logo
Like Nixon before him, Trump is weakening the dollar in a bid to correct the US's trade deficit

Like Nixon before him, Trump is weakening the dollar in a bid to correct the US's trade deficit

Irish Times2 days ago

August 15th, 1971 was an auspicious day in global financial history. Then-US president
Richard Nixon
interrupted the evening broadcast of the US's most popular TV show – Bonanza – to announce the dollar (as a currency) was delinking from gold, a move that remade the global monetary system in an instant.
The announcement effectively dismantled the Bretton Woods system that had prevailed since the end of the second World War.
It had pegged the dollar to the value of gold (at $35 an ounce), with the rest of the world's currencies pegged at various (adjustable) rates to the dollar.
Nixon's decision to detach the US currency from gold was driven by a simple anomaly in the global financial system. The US did not have enough gold to cover the volume of dollars in worldwide circulation.
READ MORE
[
Trump puts US dollar's role as dominant world currency up for grabs
Opens in new window
]
This meant the dollar was overvalued. It also meant the US was starting to run big trade deficits (on account of imports being cheaper and exports less competitive), something the country hadn't experienced since the 19th century.
The overvalued dollar was also subject to speculative runs against it, which was undermining the country's foreign trading position.
Without warning, Nixon jettisoned the Bretton Woods arrangement, ushering in a system of free-floating exchange rates that still prevails today.
The move also exploded what many saw as the 'Marshall Plan mindset' whereby US economic interests seemed to chime with the economic interests of its allies in Europe and elsewhere.
Despite the seriousness of the announcement, Nixon apparently fretted about the potential downside of alienating those addicted to the adventures of the Cartwright family, the fictional family upon which Bonanza was based.
But his advisers convinced him that the announcement had to be decisive, reach the widest possible audience and go before the markets opened the following morning.
Nixon, like Donald Trump, believed the overvalued dollar was hurting US exporters and workers and blamed the rest of the world for the US's predicament.
As well as abandoning gold, he announced two other measures: a 10 per cent import tax (or
tariff
), designed to force countries that had a trade surplus with the US to accept the adjustment; and a new system of price and wage controls aimed controlling inflation, which had begun to surge.
The 'Nixon shock' – at it was called – was a unilateral attempt to devalue the dollar and rewire the US's trading relationships while maintaining US economic hegemony.
The parallels with today and the so-called 'Trump shock' are striking.
The Mar-a-Lago accord, the supposed blueprint to correct the US trade deficit through deliberate dollar weakening, is key to understanding Trump's disruptive economic agenda.
The dollar has lost more than 10 per cent of its value against the euro, the pound and the Swiss franc since Trump came to office in January.
Like Nixon, Trump believes the strong dollar has made local manufacturing uncompetitive, forcing the US to import more, leaving it dependent on foreign countries and lumped with big trade deficits.
This has been amplified by what Washington sees as
China
's unfair trade practices.
Approximately five million 'well-paying blue-collar jobs' have been lost in so-called Rust Belt states, Trump's power base, since 2001, the year China joined the World Trade Organisation.
Another problem feeding into this, in Trump's eyes, is the US role as global policeman and underwriter of European security, which leaves it with a large military expenditure, another driver of US deficits and debt.
But where the Trump/Nixon comparison falls down is the country's current debt pile: $36 trillion and counting. This is tipping into an out-of-control zone and testing the limits of the US economy's reserve status.
And it can't be simply blamed on the strong dollar or rigged trading relationships. It stems – in the main – from fiscal indiscipline, fuelled by several factors, including tax cuts under Trump's first administration.
The 'forever wars' in Iraq and Afghanistan – estimated to have cost the US $8 trillion – similarly are not a function of the US's role as global policeman but part of the post-9/11 'neocon' agenda.
In investment parlance, bonds hedge stock market risk.
What that means in practice is that when stock markets drop, investors flee to safe-haven assets such as bonds. US bonds – known as Treasuries – are backed by the globe's strongest economy and are traditionally seen as the safest of safe securities.
However, this relationship has begun to fracture.
After Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff announcement in April, stock markets nosedived but the yield on US bonds – essentially the US government's borrowing costs – which should have fallen as investors piled in, actually rose.
Soured by Trump's tariff turbulence and his 'big, beautiful' tax Bill, which will add more debt to the pile, investors sold US bonds when, historically, they should have been buying them.
In what was dubbed 'America's Liz Truss moment', the negative market reaction prompted an immediate U-turn in Washington.
The US bond market used to be a boringly predictable segment of global financial markets, now it's a flashpoint.
Like Nixon before him, Trump is attempting to use American economic might to bend the global economy to his will, but he is being hamstrung by the country's deteriorating financial situation.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Gaza Strip: Donald Trump reiterates calls for ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas
Gaza Strip: Donald Trump reiterates calls for ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas

