Oren, I am paying to subscribe to you. Not to the NYTimes. "Continue reading" indeed. The Times has a paywall. Either put the essay in whole on your site or do not put it up at all. Don't give your subscribers part of your essay and then have them shut out of the rest.
Ah, what would we do without “experts”? Being a subject matter expert has benefit, but when, as the author points out, they become invested in their one theory, they cannot seem to comprehend that they may be wrong. And don’t forget the political portion of the show. Pressure to conform to a certain viewpoint has been the norm for the past 10+ years.
My oldest daughter (married, well-educated) asked about Tariffs. She was wondering if they would 'fix' the issues that we have. I said "we shall see" as per the Chinese parable.
My summation of what happened with China was:
1. Clinton opened the way for free trade. If only Nixon could go to China, only a Democratic president could sell lowering tariffs and free trade with a hostile nation.
2. The Bush/Cheney neocons double down on that and said "hey, let's give China MFN status". I am sure none of that had anything to do with the billions that everyone was making. Keep in mind that Neil Bush was pushing his influence in China (after Silverado bank failure) well before the Bidens got into the act. (Caveat... I voted for Bush 2X).
3. But along the way, it became apparent that China had no regard for copyrights, patents, trademarks and was blatant in their strategy of drawing companies in, figuring out how to copy what they did and then starting their own company.
4. As that went along, China developed a kind of mercantilistic strategy of picking key industries, subsidizing them, flooding foreign markets and driving their competition out of business.
5. But everyone was making money.
As I said to my daughter, when you remove tariffs, it's the best of all worlds. You still have your domestic high-paying jobs and suddenly shit gets cheap. And if any domestic producers want to raise prices, someone will undercut them. So inflation is in check too.
But over time, those good jobs go away. And we have seen that they aren't necessarily replaced with 'equal service industry jobs'. A lot of those went to India and the Philippines and elsewhere.
So now, how do we reverse this? As George Costanza says "Do the opposite". So raise targeted tariffs to help foster domestic production. How will this work? It will immediately raise prices as domestic produces will adjust to the tariff price. So there will be some added inflation. And with the worsening demographics (but still the best demographics in the developed world) it will mean rising wages. Which will mean more inflation. So don't think 1-3% as normal. Thinks 4-6% as the baseline.
Will it bring back jobs immediately? Absolutely not. You see all of the Chips act, and infrastructure act and those bills. Those spur cap ex. But if you are looking at the taxpayer cost/ job they are certainly not a winner. It will take real companies, creating real jobs without federal subsidies to make that work. And that will take time. And with the demographics and robotics and AI that is going to look a lot different than the jobs that left.
So if lifting tariffs was a win in the short-term and lose in the long-term. Adding tariffs is a lose in the short-term and maybe, possibly kind of win in the long term.
But none of this takes into account the need for a country to be able to actually produce materials should we come into conflict with an adversary. That is about energy and mining and siting laws. That is a whole 'nuther can of worms' as they say. But suffice it to say that I THINK we are finally starting to see that wealth and power and not one-in-the-same. So, if we want to remain powerful, we need to be able to make things with cheap energy, with materials we produce domestically or with allies, and some of that will come at the expense of GDP per capita.
China is a problem. THE problem is Western leadership. In Chinese terms, they have lost (or thrown away), the Mandate of Heaven. The Chinese didn't invent off-shoring or JIT or DEI or ESG. They merely took advantage of lunatic Westerners to their own advantage.
"It would be surprising if many of the Uyghurs performing forced labor " Where is the evidence for this? Aside from "testimonials" from those on the NED/CIA payroll, the evidence for the "forced labor" is precisely zero. It is part of a huge propaganda campaign. None of the Central Asia "stans" or the Organization of Islamic Cooperation buy into it. You shouldn't either
Boy, the NYT did you a real disservice, at least on my end: I had no interest in a weird opinion piece hooked around George Costanza, but now of course I’ll read it! Hope I’m in the minority
Oren I have to admire your peskiness. It isn't easy to be a Don defender, especially on policy grounds since so little policy ever enters his aging, conspiracy-soaked brain. Perhaps you're right and he really does have a plan, and Elon approves in spite of his exhaustive China ties. I hate to be a cynic, but to me tariffs are the ultimate shakedown tool for Don's lifelong grifting toolkit. Hence the daily billionaire pilgrimages to Mar A Lago. The "new" right needs to get real. The last thing Don and JD are worried about is the middle class. They showed us again in this year's campaign the contempt with which they hold their own voters. There is no greater expression of contempt than serial lying to your own supporters. Elections, pet eating, QAnon lunacy, the lies are never ending. If they respected their voters, they would tell them the truth. They would educate them on the complex trends buffeting the global economy. The "new" right reminds me of the Seinfeld episode on car rental. The rental agency has no car for Jerry in spite of his reservation, leading Jerry to engage in a hilarious discussion of what a reservation actually is. Y'all may think Don has your reservation for tariffs, but I predict a rerun of his prior episodes. He'll impose something flashy but largely irrelevant, tout it daily to his base, jettison the broader policy, and claim victory. How many times do you need to see the same show? JD was right about Don the first time...before he self-gelded.
