LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the high growth during Jeb Bush's period as governor of Florida was a result of the housing boom years. When that boom collapsed by 2008 the economy slumped badly. Taken as an average for the boom and slump years Florida's growth rate is slightly below the national average, says Krugman. Economists and other experts say productivity is a key factor for increasing wages and growth, which is a result of factors depending on the use of technology, business investment in productivity, human capital. It is stuck at a low level of 0.4% since 2010, according to economists, and not a factor that is dependent on who is president. During the two terms of president Obama growth was 2.1%, George H.W. Bush 2.0%, George W. Bush 1.6%- making the Bush and Obama years in office similiar in terms of growth. Before 2000 we see higher growth rates under a Republican president Reagan 3.4% and a Democratic president Clinton 3.7%. A significant factor since 2008 is the financial crisis and housing bubble which has in many countries such as Japan and Mexico, and to a lesser extent in the U.S., led to a lost decade....

LyrArc Article Gist
In one of its first major votes the newly elected U.S. House of Representatives approved the Keystone XL pipeline by a vote of 252 to 161.

LyrArc Article Gist
Two weeks after his election Donald Trump says the U.S. will not join the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement during his term in office. Barack Obama took seven years to negotiate the trade agreement which was opposed by trade unions, the auto industry and was unpopular in the midwestern U.S. because of the impact of trade in hollowing out the manufacturing sector. Here Frank Sieren of the DW.com points out that the agreement was not really about trade, as most of the gains of trade had already been realized according to experts. It was part of the "pivot to Asia" to maintain American dominance in the region, says Sieren. After China pulled together some Asian and European countries into its trade agreement, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the U.S. pushed for TPP as a counterweight to the China sponsored trade zone. China says it will try to integrate the countries in TPP into the trade zone it has sponsored. President Trump has said that the U.S. is better off negotiating agreements with each country and not getting into multilateral trade agreements. He fought the election campaign on the basis of the opposition to TPP and trade agreements that unfairly hurt American workers. This could have provided the 110,000 margin of victory in the states suffering from the hollowing out in manufacturing such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania. A similar hollowing out in Ontario favored Justin Trudeau's Liberals against the Conservatives in Canada's election. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT explains why the loss of jobs particularly in the auto industry to Mexico, with the experience of NAFTA passed by president Bill Clinton, has caused widespread opposition to the TPP trade agreement proposed by president Obama. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016 oppose the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
The slowing economy of Turkey as the wars in Syria and Iraq take their toll reducing demand for Turkey's exports. The conflict with Russia also affects Turkish exports. Growth slows to 2-3% a year in 2015-2016.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dan Balz says former prime minister Blair's policies in Britain (1997-2007) closely followed the policies of moving to centrist positions of U.S. president Clinton, with Blair's election in 1997 following Clinton's wins in 1992 and 1996. Clinton followed the Reagan years and Blair the Thatcher years in government, in modifying the early postwar ideas about the economy. The election of Corbyn by 59.5% of the vote of Labor party members, exceeds the 57% achieved by Blair in 1994. The opposing candidates did very poorly. Yvette Cooper, who most resembled Blair's positions was seen as waffling on issues by not taking clear positions. She lost badly with 4.5% of the vote, showing that something significantly has changed with the the deep recession following the 2008 financial crisis, and the recovery through years of austerity policies under Cameron's Conservative government. Balz's view is that this is likely to bring up the same debate in the Democratic party- Corbyn proposes a national investment bank for large investments in education, health services and infrastructure, and a reversal of Labor policies introducing fees for college education to increase opportunity. Sanders has not proposed a national investment bank, but says he would invest in education ( including reversing the spiralling education costs), health services, infrastructure, and other areas. Hillary Clinton has made the issue of upward mobility for the middle and working class a central issue in her campaign, but lacks the authenticity claimed by Sanders, who has tapped into anti-establishment feeling following the lack of recovery in wages under 7 years of the Democratic party government in the U.S. In this context Jeb Bush has also stated at the 2013 CPAC conference that social and economic mobility is the central issue of our times, only he would approach it by giving business incentives to increase business investment to create jobs and increase wages; and by adopting a tax code that would be also fair to the middle and working class....