Irish Times

time33 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

Gaza Strip: Donald Trump reiterates calls for ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas

US president Donald Trump has reiterated calls for a ceasefire deal between Hamas and Israel . Posting to Truth Social on Sunday morning, he wrote: 'MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!' Mr Trump said on Friday that he believed it is possible that a ceasefire could be reached within a week, despite intense bombardment of the strip by the Israeli military and continued deadly Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians. Some 50 hostages remain in Gaza, with less than half believed to still be alive. They were among 251 hostages taken in the Hamas -led 7th October attack on southern Israel in 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed. READ MORE Indirect talks between the two sides have faltered since Israel shattered a previous ceasefire in March that had come into effect in January. A Hamas official told Reuters the group had informed the mediators it was ready to resume ceasefire talks, but reaffirmed the group's outstanding demands that any deal must end the war and secure an Israeli withdrawal from the coastal territory. As efforts to bring about a truce continue, Israel's military has issued an evacuation order for the northern Gaza Strip, warning Palestinian people in parts of Gaza City and nearby areas of imminent strikes there. Mr Trump said on Saturday that the US was 'not going to stand' for what he framed as the continued prosecution of Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu on corruption charges. 'The United States of America spends Billions of Dollar a year, far more than on any other Nation, protecting and supporting Israel. We are not going to stand for this,' the US president posted on his Truth Social platform. An Israeli court on Friday rejected Mr Netanyahu's request to postpone giving testimony in his corruption trial, ruling that he had not provided adequate justification for his request. Mr Netanyahu is standing trial for three charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. He denies the accusations levelled against him and say they are politically motivated. – Guardian

Tesla's robotaxi: modest rollout, wild stock ride
Tesla's robotaxi: modest rollout, wild stock ride

Irish Times

time4 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Tesla's robotaxi: modest rollout, wild stock ride

Tesla 's recent robotaxi launch sparked a brief frenzy, sending shares more than 10 per cent higher and adding some $100 billion to its market value, before gains quickly evaporated. One can see why the rally faded. After all, the debut was modest at best: a handful of Teslas operating with a human safety supervisor in the front passenger seat, limited to a geo-fenced area during specific hours, and only available to invite-only riders. This cautious roll-out stands in sharp contrast to Elon Musk 's years of grand promises about fully autonomous robotaxis operating everywhere. Compared with Google 's Waymo, which has been testing driverless fleets under strict supervision for years, Tesla's launch looks more like a tentative experiment than a breakthrough. READ MORE Still, that some investors thought otherwise is not surprising. Ordinarily, stock price volatility eases as a company's valuation grows, but not Tesla. Data from Bespoke Investment shows the only period when Tesla's daily volatility was higher than now was during the early days of Covid. Over the past year it has seen four separate rallies exceeding 20 per cent, and four declines each exceeding 20 per cent. These include a 150 per cent surge in late 2024 and a drop of more than 50 per cent earlier this year. Since going public in 2010, Tesla has averaged 4.25 bull or bear cycles per year. 'It's already had five in 2025,' adds Bespoke. Tesla's volatility persists with almost stubborn consistency, defying the usual calming effect of scale – a fitting mirror to its chief executive's penchant for grandiose promises and reality checks alike.

