep currency principles market
stability period idea volatile find market variety exchange rate may
A 1)_________ exchange rate is an exchange rate which is allowed to shift
in response to market pressures. The exchange value of the currency in question is
determined by activities on the foreign 2)_________ market, causing its value to
rise and fall. By contrast, a fixed exchange rate is set by the government, usually
by pinning the value of the currency to the value of a currency unit such as the
United States dollar.
The 3)_________ behind a floating exchange rate is that it allows for self
correction. As market pressures shift and the value rises and falls, the economy
should in theory remain stable. In practice, things are not this simple. While many
nations use a floating exchange rate, the rate can be highly 4)_________, and can
have a profound impact on local economies. Especially if a nation enters an
economic tailspin, having a floating exchange rate can be brutal for the citizens, as
they may 5)_________ that their purchasing power dwindles away to nothing.
In a truly independent floating exchange rate, the value of the currency is
determined solely on the foreign exchange 6)_________. It changes in response to
supply and demand of the currency in question, economic activities in the nation of
origin, and a wide 7)_________ of other factors, including overall financial
depression and similar events.
213
The way through which a country manages its currency in relation to other
currencies and the foreign 8)_________ market is known as an Exchange Rate
System. Basically there are three types of exchange rate systems:
1) Floating Exchange Rate Systems or Flexible exchange 9)_________
system.
2) Fixed Exchange Rate System or Pegged Exchange Rate System.
3) Managed Floating Exchange Rate System
Dirty float refers to a specific floating exchange rate system in which central
bank intervention may occur. The country’s central bank 10)_________ do so with
the objective of manipulating the currency in order to protect it from effects of
economic fluctuation. This is especially helpful in ensuring that major backlashes
are prevented before they can even occur.
A floating exchange rate is one in which the value of a particular currency,
in this case known as a floating currency, is allowed to change depending on
fluctuations in the 11)_________ exchange market.
Since floating exchange rates are directly affected by changes on an
international level, adjustments are 12)_________ made to the currency. These
adjustments are often believed to be beneficial, because they help protect the
currency from external shocks.
On the other hand, adopting a fixed exchange rate may seem attractive,
because doing so may appear to bring about more stability. A country must
therefore make a decision on which regime to use, especially since most countries
would prefer to be able to 13)_________ their currencies strong in relation to those
of other nations. In order to do so, it are necessary to opt for a floating rate, albeit
one which is still open to intervention.
There are two types of exchange rate systems: floating or fixed. A floating
exchange rate is one in which a currency’s value is determined by market forces. A
fixed exchange rate matches, «pegs», the value of the 14)_________ to: one
currency, several currencies or even to a fixed amount of a commodity.
214
Floating Exchange Rates Prior to 1971’s breakdown of the Bretton Woods
Agreement (a fixed exchange rate system revolving around the US Dollar and
gold), most currencies were pegged. Today, the current international financial
system squares most of the currencies of the world against one another in a free
market. Floating exchange rates are preferable to fixed ones since floating rates are
reflective of 15)_________ movement and the 16)_________ of supply and
demand and limit imbalances in the international financial system. Fixed exchange
rates grant more control to central banks (who may or may not be independent of
the government) to set a currency’s value, and during times of volatility are
preferred for their greater 17)_________. Many developing countries use fixed
exchange rates in order to evade market abuse.
In extreme situations such as political unrest, terrorist attacks or natural
disasters a country’s currency may experience a 18)_________ of heavy selling
that causes it to depreciate in value. The country’s central bank may intervene in
order to restore the value of the currency. A central bank regime that routinely
intervenes would use the term «managed float». Sometimes, the central bank may
set upper and lower bounds known as price ceilings and floors, respectively, and
intervene whenever those bounds are reached.
3. Read the following article and make a rendering of it in English.
В то время сигареты московских фабрик были большим дефицитом.
Оптом их можно было приобрести через государственную посредническую
компанию «ТКС». «Мы просто приехали к ним, поговорили и начали
работать», – рассказывает
Смирнов о дебюте на табачном рынке. В те
времена одна сделка приносила минимум 80% прибыли.
В 1994 году Олег Сало решил отделиться от СНС и учредил
собственную компанию «Тюсом». Она, впрочем, до сих пор работает в паре с
СНС, участвуя в одних и тех же операциях. Зачем нужно было делить одну
компанию
на две, партнеры не объясняют.
