Skip to main content

Stupid economists: How Josh Feinman proves my point

So, Globalization is at risk, its not only Donald Trump that is the problem, but there are waves of resentment across the world about further opening of markets.

In fact, over the past 30 years the level of equality in countries has risen dramatically:



The linchpin here is the increase (except Brazil and Mexico) of the GINI coefficient in most
OECD countries; Canada the least the Sweden the most -- but the latter one may be entirely due to IKEA...  Bottom line, voters have taken notice that the deregulation of market has resulted in less wealth and more insecurity.  The reason Trump won is because he promised "something different"  He may not be able to delivery (I am not sure he knows what to deliver) bit its sounds better than what Clinton offered which was more of the same...

However, Mr Feinman suggest that the reason deregulation and market opening is getting a bad press is entirely driven by poor explication of the benefits of free trades and other market reforms.  In fact, the people got it, they understand the limits of the market and how it has directly affected their lives; lower wages, less security -- they may find via Trump's administration that the US system is about to get a lot meaner -- expect the destruction of Obamacare within the first few weeks of the new administration.  Congress may offer a fig leaf to Trump; approve the new law or will kill the whole thing via reconciliation (that would end the ACA immediately).

The problem of Deutsch Bank's economist is that he lives in a strange world where reality is somewhat different than what "ordinary folks" face, he lives in Connecticut in one of the best neighborhoods and his entire experience about trade policy is driven by book learning.  If you worked for Carrier your entire life welding bits an pieces together, the loss of your livelihood to a Mexican welder is a clear and immediate threat, as such you view Trumps' intervention as a good thing -- it did, for a time save your job.  The benefits of market liberalization has been the top 10% of America's for the rest, the 90% saw no gain or real losses.

That is the real problem; Americans as a whole didn't see any improvement in their lifestyle over the past 30 years, their revenues have at best been static or dropped and job security is out of the door.  That's what "the people" understand, you cannot explain that away









Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

what people get wrong about tariffs

 The issue is simple. What percentage of the economy is dependent on tariff goods? The truth, is that the US economy is far more closed than people understand. People genuinely believe that all manufacturing has ceased to exist in the United States all given to China on the altar of woke policy the truth can be further from That statement. Only about 15% of US GDP is related to foreign trade. Of that amount, slightly more than half is from Canada in Mexico. And half of that is energy. What that means, is that about 7% of US GDP is tariff dependent. The proof in the pudding, is how little money tariff generates. People think that 30 or 50 billion is a lot it’s not in an economy that has $3 trillion. The impact on the US economy will be less visible but not absent. Inflation hasn’t occurred yet first because tests have hardly started to bite, but more importantly it’s such a small percent of the economy. Now certain things are critical. The rare earth metals from China were critical....
Post a Comment
Read more

Trump and Venezuela...

The US now owns Venezuela…and not in a good way.  America is not known for its nation building skills, and yet it now owns the disaster that is Venezuela.   Starvation and exodus are the natural progression.   In addition it will become a haven for narco-terrorists, more so than it already was. I am sure that Trump and his friends really thought that little attack very well…I guess that he will now attack Iran now.  
Post a Comment
Read more

Demographics

 I am preparing a kind of family tree for our children so that they know where they came from.  In my family I am the only survivor, although my brother and sister died recently they were both in their seventies (a story I told already).    It was a fun process, but it provided more than that.  First, I married relatively young I was 26 when I married and nearly 30 when our first child was born.   I was looking at my ancestors.  On my mother's side, she had 6 siblings, Four died before the age of 30, two in war, and two from illnesses.  Only she and a single sister survived.   The two boys had a child each but they died in WWII, and the other sister died as an infant.   what is interesting is that every one of my mother's siblings had children in their early 20s.   I know that my mom was hardly 20 when my brother was born.    What is remarkable is that among our friends, we are the only ones to have fou...
Post a Comment
Read more