Trump's F-bomb: The US didn't faint when the president swore on live TV. How unexpectedly unprissy of it
Trump's F-bomb: The US didn't faint when the president swore on live TV. How unexpectedly unprissy of it

Irish Times

time5 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Trump's F-bomb: The US didn't faint when the president swore on live TV. How unexpectedly unprissy of it

There was a dog that didn't bark amid this week's news. On Tuesday President Trump became (we think) the first US president to say the word 'f**k' on live TV. This column was prepared to fulminate on how, 'with all that's going on in the world', the American media took to the fainting couch over a harmless nugget of 16th-century Germanic profanity. It says something about how Trump has rewired the American mind that the response was relatively muted. There is no lower form of speculative discourse than 'can you imagine if [X] had done that?' but, well, can you imagine if Barack Obama had said such a thing? The closest we can find is him using the word 'bullsh***er' – apparently of Mitt Romney – during a 2012 print interview in the White House. Rolling Stone magazine argued that the incident set off a 'brief firestorm'. Obama was in jocular form there. That is quite different from addressing a serious policy issue on the White House lawn. 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f**k they're doing,' Trump said of Iran and Israel over the throb of helicopters. [ Is Donald Trump the greatest media performer of the 21st century? Opens in new window ] Everyone knows presidents have employed maritime vocabulary since the founding of the nation. 'People said my language was bad,' Richard Nixon once remarked. 'But, Jesus, you should have heard LBJ.' They have, however, almost always returned to 'fudge!' and 'fiddlesticks!' when in earshot of a microphone. READ MORE Different nations have different sensibilities. Publications within those jurisdictions work along a spectrum of sensitivity. You will have already noticed that The Irish Times still plays it safe by studding asterisks among the most common bar-room expletives. 'Style is, for example, f**k,' the paper's stylebook helpfully explains. This is not just prudishness. Newspapers tend to avoid swearing in web headlines – even with asterisks – as this can cause search engines to downrank the story. For all the talk of unregulated filth, the internet still often behaves like the pinch-mouthed maiden aunt of unjustified stereotype. For the most part, however, the Irish have been more relaxed about cussing than the English, who, in turn, have been more relaxed about cussing than the Americans. That nation's media will still pixellate the raised middle finger when it is offered to the camera in digital insult. Is the finger standing in for the erect male member? When fully visible is it enacting the words 'f**k you!' to a frail readership? The most infuriatingly prissy manifestation of such puritanism is that dread construction 'F-bomb' – as infantilising as referring to your excreta as 'poop' and 'wee-wee'. Trump's greatest weapon is exhaustion. Almost nobody has the energy to get annoyed with him any more You saw a bit of that this week. 'It's still surprising to see the president drop an F-bomb on the White House grounds,' the late-night host Seth Meyers said. 'Nothing says 'Everyone remain calm' like dropping an F-bomb on live TV,' his rival Jimmy Fallon ventured. The word is, this usage suggests, so explosive that it can destroy careers and send broadcasters in fraught supplication before the Federal Communications Commission. CNN had great fun contrasting the way Fox News treated Trump's verbal detonation with the right-leaning network's unforgiving attitude to swearing Democrats. Emily Compagno, a host on Fox, noted the president had been 'using some salty language'. Just 20 minutes later Compagno was considerably more heated when addressing the use by Jasmine Crockett, a representative from Texas, of the word 'f***ing' in a statement on the bombing of Iran. The host declared herself 'particularly repulsed' by the comments and went on to say, 'It's a pretty foul mouth of her for someone that went to a tidy little all-girls Catholic school.' The CNN report from Abby Phillip continued with a montage of earlier Fox jibes at sweary Democrats that confirmed the starchy, priggish tone of so much American discourse on 'bad language'. The Fox regular Jeanine Pirro argued that Democrats 'are like a bunch of potty-mouth kids'. Another said Democrats were so 'confounded by the fact that they've got to cuss'. All of this could confuse anyone familiar with Martin Scorsese's Oscar-winning films or Kendrick Lamar's Pulitzer-winning raps. The hard-collar puritanism to which the authorities pretend sits uneasily with a wider nation that, when it lets itself go, can be more creative with profanity than any other in the Anglosphere. Which is not to suggest it is Trump's way with words that has got him off relatively lightly. CNN is on to something with the politics of it all, but, the odd quip from light-night hosts noted, there has been little substantial outrage from the president's opponents either. His greatest weapon is exhaustion. Almost nobody has the energy to get annoyed with Trump any more. This may not be a terrible thing when it comes to 'salty language' on the front lawn. It's everything else he does that matters.

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