Categories
Economics

[1996] Of what increased trade surplus due to fallen imports typically means

There are a lot of things to be optimistic about. The recent increased in Malaysian net exports however is not one of them.

The increase is due to fallen imports. That is generally bad and especially so within Malaysian context. So, I will find my blood pressure spikes slightly whenever I read in the news and other writing of a slew of bad things only to read a negating adverb like, ‘however’, ‘nevertheless’, ‘nonetheless’, etc. to introduce the fact that net exports increased due to fallen imports. And it really pains me to see words like ‘fortunately’. There is nothing fortunate about it for heaven’s sake, unless you are a some kind of neo-mercantilists.

Why is it bad?

In the accounting of gross national product, the component imports is subtracted from exports because it is redundant to another component that is consumption. Imported goods, with the exception of intermediary goods which are meant to be reexported, are consumed locally.

For the reexported goods, it would be reflected in the exports component. For the imported and locally consumed goods, it will be reflected in the consumption component.

For the sake of clarity, the simple form of GDP is Gross Domestic Product = (Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports), where Net Exports = (Exports – Imports).

Increased net exports due to lower imports, means consumption is suffering. That cannot be good for the economy, with all else being equal.

Categories
Economics History & heritage

[1347] Of Kant’s perpetual peace

Immanuel Kant wrote that free trade creates perpetual peace. Under the mercantilist era which he had lived in, the truth behind such idea cannot be any clearer.

Mercantilism holds that trade is a zero-sum game with constant volume of global trade. As such, the most prosperous country is the country with the most supply of capital. To a mercantilist, this means export should be encouraged while import should be actively discouraged. One may recognize this as some sort of protectionism.

In a world dominated by mercantilists, low volume of trade would be a norm as each and every mercantilist seeks to accumulate vast amount of capital. This is so because everybody refrains from buying anything from anybody. Trade meanwhile is dependent on the act of buying and selling; without either one, there can be no trade. Mercantilism necessarily limits resources any mercantilist state could muster to only those found within its boundaries.

Individuals demand so many things and not all of those things could be obtained locally. Without trade, demand would be unfulfilled, turning life duller than it should be. Mercantilists of the past realized this and sought to solve it by expanding its boundaries; they internalized resources into their boundaries. In doing so, mercantilists eliminated the need for import and possibly maintained a positive trade balance. This requirement for expansion is one of many factors that fueled colonialism and wars in the past.

As demand becomes more sophisticated, it becomes impossible for local industry to satisfy local demand in the absence of trade. Boundaries of mercantilist states thus require further expansion to internalize more resources to satisfy greater demand. In the end translates into one conclusion: the biggest state, all else being equal, would have the greatest amount of resources. Britain of old, the great mercantilist state, was well on its way to be the largest empire the world has ever seen.

Alas, the Earth is only so big. Continuous expansion eventually will bring mercantilists to each other door step and finally, in absence of trade, the only way to obtain what a mercantilist state needs is by expanding its boundaries into other states’ borders. This typically means war and wars involving mercantilist states did happen from the 16th to the 18th century.

The madness brought by mercantilism was only suppressed after the rationale of trade overwhelmed the prevailing thinking in the late 18th century. Through trade, various states can obtain what it requires without the need to expand its boundaries, without going to war. Sooner or later, trading states will depend on each other to achieve prosperity. To quote Kant:

By virtue of their mutual interest does nature unite people against violence and war… the spirit of trade cannot coexist with war, and sooner or later this spirit dominates every people. For among all those powers… that belong to a nation, financial power may be the most reliable in forcing nations to pursue the noble cause of peace… and wherever in the world war threatens to break out, they will try to head it off through mediation, just as if they were permanently leagued for this purpose.

Categories
Economics

[1172] Of pressure for liberalization builds up

The International Herald Tribune, one of many, picks up a report by Associated Press:

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia: Foreign funds inflows are keeping Malaysia’s markets on a long rally, but the money is staying in the country because of central bank restrictions and is starting to create economic imbalances, analysts say.

The local currency, the ringgit, is not allowed to be traded offshore, which means currency transactions are limited to within Malaysia. That has created a massive pool of money. [Awash in foreign funds, Malaysia faces economic imbalances over central bank restrictions. AP via IHT. April 8 2007]

Too much many chasing too few capital is a classic, or rather, a textbook recipe for inflation, as mentioned in the same report:

The excess cash in the country is leading to inflationary pressures as there is more money than before, chasing the same amount of goods. [Awash in foreign funds, Malaysia faces economic imbalances over central bank restrictions. AP via IHT. April 8 2007]

Further in the article:

Speculation is now mounting that Bank Negara might eventually lift a curb on the offshore trading of the ringgit that was imposed in 1998 during the Asian financial crisis. [Awash in foreign funds, Malaysia faces economic imbalances over central bank restrictions. AP via IHT. April 8 2007]

It is time to dump our neomercantilist policy in favor of liberal ones.