Physics has a Standard Model that acknowledges two distinct epistemological positions: one based on the known particles and one based on gravity. In addition physics has a well known collection of theoretical gaps filled by speculations such as the existence of dark matter & energy or of a gravity particle.
It is not enough, as American Compass has done, to compile an exhaustive, substantial, critique of neoliberal macroeconomics. In addition, out of all the economic experimentation about to take place, a new “standard textbook” of macroeconomics should be developed and become adopted by major universities.
Such a textbook should resemble the Standard Model in that it acknowledges the current state of epistemological heresy and the many gaps between in our understanding filled by speculations.
For those faint of heart or convinced they possess the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, I recommend they consider the fabulous success of Alexander Hamilton, whose Report on Manufacturers exploits epistemological heresy.
I would also point out that our first democracy, the one in Athens, incorporated epistemological heresy into its operations, which Protogoras identified as disso logoi. Our legacy of Truth Tellers, to the contrary, we owe to Plato and Aristotle, who were certainly not friends of democracy.
Democracy, I would argue, is based upon epistemological and ontological foundations whose trustworthiness has been substantiated by the state of the art of our physical sciences. So, until somebody comes up with a Theory of Everything, I suggest we conduct ourselves as though one does not exist.
The question facing USA is how does the country put most of its citizens to work with pay that will enable them to keep their heads above water? What are the areas where domestic output will strengthen the both the populace and the might of our country among the world’s economies? Please do an essay on that. What are the details of doing the opposite?
Oren, I am paying to subscribe to you. Not to the NYTimes. "Continue reading" indeed. The Times has a paywall. Either put the essay in whole on your site or do not put it up at all. Don't give your subscribers part of your essay and then have them shut out of the rest.
Ah, what would we do without “experts”? Being a subject matter expert has benefit, but when, as the author points out, they become invested in their one theory, they cannot seem to comprehend that they may be wrong. And don’t forget the political portion of the show. Pressure to conform to a certain viewpoint has been the norm for the past 10+ years.
My oldest daughter (married, well-educated) asked about Tariffs. She was wondering if they would 'fix' the issues that we have. I said "we shall see" as per the Chinese parable.
My summation of what happened with China was:
1. Clinton opened the way for free trade. If only Nixon could go to China, only a Democratic president could sell lowering tariffs and free trade with a hostile nation.
2. The Bush/Cheney neocons double down on that and said "hey, let's give China MFN status". I am sure none of that had anything to do with the billions that everyone was making. Keep in mind that Neil Bush was pushing his influence in China (after Silverado bank failure) well before the Bidens got into the act. (Caveat... I voted for Bush 2X).
3. But along the way, it became apparent that China had no regard for copyrights, patents, trademarks and was blatant in their strategy of drawing companies in, figuring out how to copy what they did and then starting their own company.
4. As that went along, China developed a kind of mercantilistic strategy of picking key industries, subsidizing them, flooding foreign markets and driving their competition out of business.
5. But everyone was making money.
As I said to my daughter, when you remove tariffs, it's the best of all worlds. You still have your domestic high-paying jobs and suddenly shit gets cheap. And if any domestic producers want to raise prices, someone will undercut them. So inflation is in check too.
But over time, those good jobs go away. And we have seen that they aren't necessarily replaced with 'equal service industry jobs'. A lot of those went to India and the Philippines and elsewhere.
So now, how do we reverse this? As George Costanza says "Do the opposite". So raise targeted tariffs to help foster domestic production. How will this work? It will immediately raise prices as domestic produces will adjust to the tariff price. So there will be some added inflation. And with the worsening demographics (but still the best demographics in the developed world) it will mean rising wages. Which will mean more inflation. So don't think 1-3% as normal. Thinks 4-6% as the baseline.
