The trade debate in the U.S. is now entering a new stage with the apparent nomination of Kamela Harris and J.D. Vance. So far, the trade debate in the U.S. has been particularly toxic, even though there were significant similarities between Biden and…  | By Stuart Malawer on July 23, 2024 | The trade debate in the U.S. is now entering a new stage with the apparent nomination of Kamela Harris and J.D. Vance. So far, the trade debate in the U.S. has been particularly toxic, even though there were significant similarities between Biden and Trump. Vance is fervently a protectionist (as is Trump) and Harris and her yet named running mate -- well, we don't know. The public has become very skeptical of trade and its impact on the U.S. economy. But new data and candidates can change the terms of the debate and the formulation of newer and more beneficial trade policies, hopefully. "For over a decade, there has been a widespread myth in US politics that global trade causes American job losses. Yet, two decades of data show that the US economy has largely recovered from the initial impact of the China Shock, grown its resilience to foreign competition, and now in fact thrives on foreign imports. The data reveal the complexity of globalization's impact on workers, the need to address the US' investment in its human capital, and the myth that trade is toxic to the American economy …. The US economy was already resilient against imports from China and other low-wage countries prior to the sharp shift in US trade policy and public sentiment, stoked by a bipartisan ongoing political narrative, against globalization …. US manufacturing jobs post-2011 is insignificant, implying that policymakers advocating for nationalist policies are basing their trade policy decisions on outdated evidence …. The research suggests that, rather than solely focusing on reviving lost manufacturing jobs, US policymakers should pivot toward leveraging the country's comparative advantages in tradable services. This shift in focus holds promise for further enhancing the US economy's robustness and competitiveness in the global marketplace …. Analysis underlines how reactionary protectionism can worsen economic inequalities and undermine US competitiveness by failing - often deliberately, in the ongoing political narrative - to recognize the benefits that global trade actually brings to the American economy. "Is Trade Really Toxic." Hinrich (July 2024) (discussing 2024 Georgetown Report). | | | |  | You can also reply to this email to leave a comment. | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment