Sir, Jeffrey,



It is good to see that there is some common ground between America's two political parties, but not good that they are united in anger.



Manipulation is a word, that has many meanings its use, usually implied by it's tone, context and intent. It is not hard to imagine that the manipulation of its tone could generate anger even if it was used with the best of intent originally but taken out of context by others, and then used with a different tone, to provoke anger to achieve a required politic0-economic response. But enough of such semantics, lest I be accused of Manipulation.



Manipulation, if taken as being a current activity, does occur on a daily and moment by moment basis on Global Money Markets, it's called trade, just look at the "spread". But that is not the sort of Manipulation that is being discussed, at least not in Top Level Committee Meetings within Major International Organisations, although it would be of concern when Major Market Makers, such as National Central Banks and Major International Bankers start entering into the Trade.



I suppose when you say that the renminbi (also known as the Yuan), if allowed to float freely (Is it fixed? If so by whom?) would more likely depreciate; the reality is that it does float, but not freely, there are signs that as well as the historical Base Setting(ancient settings for exchange rates), there are signs of an invisible hand playing in the "Free" (For anyone to Play In) "Perfect Market" - (Could that be the Manipulation that is being referred to?): A look at the recent fluctuations in the Exchange Rate between US Dollars and the Yuan or Renminbi, show that it is being traded and does fluctuate - just normal trade? or Manipulation? I guess that depends on a definition of "Manipulation". If one accepts that the Free Market knows best and values for trade reflect all the influences at work to determine the value of stock then obviously what you are saying that the Yuan should depreciate, is mistaken.



I understand, from your - "From an economic viewpoint, currency manipulation or unfair undervaluation are exceedingly hard to pin down conceptually" - That the Definition of "Currency Manipulation" is "Unfair undervaluation" - Could it also be "Unfair overvaluation"?



The question then becomes what is meant by "Unfair"? Unfair to whom? and Unfair in what way?



"Unfair" implies some stance in Ethics. The fact that Congressional Republicans and Democrats are taking a Bi-Partisan or even a Non-Partisan approach on this issue also implies the application of "Conscience" or "Ethics" in voting.



Interesting, as it seems that the "Unfairness" that is being considered has to do with "Trade" more specifically "Imports from offending countries", "appreciation of the dollar" and "eroding net exports"... all factors which are having an impact on the "Quality of Life of American Citizens".



"Winners are Grinners" Losers sometimes whinge and claim "Unfair". But lets not go "There"... That leads to "Whose side are you on?" and Nationalism... Perhaps, and perhaps even Military Intervention!.



Military Power: Traditionally there has never been a time when the Dominant Economic Power in Global Transactions has not also been The Dominant Military Power.... Which suggests that Historically the Currency Exchange Rates might have been based on Military Might rather than "Fairness" or "Ethical Transactions" it also explains the traditional conflicts between "Business" and Ethical Behaviour based on Fairness not on Military Might or the Power of The Ducat. - The Expression "That's business my friend! I know it's not fair but that's just the way it is! I'm rich and you're just a beggar!" - "Get used to it!"



Given; thank God; that we have now moved away from such determination of the "Global Terms of Trade" and are living in Peaceful Times in the Age of Reason not War. perhaps it is time to look seriously at the Historically set Levels for International Trade based on Military or Economic "The Ducat"; terms of trade.



"exceedingly hard to pin down conceptually": I think not, Fairness in Trade has always been considered by those involved in the "Labour", Manufacture or production of the goods as being based on rough Parity of Wage Labour Rates between different but comparable states be they Internal or external to the Nation States: It was only ever Military or Economic Power of the "Ducat" that brought in "Unfairness", Social Unrest and Warfare. History is full of it!... First (being English by Birth and Primary, Secondary and some Trtiary Education) England and the internal revolts and then The United Kingdom - The Magna Carta - Democracy and Parliament. The Advance of Reason - Internally! - One Could similarly look at the United States I suppose! .... Reason Prevailed Internally.



Given the Age of Reason - And I suppose that the Majority of the Worlds Population want Fairness, not Military Muscle or the power of the "Ducat" to dictate Exchange Rates. Because it is Exchange Rates that determine rough Parity of Wage Labour Rates and the Ability of Nations to Develop their own Sovereign Economies to eventually achieve as far as possible self sufficiency in a Globally Sustainable Way.



Much of the Waste of Globalisation and the current Financial problems being experienced in Globalisation come from Precisely Two Major Areas: A) Disparity of Wage Labour Rates in the Member States and B) The Failure to Establish Best Worlds Practice in the Running and Organisation of Central Banking Systems.



The latter is particularly applicable to "Globalisation" and "The EU"



Discussion about the "Micro Economics of Trade" under the present system is a complete Waste of Time.



It is time to build a more Advanced Vehicle... One based on:

....A) Rough Parity of Wage Labour Rates Globally, and

....B) Properly Organised Central Banking Systems



To develop it further I could add

....C) Effective Regulation of The Private Sector Banks and Mega Global Corporations. So that they too are confined to "Fairness of Trade"



I'll finish by saying that I would love to be involved and gain some remuneration from my contributions to solving these problems. Anyone reading this that feels some inspiration, please respond either on this forum or privately if they consider that solving problems of this nature in the way that I have proposed has some financial value. I can be contacted via Linked In

