logo
The World Still Speaks in U.S. Dollars

The World Still Speaks in U.S. Dollars

New York Times01-05-2025
The U.S. dollar has fallen about 9 percent in the past three months, according to an index that tracks its performance against a basket of major trading partners. Not since the 1970s has the currency performed so badly in a president's first 100 days.
The drop isn't surprising. The U.S. economic outlook is far cloudier than it was on Inauguration Day, as President Trump's tariffs set the stage for slower growth and higher inflation. U.S. assets look far less attractive now.
But could there be something more existential afoot? Questions are swirling about the dollar's global standing and whether after more than seven decades as the world's most important currency, it's on the cusp of shedding that status.
Trump's policies and his threats to longstanding norms like the political independence of the central bank have prompted a rethink among investors about how much more exposure they want to have to U.S. assets. That skepticism looks likely to endure. 'Something is in motion that is irreversible,' said Jens Nordvig of the research firm Exante Data.
There are obvious caveats. Just because the dollar is weaker now doesn't mean it has lost all its primacy. A sudden shift away from the United States still seems far-fetched because there are few places to go.
'The rest of the world is eager, if not desperate, to reduce reliance on the dollar as a payment and reserve currency,' said Eswar Prasad, a former official at the International Monetary Fund who is now an economics professor at Cornell University.
Attempts to weaponize the dollar through policies like sanctions would be less potent, and having multiple sources of liquidity during times of stress could make for a less fragile global financial system, some currency experts say.
'The reality, though, is that there are no robust alternatives,' Mr. Prasad said.
The euro is perhaps best positioned to eventually seize the opportunity created by Mr. Trump. It is a widely used and favored currency among central banks. There are now more euro-denominated safe assets available, as Germany and other countries increase spending. And the European Central Bank has also shown more willingness to serve as the region's lender of last resort, a crucial function for an international currency.
When would the euro become a reserve currency? 'We're at the best position to become one in some years,' Luis de Guindos, the E.C.B.'s vice president, said recently. But there would have to be much more meaningful economic, financial and regulatory integration across Europe for that to happen. It would take time.
Other alternatives like China's renminbi face even higher hurdles. Investors cannot transact freely in the country's financial markets because of capital controls, and the currency is heavily managed by the government — two insurmountable barriers to the Chinese currency assuming a more global role.
Another idea that has gained traction is a shared currency issued by the so-called BRICS group of countries, which includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Already some of the participating countries, like Brazil and India, have backed off from the proposals following threats by Mr. Trump that they would have to 'wave goodbye to America' if they did so.
Shifting away from the dollar presents as big of a challenge as trying to shift the world away from using English, said Stephen Jen, a currency expert who runs Eurizon SLJ Capital.
'People can bicker on whether French is more beautiful or German more precise, but none of that matters — when more people speak English, more will learn to speak English,' he said. 'Dollar liquidity is deep. No one administration can destroy the dollar, certainly not President Trump in 100 days.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pence urges Trump to take out the ‘hammer' on Russia: ‘Putin's not going to stop until he's stopped'
Pence urges Trump to take out the ‘hammer' on Russia: ‘Putin's not going to stop until he's stopped'

New York Post

time16 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Pence urges Trump to take out the ‘hammer' on Russia: ‘Putin's not going to stop until he's stopped'

Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday urged President Trump to bring the 'hammer' down on Vladimir Putin and push for additional sanctions against Russia. Pence commended Trump for seeking peace in Ukraine following the president's Alaska summit with the Russian strongman on Friday, but implored him to ramp up the pressure in order to cut a peace deal. 'I served alongside the president for four years. I know his style in dealing with these dictators. It's the velvet glove, but I think the hammer needs to come, and it needs to come immediately,' Pence said on CNN's 'State of the Union.' '[Trump] ought to pick up the phone and ask Majority Leader John Thune to immediately pass the secondary sanctions bill that is supported by virtually everyone in the United States Senate,' he said. Pence emphasized that the Russian president is 'the bad guy' and should be treated as such during negotiations. Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have, for several months, championed a sanctions bill against Russia, with over 80 senators backing it. Trump shrugged off the bill as unnecessary and instead gave Putin an ultimatum, demanding the Kremlin tyrant take steps toward peace by Aug. 8 or else face severe secondary sanctions and tariffs. 3 Former Vice President Mike Pence expressed concerns that Russian leader Vladimir Putin may be trying to buy time. CNN 3 President Trump became the first US president to meet with Russian leader Vladimir Putin since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. AFP via Getty Images Following a meeting Putin had with special envoy Steve Witkoff at the Kremlin just days before that deadline, Trump decided to call off the economic penalties and hold the Friday summit with the Russian tyrant instead. Pence warned that Putin may be attempting to 'run out the clock' and delay sanctions that could batter his country's economy as long as possible. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has swatted off criticism that the Trump administration has slow-walked economic sanctions against Russia, arguing that such a move would hamstring peace talks. 'You're saying talks are over. For the foreseeable future, for the next year or year-and-a-half, there's no more talks, because there's no one else in the world that can talk to him (Putin),' Rubio told Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures' about the implications of additional sanctions against Russia. 3 Mike Pence praised President Trump for pursuing peace between Russia and Ukraine. AFP via Getty Images Putin did not agree to a ceasefire during his summit with Trump, and the US president has since opted to pivot towards pursuing a full-fledged peace deal. Pence said he 'was not surprised' that the historic meeting didn't end in a ceasefire deal. 'There was an agreement by President Zelensky to a cease-fire back in February. Putin refused it. He's managed to delay the game,' the ex-VP said on CNN. 'All the while, his military has continued its brutal assault on civilian populations in Ukraine.' Trump, ahead of the summit, had told Fox News that he wouldn't be 'happy' if his Russian counterpart didn't agree to a ceasefire. Trump is set to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House on Monday. A group of European leaders will join Zelensky during his trip to Washington, DC, though it is not clear if they will be present in the White House meeting. 'I'm also going to be praying that it's a productive time and a unifying time among all the leaders in the West and the president and President Zelensky,' Pence said.

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs
GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

The Hill

timean hour ago

  • The Hill

GM's quarterly results illustrate the folly of tariffs

