Mercantilism does reign in much of Asia, with high domestic saving rates, huge foreign exchange reserves, undervalued currencies on a purchasing power-parity basis, and large current account surpluses. Speaking as an American, this combination would not be pleasing to me, as it makes consumption an after thought in the pursuit of ever-greater stores of international wealth. Americans operate on the thesis that hearses don’t come with U-Haul trailers and spend accordingly.basically he's saying that if the massive demographic influx of the world's population into the capitalist system -- 2.5 billion people or about half the world over the last two decades, viz. china and india (causing the secular decline in interest rates?) -- is without concomitant movement of those people (human capital as it were) to a) where they're most productive and b) where their utility is maximised, then in the absence of a "free market in passports," it's the govt's prerogative to affect their 'collective' preferences as best it can, e.g. thru monetary policy :D
Neither the Asian model nor the Anglo Saxon model is inherently right or wrong. Peoples’ utility functions are not homogenous: different strokes for different folks. And because peoples’ utility functions are different, there is scope for win-win international trade.
Except, of course, in the delicate matter of citizenship. There is no free market in passports. Indeed, the very definition of the sovereignty of nations includes the right – at the point of a gun – to define who is and isn’t a citizen: entitled to vote; subject to laws of the land, including the obligation to pay taxes and submit to conscription; and eligible for the social safety net funded by fellow citizens.
Accordingly, the leaders of sovereign countries rationally respond to exigencies beyond the economic doctrine of comparative advantage through free trade. This is nowhere more clear than in considering the political hot button of today called “outsourcing” – the creative destruction of American jobs in the (capitalist!) pursuit of profits through lower labor costs beyond America’s borders. Every sensible economist agrees that in the long run, “outsourcing” is a winning trade for both America and the countries who are the beneficiaries of outsourcing: American consumers get to buy more for less, and foreign workers get to move up the value-added chain, increasing their prosperity, too.
The problem is that the economist’s long-run dream is the politician’s short-term nightmare. Voters who benefit from free trade – employed consumers – do not reward politicians with yea votes, but those whose jobs are creatively destructed do punish politicians with nay votes. Thus, politicians are rationally less enthusiastic about free trade than economists.1 This is particularly the case in times of weak global aggregate demand growth, which begets “beggar thy neighbor” pathologies: political leaders rationally want to get re-elected!
Agriculture jobs provided decent livelihoods for at least 80 years before the rules changed and working in the factory became the norm. Those industrial jobs endured for some 40 years before the twin pressures of cheap competition overseas and labor-saving automation at home rewrote the rules again. IT jobs - the kind of high-skill knowledge work that was supposed to be our future - are facing the same sort of realignment after only 20 years or so. The upheaval is occurring not across generations, but within individual careers.also btw, it appears there's a preference to substitute capital for labor...
Why is the US having so much difficulty generating jobs? I argue that the super-low interest rate stance in the US has had an unintended effect of skewing the incentives in favour of firms expanding capital rather than labour. The irony here is that, as long as interest rates stay low, the job market will struggle to recover, with labour being crowded out by capital.this has also been blamed on healthcare costs (among other things) associated with hiring, which further drives jobs either to machines or abroad. stephen roach has called this the global labor arbitrage.
« Older Who will save rock'n'roll?... | Tired of Iraq?... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
"Complimentary currencies for social change."
posted by gen at 12:00 AM on March 17, 2004