Categories
Economics Politics & government

[2563] Why I do not want to see a Eurozone break-up

I understand the case for the breaking up of the Eurozone. I do appreciate the virtue behind a flexible exchange rate, especially for cases like Greece. There is a need for rebalancing that a monetary union cannot provide. Yet, I am uneasy at the suggestion of a break-up, of Grexit, because deep inside of me, I am more or less an internationalist.

The internationalist sentiment is derived from my libertarian belief. It is about freedom of movement. Free flow of labor. Free flow of capital. All around the world.

I dream of a world where I would not have to present identification whenever I land in some foreign airports. I dream that I would be free to be anyway I choose without the need to ask permission from the state.

Unleash the ideal world and what I call the crazy me would come out as an anarchist. Specifically, an anarcho-capitalist. Freedom unbounded.

But I am not an anarchist because I understand anarchism is inherently unstable. I settle for the second best option available and that is free-market libertarianism.

Just as anarchism is the ideal but unattainable and thus the second-best solution is libertarianism, internationalism is the ideal but the second best approach is regionalism, for now.

This fuels my sympathy for the Eurozone. I want the Eurozone to be intact because of my bias. It has nothing to do about being western or Europe-centric.

I want it intact so that in the future, the Asean version can emerge. An Eurozone failure will likely inform decision on a more integrated Asean. Already the Indonesian President warned Asean of repeating the European mistake. The warning is appropriate but as I have argued, there are appropriate lessons to learn from the European crisis without jettisoning a closer Asean idea.

And I do think Europe will succeed, if recent history is of value.

The end of World War II saw closer cooperation between European countries: observe the Marshall Plan. Not all and definitely it was easy to cooperation when your opponent is dead, but the cooperation happened and that is the point.

The Cold War saw closer integration: observe the European Coal and Steel Community and the European Economic Community.

Post-Cold War saw even more: observe the European Union and its expansion.

The European Exchange Rate Mechanism crisis brought closer cooperation: observe the introduction of the Eurozone.

Now, the latest Eurozone crisis may bring in closer cooperation: observe the fiscal union proposal.

So, do not ring the bell yet. The regionalist game is not over yet and the outcome of death is not certain.

As a libertarian, the issue is the creation of a stronger state but I think, this can be a largely enlightened state, with a federal structure is can be a counterforce to the central government.

Categories
Economics

[2553] The lesson of Europe for Southeast Asia

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono warned of the danger of a common currency in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. It is a reminder that needs not a resounding. The horror of Europe is enough to make one thinks twice of a currency union. The talks of Greek exit can potential become the end of the European dream.

The European crisis is a challenge to me partly because I am supportive of a currency union for Southeast Asia. Sometimes in the past, I contended to be associated with the term Aseanist.

More importantly, I am supportive of a currency union because of my free trade tendency: a union boosts trade because it reduces trade barrier significantly.

To be fair to myself, I support a union across similar economies and not wholly across the diverse Southeast Asia economies from the financially sophisticated Singapore to the tiny backwater East Timor.

Really, the lesson of Europe is not that monetary union does not work. The lesson is that monetary union works best for similar economies: the economic cycles mostly coincide, the structures are about the same, the culture of societies in it are not so different, etc.

I think I have made the case for a currency union for Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei for a start. In fact, Singapore and Brunei are already on a currency board, which effectively means de facto currency union. Malaysia is the natural extension of the Brunei-Singapore union because of its proximity and the massive interlinking between the three economies.

Then, there is perhaps historical hangover on my part, given how the original Malaysian proposal was a 15-state federation, with both Brunei and Singapore in it. Indeed, prior to 1973, all three currencies were interchangeable freely. Even before that between 1953 and 1967, all three countries used the same currency.

One issue with the Malaysia-Singapore-Brunei currency union is that the Singaporean economy tends to be more volatile than Malaysia. Nevertheless, I think in many ways, the direction of both economies are more or less the same. In that sense, the challenge of a monetary authority is to be more flexible and responsive to a more dynamic economy.

Categories
Economics

[2476] Postponing the European crisis to 2013

I am in the opinion that the expected sovereign debt and banking crises in Europe have been postponed to the end of 2012 or early 2013. There are two reasons why I think so.

The crisis in Europe is essentially two-fold. One is due to government debts. Two is the risk of default by European banks. The two sides are interrelated but it is useful to separate them.

The sovereign debt crisis has been postponed thanks to the establishment and the expansion of the European Financial Stability fund. The EFSF would not be exhausted until the end of 2012 even if all debts repayment or refinancing by the infamous PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) is financed through facility. The potential rating downgrade of sovereign debts of stronger economies, namely Germany and France, may hurt the likelihood of success of on the EFSF front but I will wait until that actually happens.

I am taking this position because by December 2012, total principal and interest payments made by the PIIGS government is projected to be EUR700 billion. That is below the total size of the EFSF.

The following graph shows principal and interest payment obligation of all the PIIGS government cumulatively. Looking at it, without the more permanent European Stability Mechanism which is supposed to kick start in the middle of next year, trouble will come only around February or March 2013.

The banking crisis meanwhile has been postponed until next year thanks to the soft loan facility provided by the European Central Bank. It has been reportedthat banks in Europe will require EUR700 billion next year to pay up their debts. Since the facility offered by the ECB is at the moment limitless (there will be a limit because already the total loans made by the ECB attract considerable question), the problem on this front too has been postponed to 2013.

This of course says nothing of recession and economic recession is another issue altogether.

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[2469] The United States of Europe, on the way

There are several stages of economic integration.

Free trade agreement is probably the lowest of all integrations. It seeks just free flow of capital and labor across borders.

The next step is either custom or monetary union together with a common market. Member states surrender monetary policy to a central authority while maintaining independent fiscal policy. Trade duties are harmonized across the union.

The next stage is fiscal union where individual governments cede their power over fiscal policy to a central authority.

The European Union is on the verge of becoming a fiscal union, making history less than just two decades after adopting a monetary union in all of its sense. Today at an important summit, a majority of European leaders voted for stricter fiscal deficit rules. They believed the best way to solve the debt crisis is to integrate further. Integration will eliminate the crisis of confidence Europe currently suffers from, much like how a troubled California will not trouble the United States by much.

This integrationist logic is persistent among Europeans. When Europe suffered from a serious currency crisis long ago, the then European leaders thought the best way to eliminate volatility between currencies that adversely affected trade in Europe was to have a monetary union.

This is really a big jump. Usually, debates on exchange rate mechanism gyrates between floating or fixed regime. Europe chose to not only have a fixed regime, they chose a fixed regime by marriage. You cannot get a more fixed regime than a monetary union.

Now, the thinking is that the best way to address the debt crisis to have a fiscal union.

Yes, it is an exaggeration to call the recent development in Europe as outright fiscal union. But the new agreement is a big push towards that direction, towards the United States of Europe.