General Motors, a cornerstone of American industry, is suffering the consequences of President Trump's unconstitutional 25 percent tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts. In the second quarter of 2025, GM suffered a $1.1 billion tariff blow to its operating income, slashing the company's profit margin from a healthy 9 percent to just 6.1 percent. Net income plunged by 36.1 percent from the prior quarter and by a staggering 40.7 percent compared to a year ago. Although the estimated tariff impact for the full year of $4 billion to $5 billion is less than 3 percent of GM's overall revenue, that cost represents more than half of the typical annual income for the company over the past decade. The consequences extend far beyond GM's balance sheet. Tariffs, paid by importers to the federal government, are partly absorbed by companies and partly passed to consumers. We've especially seen this in import-sensitive sectors including furnishings, appliances, clothes and toys. Men's shirts and sweaters, for instance, rose 4.9 percent in June alone. When businesses 'eat' the cost, as GM tried to do last quarter, the fallout is no less severe. Diminished earnings mean less capital for investment in better technology or expanded operations, slowing broader economic growth, fewer resources for pay raises or new jobs — hardly the boon for workers that tariff advocates promise. The data confirms this. Nationwide, 14,000 manufacturing jobs disappeared in the past two months, erasing all gains in 2025. In June, real average weekly earnings dropped by 0.4 percent, an annualized loss of nearly 5 percent. Shareholders are also feeling the pinch. Stock valuations track a company's expected future earnings. Since 2012, GM's stock price increased by more than 200 percent. GM's price-to-earnings ratio today stands at 6.83, almost identical to 2012 levels. Stock prices increased alongside earnings. A sustained $5 billion annual hit, wiping out over half of GM's annual net income, could erase more than $20 billion in market capitalization if valuations adjust. With tariffs eroding profits, is it any wonder that GM's stock has slid 8 percent since its post-2024 election peak and now languishes 13 percent off its 2021 highs? This affects millions of middle-class Americans and retirees with pensions and savings invested. More broadly, lower dividends and diminished returns discourage investment, starving companies of the capital needed to expand. The result: slower growth, fewer jobs and weaker wage gains. GM, to its credit, is fighting to offset 30 percent of this burden by boosting U.S. production, cutting costs and increasing domestic content to comply with the USMCA trade agreement's labyrinthine rules. Yet even if successful, the net impact of $2.8 billion to $3.5 billion will devour a significant slice of GM's already thin margins. Profit margins at GM — as in most other sectors — are far less than conventional wisdom. GM's net profit margin over the past decade has averaged less than 5 percent. In other words, a $30,000 vehicle yields less than $1,500 in profit. GM's plans to shift some production to U.S. plants and rework supply chains is a testament to private enterprise's resilience. But make no mistake: These shifts sacrifice efficiency for compliance. Restructuring operations in a free market in pursuit of efficiency yields more profit, consumer benefit and economic growth. Doing so under duress to escape arbitrary tariffs may result in survival, but without these benefits. Resources that could have fueled innovation or lowered prices are now squandered on navigating artificial trade barriers. As an important sidenote, roughly half the tariff's cost stems from GM's South Korean operations, a stark reminder of the folly of taxing trade with allies. Rather than strengthening ties with democratic partners through bold free-trade agreements, these tariffs risk pushing nations like South Korea toward China, America's chief adversary. Far from economic strategy, it is geopolitical shortsightedness. Politicians sometimes prefer tariffs to other forms of taxation because they are less visible than taxes on income or sales. This makes it easier to dodge accountability by blaming 'greedy' corporations. For this reason, Trump called Jeff Bezos to deter Amazon from listing tariff costs on purchases. The White House press secretary labeled this a 'hostile and political act by Amazon.' Regardless, protectionism is not cost-free. Sustained tariffs will raise prices, shrink profits, erode real wages and slow economic growth. GM's quarterly results are a warning.

Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee
Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

Trump stuns Wall Street, Washington with controversial BLS nominee

President Trump's pick to lead the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is breaking the mold of his predecessors and causing alarm among economists of all stripes Commissioners of the BLS are usually academics or career civil servants with decades of experience in statistics and economics. But EJ Antoni, who Trump nominated to lead the agency after firing former BLS chief Erika McEntarfer on the heels of a disappointing jobs report earlier this month, has more bona fides as a pundit and conservative advocate than he does as a statistician. The choice of Antoni to lead a statistical division whose data is scrutinized by businesses and governments all over the world is getting major backlash from the economics profession and sparking concerns about the politicization of bedrock-level economic data. 'E.J. Antoni is completely unqualified to be BLS Commissioner,' Harvard University economist Jason Furman, who worked for the Obama administration, wrote on social media. 'He is an extreme partisan and does not have any relevant experience.' Stan Veuger, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, echoed Furman's words. 'He's utterly unqualified and as partisan as it gets,' he told the Washington Post. Who is EJ Antoni? Antoni has been the chief economist of the Heritage Foundation's center on the federal budget for the past four months. The Heritage Foundation is a right-wing think tank that produced the wide-ranging Project 2025 policy agenda. Project 2025 took aim at the 'permanent political class' in Washington, and many of its budget-cutting recommendations have been carried out by the Trump administration. He held two research fellowships at Heritage prior to his current position and two other fellowships at the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, a conservative advocacy group led by billionaire Steve Forbes. Antoni submitted his doctoral dissertation in 2020, in which he defends positions associated with 'supply-side economics,' a conservative policy doctrine that became popular in the 1980s. Besides stints as an adjunct at a community college and as an instructor at his alma mater of Northern Illinois University, he's held no other academic posts. By comparison, McEntarfer worked for 20 years as an economist with the Census Bureau. Her predecessor William Beach was the chief economist for the Senate Budget Committee, and his predecessor Erica Groshen spent 20 years as an economist at the New York Federal Reserve and referees for about a dozen academic journals. Antoni is a frequent guest on a number of conservative media outlets. While BLS makes it a point to produce — rather than interpret — economic data, Antoni has been hitting talking points on recent BLS releases in media appearances, a stark contrast with the agency's typical cut-and-dry communications. Discussing the dismal July jobs report, he emphasized job growth among native-born Americans on former Trump adviser Steven Bannon's internet podcast. 'There was some good news in the report, too, that we should definitely highlight,' he said. 'All of the net job growth over the last 12 months has gone to native-born Americans.' The Heritage Foundation did not respond to a request for an interview with Antoni. Backlash from economists Economists aren't mincing their words about Antoni's credentials. One economist at the University of Wisconsin refuted one of Antoni's recent papers, showing it contained basic statistical mistakes and finding that it wasn't possible to replicate its results — an academic kiss of death. Alan Cole, an economist with the conservative Tax Foundation think tank, described the errors in the paper as 'stunning.' 'Stunning errors in a tweet are bad, but worse to do it in long form, where there's more time and effort involved,' he wrote on social media. Conservative economists have also been blasting the firing of McEntarfer after the July jobs report showed that a meager 106,000 jobs have been added to the economy since May. Trump accused the agency — without any evidence — of producing 'rigged' data, which many economists have said is poppycock. 'The totally groundless firing of Dr. Erika McEntarfer … sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the statistical mission of the Bureau,' William Beach, a Trump appointee who preceded McEntarfer as head of the BLS, wrote online. Warnings to senators Antoni is expected to be easily confirmed by the GOP-controlled Senate after he appears before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which will also need to approve his nomination. Antoni's critics are waging a long-shot effort to turn GOP members of the committee against the nominee ahead of his likely confirmation. Friends of the BLS, a group that advocates for the agency and that's chaired by Beach and his predecessor Erica Groshen, called out Antoni in a statement Wednesday, describing the debate about his nomination as 'contentious.' 'BLS now … faces the additional challenge of a contentious debate over the nominee for the next Commissioner, Dr. EJ Antoni,' they said. Groshen told The Hill they hope the nomination process will be 'very thorough.' 'The responsibility of the Senate HELP committee … is particularly important at this time,' she added. The Hill reached out to all Republican members of the committee about Antoni's qualifications, most of whom didn't respond. A representative for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she wouldn't be commenting on the nomination prior to the hearing. What would politicized labor data look like? Antoni has already floated some massive changes to BLS data releases, including canceling regular monthly reports in favor of quarterly releases — a change that would alter the entire cadence of economic data output and affect nearly every private and public sector model of the U.S. economy. He told Fox News before his nomination that 'the BLS should suspend issuing the monthly jobs reports, but keep publishing more accurate, though less timely, quarterly data,' since BLS data is often subject to revision. Former BLS chiefs told The Hill they're keeping an eye on a regulatory standard known as OMB Directive No. 3, which governs the rules of BLS releases, for any sign that agency data could become politicized. 'Violations of that would be very unusual, and therefore indicative of something unusual underneath it,' Groshen said. Antoni has delivered some conflicting remarks on BLS data revisions, attributing them to 'incompetent' leadership under McEntarfer during his appearance on Bannon's podcast and then noting later that the problems pre-dated her time as agency commissioner. 'I think that's part of the reason why we continue to have all of these different data problems,' he said before adding that 'this is not a problem unique to the Trump administration.' Real problems with BLS data In fact, the downward revisions in the July jobs report that prompted Trump's firing of McEntarfer were due to the late reporting of educational employment figures by state and local governments, along with the more pronounced seasonal effects in that sector since teachers don't work in the summer. That's fairly typical for the agency, current and former employees of the BLS told The Hill. Political narratives aside, the BLS has seen a substantial drop in survey response rates in the aftermath of the pandemic, a decline that has made the data less reliable, but that has affected statistical agencies in a number of countries beyond the U.S. 'This is not a failure of the BLS … This is a phenomenon that is worldwide,' Erica Groshen told The Hill. 'This is a slow-moving train wreck,' she added, exhorting CEOs across the economy to make a priority of the surveys. 'There is no silver bullet. Believe me – people have been looking for it for a long time.' Economists have been lamenting the survey response rates for years. 'Like Orwellian newspeak, [the U.S. employment report] can often mean the reverse of what it says it means. The household and establishment surveys portray contrasting pictures of employment (and both have shocking response rates),' UBS economist Paul Donovan wrote earlier this month, having noted declines since 2023.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store