Michael Pettis, a distinguished economist and professor at Peking University in Beijing, recently argued that “the U.S. would be better off without the global dollar.” His thesis is highly relevant because it agrees with that of Stephen Miran, the chairman of President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, whose work has turned into what is termed the “Mar-a-Lago Accord.”
While his conclusion was likely exaggerated by a headline writer, Pettis does attempt to make the case that the U.S. would be better off if its currency and financial markets were not the dominant global financial suppliers. This is akin to arguing that sliced bread was a destructive innovation.
