CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE NEW BANKING FORUM
(Internet Explorer Browser Users Only)
VIP code: SPAMNOTALLOWED

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve System

August 22 2009 at 6:06 AM
No score for this post

EagleONE  (Login EagleUNOS)
from IP address 62.141.58.13

The Way I Sees It....

There is a momentum to start the end of the US$ as global reverse currency of choice.

The Chinese kick started it, followed by the Russian and recently the Japanese has come onto the bandwagen starting with an Asian single currency. The Middle-East power houses too has raised this prospect, selling crude in other currency than US$ as an option.

The Chinese has not only kick started the ball rolling, it too has began walking the talk by reducing its holding of US$ denominated treasuries.

So, is the end to US$ dominance in the horizon??? Interesting future we are all heading into.


http://www.cnbc.com/id/32505791

Economist Stiglitz sees need for global reserve currency system

Aug 21st 2009 at 2:20PM

On Friday, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz stated that the U.S. dollar contains a high degree of risk, making it necessary to create a global reserve currency system. The famed economist went on to note that the dollar's role as a store of value is "questionable," Bloomberg News reported Friday.

"The current reserve system is in the process of fraying," the Columbia University economics professor said at a conference in Bankok. "The dollar is not a good store of value. Right now, the dollar is yielding almost no return and yet anybody looking at the dollar has to say there's a high degree of risk."

The dollar Friday weakened about 1 cent against both the euro and the British pound, to $1.4340 and $1.6548, respectively, and weakened about 1 yen to 93.54 against Japan's yen.

The dollar has served as the world's reserve currency for more than 50 years, with institutional investors and foreign governments placing a percentage of their assets in U.S. public debt, such as U.S. Treasuries, and other dollar-denominated assets. This has been largely due to the U.S.'s comparatively low inflation and the dollar's superior performance as a store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account.

Further, as economist David H. Wang told DailyFinance on Friday, the dollar's reserve currency status also reflects "investors' confidence in the American political system and the inherent fairness of the American people." For example, the United States has never seized assets for monetary or economic reasons, he said. "Never before, in the history of the world, has there been a nation where your assets and reserves are more safe than in the United States," Wang said.

However, Stiglitz cautions that the U.S. government's effort to both stabilize the financial system and jump-start the U.S. economy has led to expenditures of more than $12.8 trillion in monetary stabilization funds and fiscal stimulus. In the process, it has threatened to undermine the dollar's reserve currency status, due to inflation.

"As the balance sheet of the Fed has blown up, as the deficit of the U.S. and the debt has increased, people have asked the obvious question: will there be inflation in the future?" Stiglitz told the Bankok conference. "Right now we're facing deflation, but some time in the future, there will be consequences."

Stiglitz also cautioned that, even if inflation doesn't show up in the U.S. economy in the years ahead, it doesn't mean that price stability will ensue. Inflation could show up in foreign markets, including in Asian property and stock markets.

Monetary Analysis: Stiglitz is decidedly in the camp that the U.S. monetary/fiscal intervention will lead to a substantial decline in the dollar, with higher inflation in other markets, if not in the United States. Certainly from a size of government intervention standpoint, the argument can be made for a weaker buck versus the world's other, major currencies.

Other economists differ on inflation. For example, Stiglitz' counterpart, Princeton University economist, New York Times (NYT) columnist and Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman argues that the asset destruction caused by the financial crisis and global recession has left the global economy net-short dollars. As Krugman puts it, "It's very hard to have rampant inflation when you're in a liquidity trap." That would tip the scales against rampant inflation.

What stance should investors take when two economic giants differ on inflation/the dollar? The best bet is to await further data. Historically, fiscal stimulus of this magnitude has led to an increase in inflation, but the globalization era offers additional variables that could complicate that theory. A major new factor is the desire of foreign exporters to not increase prices in order to remain competitive in the U.S. and other developed markets. Ultimately, that practice will work to contain inflation.

Bottom Line: It's too soon to conclude to that higher inflation is ahead or to structure one's investments based on that assumption.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

James Workman
(Login USCaribbean)
24.129.116.102

Re: Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve System

No score for this post
August 22 2009, 10:03 PM 

Risky Business

Published July 20, 2009 Leave a Comment
Tags: singapore, Sovereign Wealth Fund, Sovereign Wealth Funds, SWF, Temasek, Chip Goodyear, Saeed Azhar

Ashby Monk

In the wake of substantial 2008 losses, Singapores Temasek is reported to be reviewing its risk management strategy.