215
Постепенно СНС превратилась во всеядного дистрибьютора – в ее
ассортимент входили как отечественные, так и импортные марки. Целых
девять лет компания Олега Смирнова была свободна в выборе партнеров и
торговой линейки. Иностранцы же тем временем создавали свои табачные
производства в России. Philip Morris наладила выпуск сигарет на фабриках в
Ленинградской области и Краснодарском крае
, BAT приобрела мощности в
Саратове и Москве, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) купила производства в
Петербурге и Липецкой области.
Иностранные инвестиции в отрасль привели к тому, что суммарное
производство всех фабрик в 1999 году впервые превысило спрос – на 3%. А в
2000 году – уже на 56% (по данным «Грандтабака»). Тепличные условия для
табачных дистрибьюторов закончились. Крупные иностранные поставщики,
получившие на
тот момент 57% рынка, начали реорганизацию сбыта.
Главная идея заключалась в том, чтобы резко сократить число
дистрибьюторов – с десятков компаний до единиц – и сделать эти избранные
компании своими эксклюзивными партнерами. Торговцам сигаретами
предстояло выбрать, с кем они продолжат сотрудничество, а затем суметь
доказать этому производителю свою верность.
К концу 2000 года Смирнов
сделал ставку на BAT. В ноябре он
разорвал отношения с тремя российскими конкурентами компании –
ростовской фабрикой «Донской табак», ярославской «Балканской звездой» и
питерской «Нево Табак». СНС начала распродажу по демпинговым ценам их
сигарет, скопившихся к тому времени на складе.
Смирнов уверяет, что эта акция не имела стратегических целей. «Мы
просто проверили свои
возможности, – сказал он в интервью Forbes нарочито
равнодушным тоном. – Ассортимент этих фабрик не имел перспективы,
поэтому мы и решили от него отказаться». Но бывший генеральный директор
«Донского табака» Иван Саввиди считает, что атака была инициирована
иностранными конкурентами. Владимир Галагаев, тогдашний владелец
«Балканской звезды» (минувшим летом продана франко-испанскому
216
концерну Altadis), тоже сказал, что акция была направлена на подрыв
позиций российских предприятий.
Как бы то ни было, в конце 2000-го три фабрики вынуждены были
остановить производство более чем на месяц. А Смирнов заработал очки в
глазах руководства ВАТ, которая в тот момент выбирала трех из пяти
тогдашних дистрибьюторов для продолжения сотрудничества
.
Дистрибуция с фильтром
Осенью 2001 года BAT определилась с тройкой партнеров. В их число
вошли СНС, «Тюсом» и компания «Савва юнивесл».
«Решение BAT было для нас неожиданным, – вспоминает глава
компании «Юнэкт» Дмитрий Сухобрусов, от сотрудничества с которой ВАТ
отказалась. – В конечном счете это расставание пошло нам на пользу. Мы
были вынуждены переосмыслить свои
возможности и перестроить бизнес».
По информации Forbes, перестройка заняла три года. «Юнэкт» продолжила
торговать сигаретами, но лишь в нынешнем году достигла тех оборотов,
которые имела как партнер BAT.
Part 3
THE DIRTY FLOAT
The world is launched upon the new era of floating. To be sure, it is not a
clean launch but a dirty one, with governments intervening in currency markets.
But the dollar has bobbed upward in relation to most other currencies in waters that
seem remarkably calm. How long will stability last? Is it conceivable that, under
the pressure of the most serious monetary crisis of the postwar era, the major
financial powers of the non Communist world have already laid the basis for a
new, durable international monetary system?
Some economists now think the dirty float resulting from the upheaval is
actually a better foundation for the new monetary order than the elaborate plan
217
presented last Septeinber by Secretary of the Treasury George P. Shultz at the
International Monetary Fund meetings in Washington.
The Shultz plan calls for the use of changes in a nation's international
monetary reserves as an objective test of when countries should be pressed to take
steps to adjust their balance of payments. A country could make its adjustments by
changing its exchange rate, or by some other device, such as reducing trade
barriers on increasing capital outflow.
The economists who prefer the present scheme believe that it can evolve into
a flexible and stable permanent order.
But others fear the present dirty float is just a make shift arrangement.
(«Dirty» means a controlled float, with govern ments buying and selling in the
foreign exchange markets. «clean» means uncontrolled.)
