Wealth may be transferred from country to country in the form of goods and services, but
by far the greatest transfers are made in the form of money. Just as a stable monetary
unit facilitates economic activity within a country, so international economic activity is
facilitated when there are stable relationships between one country’s currency and
another’s. It is not simply a question of the ease or difficulty of translating dollars in yen,
francs or yuans. It is a far more important question of knowing whether an investment
made in the United States, Japan, China or France today will be repaid a decade or more from now in money of the same value – whether measured in purchasing power or in the
currency originally invested.
Various attempts at stabilizing international currencies against one another have followed
the disappearance of the gold standard. Some nations have made their currencies
equivalent to a fixed number of dollars, for example. Various European nations have
created their own international currency, the Euro and the yen has been another stable
currency widely accepted in international financial transactions.
With the spread of electronic transfers of money, reactions to any national currency’s
change in reliability can be virtually instantaneous. Any government that is tempted
toward inflation knows that money can flee from their economy literally in a moment.
The discipline this imposes is different from that one imposed by a gold standard, but
whether it is equally effective will only be known when future economic pressures put
the international monetary system to a real test.
Genuine plunder of one nation or people by another has been all too common throughout human history. During the era before the First World War, when Germany had colonies in Africa, only 4 of its 22 enterprises with cocoa plantations there paid dividends, as did only 8 of 58 rubber plantations and only 3 out of 49 diamond mining companies. At the height of the British Empire in the early twentieth century, the British invested more in the United States than in all of Asia and Africa put together. Quite simply, there was more wealth to be made from rich countries than from poor countries. For similar reasons, throughout most of the twentieth century the United States invested more in Canada than in Asia and Africa put together. Only the rise of prosperous Asian industrial nations in the latter part of the twentieth century attracted more American investors in that part of the world. Perhaps the strongest evidence against the economic significance of colonies in the modern world is tha
Comments
Post a Comment