Sorry, but that is simply not true. A strong currency should be the result of a healthy economy and high gdp. (X-M) (exports - imports) is only one component of GDP.
Now, you might have countercyclical interference by central banks that results in the weakening of the currency as they artificially lower interest rates to stimulate aggregate demand. But in the long run, output is fixed and only the price level is impacted.
Historically, lower interest rates and declining currency would translate into stimulation of demand via lower interest...
I differ on the point of the results of current actions taken by cenbanks, though. A state of hyperinflation would require that there be more money in circulation than "things". As more and more money is printed (and debt created via e.g. cenbank loans or, say,speculation on margin), yes, the balance sheet of money in existence increases. This would ordinarily ramp up inflation - more money in the supply-and-demand arena leads to "things" becoming more expensive. However, the actions of cenbanks these days are statedly aimed at 1) increasing money in circulation and 2) keeping interest rates down (as you mention) to encourage investment. Ordinarily inflation would result but because the investment is made into debt instruments (bonds, ETFs, etc) should any risk-off event occur then investment funds will flow out of both stocks and debt instruments (e.g. 2007) and destroy the debt component of money supply. This, coupled with unemployment, diminishes the money in the supply-and-demand arena: less money and more "things" = deflation. So cenbank activity will achieve precisely the opposite of what they are attempting. They are trying everything to cover their naked front with impressive suits while the backside is exposed in all its humorous glory.
It is only on the point of deflation/inflation that we differ, but on the last point above we (all) agree
cryptocurrency everytime
