Proponents of the White House’s approach to tariffs argue that unfettered globalization harmed American workers, and that the ability to cash in on global arbitrage benefited the rich and hurt the poor. It’s an argument that has been deployed before, most prominently by a progressive economist nearly three decades ago. In 1997, the Harvard University economist Dani Rodrik published a book titled Has Globalization Gone Too Far?, making what was then a heterodox claim. On the latest episode of FP Live, Rodrik looks back at how his ideas have become mainstream, even as he disagrees with how the Trump administration is deploying them.
“I don’t think that the Trump approach to trade will last,” said Rodrik. “We’re definitely moving into a world where there’ll be more economic nationalism, with countries prioritizing their own domestic economic and social interests first. And I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing.”
How should countries deal with Trump’s tariffs? “The usual analogy is the schoolyard bully. And the question is, how do you deal with a schoolyard bully? Trump is swinging wildly and hitting himself more often than hitting somebody else. His policies are self-defeating. He believes he is benefiting the U.S. at the expense of the rest of the world, but he’s hitting the U.S. economy as well. We’ll see this in the coming months in inflation, in the stock market, in economic stagnation. Nothing good will come out of this for the U.S. economy.”
No comments:
Post a Comment