There is a new policy for growth in town – one that is neither particularly new nor likely to result in growth. Having conceded that contractionary fiscal expansion failed but not yet being ready to go for expansionary fiscal expansion, economic policy makers are trying their luck with ‘inflate and depreciate’. This is the mood music in Tokyo, Washington, London and even in Frankfurt.
Since the autumn of 2008, the Bank of England has pumped £375 billion into the economy – what has become known as ‘quantitative easing’ (QE). QE serves many purposes the chief of which is to guard against deflation. An important side-effect of QE, however, has been depreciation. The pound has lost 13% against its benchmark basket of foreign currencies and a full 25% against the dollar.
While initially thinking that the crisis could be conquered merely by withdrawing government and leaving the playground to the private sector, the Treasury is increasingly relying on exports to pull Britain out of stagnation. By making British goods more competitive abroad, QE-as-depreciator has an important role to play. And seeing that private sector demand is insufficient to grow the economy and thereby shrink the size of government debt as percentage of GDP, QE-as-inflator has the added advantage of reducing the real net debt burden.
So inflate-and-depreciate it is. In fact, unless the government radically changes its course and starts investing in the economy, inflate-and-depreciate is the government’s only policy for growth and debt reduction.
But here is why it won’t work. First, depreciation is not a sufficient condition for export-led growth. At home, we need to be confident enough in the economy to take the risk of producing something to export in the first place. Abroad, a cheaper pound will not make much of difference to the demand for British goods if consumers have stopped consuming for fear of worse-to-come. The last four years have been a testimony to the insufficiency of depreciation: despite the 13% drop in the pound British exports have only increased by 1%. If this is the way to growth, it requires a near annihilation of the value of the pound to have the required effects.
Second, even if depreciation presented a fail-safe way to exports and growth it still would not present a sustainable policy. Britain is not the only economy going through tough times at the moment. If all her trade partners adopted an inflate-and-depreciate stance to get their economies going it would be the return of currency wars not seen since the interwar years. Countries would have to inflate and depreciate ever more in order to stay ahead of the curve. Keynes characterised such problems as fallacy of composition: what is rational for individuals is not always rational for the group.
Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.
Subscribe Now
In the end, therefore, we come back to the only cure for the current disease, however unappealing for ideologically minded policy makers. The only way out of this slump is by increasing aggregate demand and the only way of increasing aggregate demand is for the government to stop cutting and start investing.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
From a long list of criminal indictments to unfavorable voter demographics, there is plenty standing between presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump and a second term in the White House. But a Trump victory in the November election remains a distinct possibility – and a cause for serious economic concern.
Contrary to what former US President Donald Trump would have the American public believe, no president enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. To suggest otherwise is to reject a bedrock principle of American democracy: the president is not a monarch.
explains why the US Supreme Court must reject the former president's claim to immunity from prosecution.
When comparing Ukraine’s situation in 2024 to Europe’s in 1941, Russia’s defeat seems entirely possible. But it will require the West, and the US in particular, to put aside domestic political squabbles and muster the political will to provide Ukraine with consistent and robust military and financial assistance.
compare Russia's full-scale invasion to World War II and see reason to hope – as long as aid keeps flowing.
There is a new policy for growth in town – one that is neither particularly new nor likely to result in growth. Having conceded that contractionary fiscal expansion failed but not yet being ready to go for expansionary fiscal expansion, economic policy makers are trying their luck with ‘inflate and depreciate’. This is the mood music in Tokyo, Washington, London and even in Frankfurt.
Since the autumn of 2008, the Bank of England has pumped £375 billion into the economy – what has become known as ‘quantitative easing’ (QE). QE serves many purposes the chief of which is to guard against deflation. An important side-effect of QE, however, has been depreciation. The pound has lost 13% against its benchmark basket of foreign currencies and a full 25% against the dollar.
While initially thinking that the crisis could be conquered merely by withdrawing government and leaving the playground to the private sector, the Treasury is increasingly relying on exports to pull Britain out of stagnation. By making British goods more competitive abroad, QE-as-depreciator has an important role to play. And seeing that private sector demand is insufficient to grow the economy and thereby shrink the size of government debt as percentage of GDP, QE-as-inflator has the added advantage of reducing the real net debt burden.
So inflate-and-depreciate it is. In fact, unless the government radically changes its course and starts investing in the economy, inflate-and-depreciate is the government’s only policy for growth and debt reduction.
But here is why it won’t work. First, depreciation is not a sufficient condition for export-led growth. At home, we need to be confident enough in the economy to take the risk of producing something to export in the first place. Abroad, a cheaper pound will not make much of difference to the demand for British goods if consumers have stopped consuming for fear of worse-to-come. The last four years have been a testimony to the insufficiency of depreciation: despite the 13% drop in the pound British exports have only increased by 1%. If this is the way to growth, it requires a near annihilation of the value of the pound to have the required effects.
Second, even if depreciation presented a fail-safe way to exports and growth it still would not present a sustainable policy. Britain is not the only economy going through tough times at the moment. If all her trade partners adopted an inflate-and-depreciate stance to get their economies going it would be the return of currency wars not seen since the interwar years. Countries would have to inflate and depreciate ever more in order to stay ahead of the curve. Keynes characterised such problems as fallacy of composition: what is rational for individuals is not always rational for the group.
Subscribe to PS Digital
Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.
Subscribe Now
In the end, therefore, we come back to the only cure for the current disease, however unappealing for ideologically minded policy makers. The only way out of this slump is by increasing aggregate demand and the only way of increasing aggregate demand is for the government to stop cutting and start investing.