The key issue is whether exchange rate flexibility, in order to work, must be
reinforced by strong international cooperation–which may or may not be
forthcoming–or whether «international cooperation» is simply a euphemism for
government interference which in itself is sure to make floating fail to produce
balance among national currencies.
The first days of the system are too few to resolve the dirty float issue. If
there should be an outbreak of mass speculation and exchange rates begin to shoot
up and down, those who are committed to floating as solution will blame this
instability on the dirtiness of the float.
Those who believe that international cooperation is es sentlal will blame the
breakdown on the lack of rules for making appropriate and orderly exchange rate
changes and the lack of adequate defenses for the existing structure.
Even many of those who believa in clean floating as the best answer doubt
that most governments will accept that solution. The exchange rate is top important
for nations heavily dependent on foreign trade to entrust to the market.
A country such as the United States with total exports amounting to only 5
per cent of gross national product, can stand sizable changes in its exchange rate.
218
But the European nations–whose exports average almost 20 per cent of G.N.P. –
are more resistant to exchange rate variability.
The Common Market is trying to stay inside its narrow range of currency
values, although the «snake in the tunnel» has now become a water snake.
The «snake in the tunnel» was the term used to describe the agreement
among Common Market countries to keep their currencies within a band of 2¼ per
cent around their par values (the «snake») when other world currencies were
permitted to fluctuate within a 4½ per cent band (the «tunnel»). With major
currencies floating of course, the «tunnel» has gained considerably in scope.
Whether floating could work, even if governments were willing to keep
hands off entirely, is a moot question.
Skeptics insist that foreign exchange markets are inherently unstable,
because they are similar to such unstable markets as those for securities or real
estate in one major respect: low transactions costs that is, the small relative cost of
acquiring and getting rid of money, equities or land.
Opponents of free floating insist that such low transactions costa bring on
the kind of speculation that produced the Florida land boom, the South Sea bubble,
stock market booms and busts like those of 1929 or 1970, and the highly unstable
currency markets of the 1920's and 1930's.
Whether this view of the instability of uncontrolled currency markets is right
or wrong, finance ministers and central bankers are still unwilling to gamble on
completely free floating.
Hence, they will ultimately try to negotiate rules for making acceptable
exchange rate changes. The Europeans have also insisted on the obligation of
governments – including that of the United States – to intervene in exchange
markets to prevent sudden and radical changes resulting from speculative market
forces.
Since the United States remains the center of the international monetary
system, the immediate solution to providing this country with enough resources to
defend the dollar will require an expansion of the «swaps» network by which
219
nations borrow each other's currencies to defend their own. There is now almost
$12 billion in the swaps net work. Some economists – such as Robert V. Roosa, a
former Under Secretary of the Treasury, and C. Fred Bergsten of the Brookings
Institution –think the swaps network should be expanded to about $50 billion.
Prof. Richard Cooper of Yale thinks swaps are a necessary immediate
mechanism for maintaining monetary order, but regards the network as a «wagon
wheel» – with the United States as the hub and the other nations as the spokes.
Ultimately, Professor Cooper thinks the world is going to need a facility at the
International Monetary Fund –essentially a new central bank – that will provide
adequate resources for any country to maintain the stability of its currency.
A leading champion of moving toward a world central bank is William
McChesney Martin, former chairman of the Federal Reserve System. In his Per
Jacobsson lecture in Basle, Switzerland, oh Sept. 14, 1970, Mr. Martin said such an
entity, after he had left the Fed, should perform five jobs:
¶Persuade countries running heavy balance of payments deficits or surpluses
to adopt suitable fiscal and monetary policies.
¶Administer internationally accepted codes of behavior regarding exchange
practices, balance of payments restrictions and trade practices.
But are the United States, the European countries, Japan and the rest of the
non Communist world ready to accept the kind of international cooperation and
degree of supranational authority such a proposal would require?
If they are not–and some observers think the United States for one is bent on
a unilateral course in its foreign economic and political policies and wants no
inhibition from abroad on its domestic economic, policies–then some combination
of dirty floating with minimal international coordination would seem to be
inevitable. For that would seem to free a country to do as it pleases.
But if dirty, uncoordinated floating is likely to he as unstable as both the
advocates of free floating, and of close international cooperation, insist, then the
world has not seen the end of currency instability. And, for the same reason,
220
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]