According to Saeed Azhar of Reuters, Temasek will follow GICs lead by investing in assets that offer equity like upsides while protecting its downside, such as convertible notes. In addition, Temasek may shift its industry weightings from financials towards commodities, which perhaps reflects the priorities and expertise of the new CEO Chip Goodyear.

So, after a dismal 2008, Temasek joins many SWFs in reviewing its internal procedures. This is a good thing. Professionalizing the risk management function within these funds will ensure solid returns over the long-term. In my view, this type of transparent evaluation is yet another example of the maturity of this new class of investors.

http://oxfordswfproject.com/2009/07/page/2/


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.


(Login USCaribbean)
24.129.116.102

Re: Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve System

No score for this post
August 22 2009, 10:10 PM 

The Benefits of Dynamic Strategic Hedging

dot_clear.gif

By Monica Fan, Senior Currency Product Engineer, SSgA - United Kingdom

   
  a_fan_monica.jpg

Some investors might be surprised to discover the extent to which currency influences the total returns of pension fund assets. Yet estimates suggest that currency contributes as much as 60% of the total returns on international bonds and 30% on international equities.1

Over the past year, volatility in the currency market has reached record highs and has exacerbated the poor performance of most pension funds international equity and bond investments. Its easy to appreciate why many funds are now reviewing the way in which they manage their currency risk, and especially ways of reducing their downside risk.

Traditionally, pension funds have reduced currency risk, both upside and downside, by hedging a static proportion of their international investments. However, a hedge ratio that aims to minimise a funds currency risk over the long term - usually 10 years - may not be the most appropriate hedge ratio for a fund in the short to medium term.

The UK Perspective
The weaknesses of a static hedge, particularly in periods of high currency volatility, were highlighted in 2008 when the British pound fell to an all-time low of 73.2 on a trade weighted basis in December 2008.2 Although the pound had rebounded by 15% in June 2009,3 it was 9% below its level in June 2008 and was still extremely undervalued compared to its longterm fair value.

Many UK pension schemes with currency hedges realised significant losses on the forward currency contracts they had used to implement their hedges. The size of these currency losses fluctuated according to the volatility of the currency market. Although these schemes enjoyed offsetting currency gains on their underlying investments, unrealised currency gains are rarely viewed in the same way as realised currency losses.

In practice, pension fund trustees have investment horizons of three to five years, and do not have the luxury of waiting a decade or more for their currency gains and losses to wash out. In fact, the belief that currency gains and losses inevitably average to zero over the long term has frequently been disproved.

A comparison of rolling five-year hedged and unhedged returns on the MSCI World ex-UK IndexSM between 19892009 shows that currency returns are not necessarily normally distributed or symmetrical around a mean of zero.4 Over this period, 84% of the rolling five-year currency returns did not fall within 1% of zero and the frequency and size of currency losses were disproportionately higher than the frequency and size of currency gains.

Risk Reduction
Our research indicates that pension funds can reduce downside currency risk more effectively with a more proactive and targeted approach than static hedging. SSgAs Dynamic Strategic Hedging (DSH) programme tailors the hedge ratio to each currency exposure in a portfolio and systematically adjusts the hedge ratios as each currency pair shifts from being over- or undervalued according to our proprietary fair value models.

For example, a UK pension fund might hedge 80% of its euros but only 50% of US dollars if the British pound is more undervalued versus the euro than against the US dollar. As the pound becomes increasingly undervalued (overvalued) relative to another currency, the hedge ratio on the pound would systematically increase (decrease). This approach seeks to not only increase the responsiveness of pension funds hedging strategies to unexpected and large deviations in currencies from fair value, but our findings suggest that this active strategy enables pension funds to potentially add excess returns versus a static hedging approach.

The benefits of dynamic strategic hedging versus a static approach are compelling. It seeks to enable pension funds to better tailor the hedge ratios on their portfolios and more effectively reduce currency draw downs. These advantages, combined with the experience of the last 18 months, suggest that pension funds need to take a more proactive approach to hedging that focuses on reducing downside risk without eliminating opportunities to add much needed excess returns.

 

http://www.ssga.com/library/povw/monicafanbenefitsofdynamicstrategichedging20090731/page.html

 

The point of the articles would be the consistant view of risk in Dollars, Franc and / or _____________ <---- insert here... thus gold...

http://www.goldprice.org/

Gold always has been the reserve "note" that is political proof and holds value over time... save the bull market...

The new SWF reserve notes maybe will see action before the hording of Gold by the BRIC's.

That seems more to be case.. today... Tomorrow is always a new day though.

Be well all, JW


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve System  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE NEW BANKING FORUM
(Internet Explorer Browser Users Only)



eXTReMe Tracker