I understand the global economist view of a strong currency vs. a weak currency. I just think it’s a bad comparison — and for most people, it’s a pointless one. Most people earn money in one currency, and they’re not buying a basket of currencies — they’re buying real goods and services.

It might be true from a balance of trade or global finance perspective, or a debtor perspective or a central bank perspective that a strong currency comes with a bunch of problems and challenges. But the consumer benefits from a strong currency, because it buys more than a weak or weakening currency buys. And to the extent that a strong currency is meaningful to the consumer, it means that the currency they earn buys more goods or at least the same amount of goods tomorrow as it does today.

The policy makers have different aims, and a variety of those aims run directly counter to the interests and prosperity of your average wage earner and consumer.

It’s a perverse conclusion to come to… that we should be actively devaluing our currency. It means a great many people have to either work harder or longer or forego some future consumption in order to maintain the same standard of living today that they enjoyed yesterday.

I’m partial to a quote:

“Treat all economic questions from the viewpoint of the consumer, for the interests of the consumer are the interests of the human race.” — Frederic Bastiat

The bankers and policy makers aren’t my concern, which is why I’m beyond dismissive of their definition of a strong currency in lieu of one that’s more useful for me and literally everyone I know or ever will.