Will it bring back jobs immediately? Absolutely not. You see all of the Chips act, and infrastructure act and those bills. Those spur cap ex. But if you are looking at the taxpayer cost/ job they are certainly not a winner. It will take real companies, creating real jobs without federal subsidies to make that work. And that will take time. And with the demographics and robotics and AI that is going to look a lot different than the jobs that left.
So if lifting tariffs was a win in the short-term and lose in the long-term. Adding tariffs is a lose in the short-term and maybe, possibly kind of win in the long term.
But none of this takes into account the need for a country to be able to actually produce materials should we come into conflict with an adversary. That is about energy and mining and siting laws. That is a whole 'nuther can of worms' as they say. But suffice it to say that I THINK we are finally starting to see that wealth and power and not one-in-the-same. So, if we want to remain powerful, we need to be able to make things with cheap energy, with materials we produce domestically or with allies, and some of that will come at the expense of GDP per capita.
China is a problem. THE problem is Western leadership. In Chinese terms, they have lost (or thrown away), the Mandate of Heaven. The Chinese didn't invent off-shoring or JIT or DEI or ESG. They merely took advantage of lunatic Westerners to their own advantage.
"It would be surprising if many of the Uyghurs performing forced labor " Where is the evidence for this? Aside from "testimonials" from those on the NED/CIA payroll, the evidence for the "forced labor" is precisely zero. It is part of a huge propaganda campaign. None of the Central Asia "stans" or the Organization of Islamic Cooperation buy into it. You shouldn't either
Boy, the NYT did you a real disservice, at least on my end: I had no interest in a weird opinion piece hooked around George Costanza, but now of course I’ll read it! Hope I’m in the minority
Oren I have to admire your peskiness. It isn't easy to be a Don defender, especially on policy grounds since so little policy ever enters his aging, conspiracy-soaked brain. Perhaps you're right and he really does have a plan, and Elon approves in spite of his exhaustive China ties. I hate to be a cynic, but to me tariffs are the ultimate shakedown tool for Don's lifelong grifting toolkit. Hence the daily billionaire pilgrimages to Mar A Lago. The "new" right needs to get real. The last thing Don and JD are worried about is the middle class. They showed us again in this year's campaign the contempt with which they hold their own voters. There is no greater expression of contempt than serial lying to your own supporters. Elections, pet eating, QAnon lunacy, the lies are never ending. If they respected their voters, they would tell them the truth. They would educate them on the complex trends buffeting the global economy. The "new" right reminds me of the Seinfeld episode on car rental. The rental agency has no car for Jerry in spite of his reservation, leading Jerry to engage in a hilarious discussion of what a reservation actually is. Y'all may think Don has your reservation for tariffs, but I predict a rerun of his prior episodes. He'll impose something flashy but largely irrelevant, tout it daily to his base, jettison the broader policy, and claim victory. How many times do you need to see the same show? JD was right about Don the first time...before he self-gelded.
Physics has a Standard Model that acknowledges two distinct epistemological positions: one based on the known particles and one based on gravity. In addition physics has a well known collection of theoretical gaps filled by speculations such as the existence of dark matter & energy or of a gravity particle.
It is not enough, as American Compass has done, to compile an exhaustive, substantial, critique of neoliberal macroeconomics. In addition, out of all the economic experimentation about to take place, a new “standard textbook” of macroeconomics should be developed and become adopted by major universities.
Such a textbook should resemble the Standard Model in that it acknowledges the current state of epistemological heresy and the many gaps between in our understanding filled by speculations.
For those faint of heart or convinced they possess the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, I recommend they consider the fabulous success of Alexander Hamilton, whose Report on Manufacturers exploits epistemological heresy.
I would also point out that our first democracy, the one in Athens, incorporated epistemological heresy into its operations, which Protogoras identified as disso logoi. Our legacy of Truth Tellers, to the contrary, we owe to Plato and Aristotle, who were certainly not friends of democracy.
Democracy, I would argue, is based upon epistemological and ontological foundations whose trustworthiness has been substantiated by the state of the art of our physical sciences. So, until somebody comes up with a Theory of Everything, I suggest we conduct ourselves as though one does not exist.
Yes, when your an expert you have invested and put so much at stake that you can't change your mind. Not a good place to be.
Experts are BS experts only.
The question facing USA is how does the country put most of its citizens to work with pay that will enable them to keep their heads above water? What are the areas where domestic output will strengthen the both the populace and the might of our country among the world’s economies? Please do an essay on that. What are the details of doing the opposite?