That’s not what you actually wrote. I quoted what you actually wrote. If you read the part that you’ve left out, your complaint is that Chinese policy was suppressing global demand. You can’t have both excessive inflation and a lack of demand, if there was a lack of demand, where is the inflation coming from? Lack of demand is why the US experiences no inflation presently. In any case, now you admit that Chinese monetary tightening has not curtailed inflation, i.e. Chinese demand is still quite robust, so we’re probably on the same page.
What should the exchange rate be? You assume that the “market” exchange rate must be the correct exchange rate, but all countries that suffered through the Asian financial crisis of 1997-8 would probably disagree with you, as would Paul Krugman who advocated tight currency management as a solution to hot money flows at the time. While the price of an American house in 2006 accurately reflects the price payed by a willing buyer to a willing seller, Americans would probably question whether that was what the price “should” have been. That’s also an example of how seeing a larger trend is easier than trying to time the market. The RMB has been appreciating, the Chinese government has stated that it will appreciate for the foreseeable future, so broadly speaking, the Chinese and American governments are on the same page anyway, the complaint is that it isn’t appreciating fast enough.
Many people, e.g. Jim Chanos, have pointed out that government directed capital investment and not export has been the primary driver of growth since probably before 2008, and the (government directed capital investment)stimulus of 2008 has significantly exacerbated that problem. The current Chinese inflation has little to do with the exchange rate more to do with the lack of fine control the government has over economic policy. The stimulus of 2008 has simply overshot its intentions somewhat.
The American government likes to rail against the Chinese currency because it’s a safe and useful scapegoat.