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Juan Montes, in an exceptional report from Mexico City, tells the story behind a landmark achievement for Mexico- Pacto Por Mexico of Dec. 2, 2012. The major political parties of the right, centre and left forge an agreement for the way forward for Mexico- beyond monopolistic pricing and industry structures in Mexico that hurt consumers, to increase foreign investment and new technlogies to modernize the national oil company Pemex operations, change labor laws, and create a climate for higher growth. The pact is broad ranging, shows a grasp of the problems facing modern Mexico, and ranges from anti-monopoly laws to getting junk food out of schools considering Mexico's high obesity and diabetes rate. It covers 95 goals. It is hard to overstate the significance of this achievement for modern Mexico. Montes describes the initiative of the PRD leader Zambrones in rebranding his PRD party as a moderate left wing party open to new ideas. This happened after the departure of Lopez Obrador from the PRD to form his own party in September. Zambrano and PRD moderates brought up the idea based on what happened in a landmark deal in Spain in 1977, that helped transform Spain after decades of stagnation under the Franco dictatorship. Around July after the presidential election, PRD president Zambrano, and the PRD's Jesus Ortega, held meetings in Mexico City with Jose Murat, a senior PRI politician, and PRI president elect Nieto's top advisor, economist Luis Videgaray. The decision was made by president Nieto and economist Luis Videgaray to pursue the discussions for joint agreement on vital issues facing Mexico. The PAN party was brought into the discussions. By mid-September nine people from the PRD, PRI and PAN started work on a draft agreement at Murat's home. The ground rules were set for discussions to be private, to have agreement on all points or assume nothing had been agreed, and not let current events disturb the talks. The nine participants set up the broad principles, and then a group of three, one from each party was given the task of coming up with the right language for the pact. By the end of November a 34 page draft was put together. A night of intense work to 2 a.m. followed the inauguaration of president Nieto on Dec. 1, with the Pact ready for announcement on Dec. 2, 2012. The Pact is a landmark achievement in its potential for changing Mexico and creating decades of economic progress similiar to that envisioned by the Spanish parties for Spain in 1977. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Galston of the Brookings Institution says globalization has hurt workers in manufacturing with job losses and declining incomes. It has produced outcomes that have favored some industries such as tech, and not others such as automobiles which in the past helped create the broad middle class by offering good paying jobs to people with less than a college education. Immigration has created an issue that political leaders outside of the main parties have appealed to in France, the U.S. and Britain. The result is a polarization in the voters that has rarely been seen to this extent before. The middle class in the period from the 1950's to the 1980's is not the middle class that we see today in Europe and the U.S. The 2008 financial crisis added to the problems with the slow and uncertain recovery for some groups such as white men, the less educated, students, and people on minimum wage. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Some startling statistics on U.S. wages and incomes and the increase of part-time workers, by the publisher of U.S. News and World Report, Mortimer Zuckerman. He cites the Pew Research Center reports that show one third of Americans identifying themeselves as lower class or lower middle class compared to one quarter before 2008. This affects social mobility with the increasing gaps in incomes, education and social behaviour acting to reinforce each other and leading to even lower future mobility. Industries that are showing growth are in low wage occupations. The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows growth in future in industries noted for low wage part time work- health care, social assistance and retail, with some jobs lacking minimum wage and overtime protections. Revealing in this respect is that in the last 2 years fully 43% of net employment growth is in the 1.7 million jobs added in low wage work in food service, retail and employment services industries. The number of Americans working full time declined by 5.9 million since Sept 2007, part time workers increased by 2.6 million. The effects of higher part time workers and job recovery predominantly in lower wage industries is likely to affect consumer spending and slow growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
O'Malley, Sanders, and Clinton emphasize the issue of wages, income disparities, rising inequality, and a shrinking middle class in the first Democratic debate of the U.S. 2016 presidential election. Clinton points out that "at the center of my campaign is how we're going to raise wages." Sanders says that "the middle class of this country for the last 40 years has been disappearing." Clinton points out her opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement because it does not help raise American wages. Clinton calls herself a progressive, but "a progressive who gets things done," and a moderate when it comes to getting things done. Sanders points to the "deep injustice, an economic injustice that threatens to tear our country apart, and it will not solve itself." Sanders points to the wealth concentration in the U.S. "with the top one tenth of 1 percent owning about as much as the bottom 90 percent, and 57% of all new income going to the top 1 percent." Clinton comes to Sanders defense on the issue saying "it's our job to rein in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesn't run amok and doesn't cause the kind of inequities we're seeing in our economic system."...

LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....

LyrArc Article Gist
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson poses some difficult questions for those who like Mitt Romney say America's choice is between the merit based society Romney sees and the "European social democratic vision." In Romney's words- "a merit-based opportunity society- an American-style society- where people earn their rewards based on their education, their work, their willingness to take risks and their dreams." Meyerson cites several studies to show that European societies today are more dynamic on several measures of performance than America's. In intergenerational mobility he cites a Brookings Institution study by Julia Isaacs, that shows incomes are three times more likely to remain the same in America compared to Denmark, Norway and Finland, and one and a half times more frequently than in Germany. Another measure evident from Germany's experience is the degree of union-company-government cooperation to worker retraining, corporate boards that have representatives of workers and management, the "kurzarbeit" program of retaining employees to smooth out impact of cyclical swings in the economy on workers and companies, and worker's willingness to show restraint on wages especially because management wages are not way out of line as in America. Meyerson reminds readers that the U.S. had a more merit based society in terms of upward intergenerational mobility, distribution of rewards of work between workers in manufacturing and service sectors and management, educational mobility with the G.I. bill, in the first 30 years after the Second World War. In a separate article in the Washington Post on Jan. 5, 2012, David Ignatius poses questions about the effects of globalization in shrivelling the middle class. The access to lower wage manufacturing in China, India, Mexico, and other countries, and lowering of wages in the U.S. to be competitive, was part of globalization. The two tier wage structure in the U.S. automobile industry is one example, making middle class wages a thing of the past. Globalization opened up new markets for American companies. Yet many of the gains in employment were made in emerging markets, as the example of GM's expansion in China showed, with automobile manufacturing expansion inside China....