Wednesday, February 05, 2025
A philosophical question of macroeconomics
I am actually a bit disappointed that Trump's big push towards tariffs ended up being just bluster, with most of the tariffs called off just before implementation. Because I had wondered whether a global trade war could actually be a good thing. Let me explain.
In the last few years, we were able to observe an interesting phenomenon: Typical indicators of the economy were looking good, but the average person was clearly suffering and unhappy from the economic situation. One explanation for this phenomenon is inequality: An economy can grow in a way which makes billionaires richer while simultaneously make the average person poorer. And an important factor contributing to inequality is globalisation, because it makes capital more mobile than labor.
Now imagine a global trade war, which makes it less viable for the rich to profit from cheap labor in China and elsewhere. That would certainly be bad for economic indicators like GDP. But it would also strengthen labor comparatively to capital, and make a larger part of the spoils of economic activity go to the workers, thus reducing inequality. We could see the reverse of the current situation, where the headline numbers and stock market valuations are down, but the typical person is economically better off.
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
I have only inadequate knowledge of economy, but while it might be true that this might reduce inequality, trade war will make everyone poorer.
My understanding is that rich people win more than poor people from global economy, but everyone still wins.
The worst part is that trade war can totally lead to actual war, as having an economy dependant of another country is a good (not perfect) deterent from war - as long as the dissymetry of military power is not too big.
My understanding is that rich people win more than poor people from global economy, but everyone still wins.
The worst part is that trade war can totally lead to actual war, as having an economy dependant of another country is a good (not perfect) deterent from war - as long as the dissymetry of military power is not too big.
I've had something of the same feeling. Making all trade global creates some efficiencies and puts a few percent on GDP, but it seems like the value gets creamed off by global oligarchs. Maybe with more tariffs things would cost a little more and local oligarchs would cream off some of the profits too, but it might well feel better for ordinary people. it would make for less economic fragility, too.
I've been on a Gibson kick lately, and I am sorry to say that his pessimistic vision of the future where the middle class has pretty much evaporated seems more and more likely all the time. I am hoping it won't get seriously under way until I'm dead of old age, or at least until I can retire, but we'll see.
I would agree with ettesiun, a trade war might harm billionares more but would not make the average man richer. Well some in America would be looking at new jobs at presumably good pay making car parts. but on average no.
Why would local markets work better than the global one at avoiding inequality? If we go back some centuries, globalization was completely non-existent and more or less all production was local, but it's not like feudalism was an example of income equality.....
But, if the labor becomes more expensive, won't the rich guys try to rise prices to keep their profit intact?
I'm late to this post but I just wanted to say that market volatility typically isn't good for the average person. And especially if that volatility last for an extended period of time.
Investors and banks tend to be more stingy when the market is in chaos and that affects jobs growth and small businesses that rely on that money.
For as much as we like to think the stock market doesn't affect us the reality is millions of jobs are dependent on a stable stock market and global trade. Sowing chaos into that definitely hurts us little people more then the billionaires at the top.
Post a Comment
Investors and banks tend to be more stingy when the market is in chaos and that affects jobs growth and small businesses that rely on that money.
For as much as we like to think the stock market doesn't affect us the reality is millions of jobs are dependent on a stable stock market and global trade. Sowing chaos into that definitely hurts us little people more then the billionaires at the top.
<< Home