More than two years ago the Federal Reserve Bank made a historic cut in interest rates, causing the value of the U.S. dollar to drop decisively. It was striking because that move pushed the dollar into parity with the Canadian dollar, reversing a smug joke many of us had occasionally made.

The message at the time was that the rate cut would help to boost U.S. exports, and thus was a reason for manufacturers to be encouraged. I was among those who thought that was a worthy trade-off for the inflationary effect of the lower interest rates.

There was some evidence of manufacturing export increases in the succeeding weeks, but as the global economy tipped into recession over the following year the general improvement in that regard was negligible.

On the other hand, the value of the U.S. dollar has continued to bob and weave, in a generally downward direction. Amid other economic crises, the dollar's decline has not had much attention.

It also has had very little focus from the Federal Reserve Bank and the U.S. Treasury Dept., which seem to believe that stabilizing financial institutions is a more important goal than stabilizing the currency.

In addition, it seems clear that the Treasury and the rest of the Administration are committed to structuring the economy on the foundation of an export-driven manufacturing sector: how else to understand their unwillingness to stabilize currency values, by slowing federal spending, or cutting taxes in order to encourage consumer spending?

There is no reason to object to this presumed goal, but structuring the economy that way puts the interests of the global market ahead of domestic consumers. The foreign buyers want low prices, but we want revenue. Wouldn't it be better, in the long-term, to build the domestic economy on a balanced foundation that uses the potential of domestic demand, too? Some effort — or just as easily, restraint  — to spur domestic demand would help borrowers and buyers feel more confident about their long-term prospects.

Understanding the importance of currency valuation can be difficult, but this column gives a very helpful historical perspective, and an outline of the important global market trends that surround the issue.

Whether or not building export volumes is their goal, federal officials ought to recognize that while a weak currency makes U.S. goods cheaper, the revenue generated is also devalued. The manufacturers who earn that revenue feel very little benefit, nor do their employees, who continue to pay rising prices for products and services because the cash in their pockets has relatively less value.

In fact, the distinctions between the global economy and domestic economy are vanishing all the time, and it's for exactly this reason that we need to have a stable currency. In the wider world, it is the only control we have over our own fortunes and futures. To become a successful exporter of manufactured goods, the U.S. will have to increase the value of those goods, not cut the prices.