Example collocations logo

Exchange in sentence

3719 examples of Exchange in a sentence

In the late 1940s, those present at the creation of the post-World War II international economic order tried to create an international monetary system that would (a) allow for exchange rates stable enough for producers and consumers to escape the risks of excessive and irrational exchange rate fluctuations, (b) allow countries to follow their own domestic macroeconomic policies, and (c) prevent the catastrophic panics affecting not just individual banks but whole countries that produced the destructive international financial crisis of the Great Depression.
The result was the fixed-but-adjustable exchange rate system of Bretton Woods, which over time mutated into the floating-rate system of the 1980s.
In the US, the Bush Administration is skeptical of the stimulative power of monetary policy and wants bigger fiscal deficits to reduce unemployment, hoping that the future dangers posed by persistent deficits -- low investment, slow growth, loss of confidence, uncontrolled inflation and exchange rate depreciation-- can be finessed, or will not become visible until after the Bush team leaves office.
Flexible exchange rates, designed to allow the market to signal when confidence in the currency is declining, also put exporters at a competitive disadvantage against foreign-country producers whose prices aren't batted around by unpredictable exchange rates.
WASHINGTON, DC – The world is on the brink of a nasty confrontation over exchange rates – now spilling over to affect trade policy (America’s flirtation with protectionism), attitudes towards capital flows (new restrictions in Brazil, Thailand, and South Korea), and public support for economic globalization (rising anti-foreigner sentiment almost everywhere).
The issue is usually framed in terms of whether some countries are “cheating” by holding their exchange rates at an undervalued rate, thus boosting their exports and limiting imports relative to what would happen if their central banks floated the local currency freely.
And its export lobby is fighting fiercely to keep the exchange rate roughly where it is relative to the dollar.
In principle, the IMF is supposed to press countries with undervalued exchange rates to let their currencies appreciate.
Although Poland moved quickly toward macro stability and free prices, still almost half of its large enterprises remain in government hands, unemployment is well over 10 percent, and only a few companies are traded on its stock exchange.
In March, national leaders assembled in Nanjing, China, to speechify on exchange and interest rates.
It took the exchange rate crisis of 1992, for instance, to make Italy's leaders realize that something had to be done about the country's public finance mess.
The US could no longer maintain a fixed exchange rate between the dollar and gold – the cornerstone of the postwar Bretton Woods system.
The arrangement collapsed because the US did not want to tighten monetary policy and run more restrictive fiscal policy: keeping US voters happy was understandably more important to President Nixon than maintaining a global system of fixed exchange rates.
South Korea, which has agreed to adopt “voluntary export restraints” in exchange for an exemption from US steel tariffs, is asking its domestic producers’ association to allocate export quotas among its members.
In theory, as capital floods in, these countries’ exchange rates will appreciate rapidly, making them look unattractive and automatically stemming the flow.
In fact, the real effective exchange rate (REER), adjusted by US manufacturing unit labor costs, has depreciated by 30% since 2001, and by 17% since 2005, suggesting a rapid erosion of emerging markets’ low-cost advantage – and giving America’s competitiveness a substantial boost.
Last summer, disputes over a string of contested islands in the East China Sea led to a furious exchange of charges between China and Japan, the world’s second- and third-largest economies, respectively.
The stock exchange boom of the early 1870’s was followed by collapse in 1873 and a witch-hunt for those responsible.
After all, even after nearly two decades of “recession,” per-capita income in Japan is more than $40,000 (at market exchange rates).
Seventeen of the 45 blocks are being reserved for unknown companies that will be given a first right of refusal on acreage in exchange for promises to invest heavily in projects not directly related to oil production, such as new power plants and refineries.
In 1994, when I became State Secretary for Financial Affairs in Sweden’s Ministry of Finance, recovery appeared to be on the horizon, following the abolition of the fixed exchange rate, the ensuing sharp depreciation of the Krona, and lower interest rates.
Their answer is clear: yes, but only in exchange for more power and votes at the IMF.
These include greater fiscal discipline in the US, greater reliance on domestic demand in both Europe and Asia, and more flexible exchange rates in Asia.
Stable macroeconomic policies also need to be in place, while fixed exchange rates are to be avoided.
And Israel has been willing in the past to barter hundreds or thousands of detainees in exchange for the release of just a few of its citizens.
But, despite deep popular sympathy, not a few Israelis – on both the left and the right – opposed the exchange of one soldier for a thousand or more Palestinian prisoners, some of whom perpetrated terrorist attacks that killed dozens of people.
By demanding the release of more than 1,000 prisoners in exchange for one soldier, Hamas is conceding the stark military reality of this imbalance: thousands of their prisoners, fighting with knives, explosive belts, and primitive rockets, are worth only one Israeli soldier.
As a result, one prisoner in exchange for a thousand Palestinian prisoners is neither a humiliation nor a surrender, but an acceptable agreement that acknowledges, even on behalf of the enemy, the military capacity of Israeli soldiers.
There are also those who vigorously oppose the prisoner exchange with Hamas because some of the released prisoners will return to terrorism against Israel, as has happened after past exchanges.
The release of one Israeli soldier in exchange for such men could therefore endanger many lives in the future.
BackNext