Let us be clear: Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic mistake. In the long run, its consequences might well be apocalyptic, if only because we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change.
However, will the extent of the disaster become apparent right away? It is natural and, one must admit, tempting to predict a quick comeuppance — and I myself gave in to that temptation, briefly, on that horrible election night, suggesting that a global recession was imminent. However, I quickly retracted that call. Trumpism will have dire effects, but they will take time to become manifest.
In fact, do not be surprised if economic growth actually accelerates for a couple of years.
Why am I, on reflection, relatively sanguine about the short-term effects of putting such a terrible man, with such a terrible team, in power? The answer is a mix of general principles and the specifics of our current economic situation.
First, the general principles: There is always a disconnect between what is good for society, or even the economy, in the long run and what is good for economic performance over the next few quarters. Failure to take action on climate might doom civilization, but it is not clear why it should depress next year’s consumer spending.
Or take the signature Trump issue of trade policy. A return to protectionism and trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, and would in particular cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets for their products.
However, predictions that Trumpist tariffs would cause a recession never made sense: Yes, the US will export less, but it will also import less and the overall effect on jobs will be more or less a wash.
The US already had a sort of dress rehearsal for this disconnect in the case of Brexit, Britain’s vote to leave the EU. Brexit will make Britain poorer in the long run, but widespread predictions that it would cause a recession were, as some pointed out at the time, not really based on careful economic thinking. And sure enough, the Brexit recession does not seem to be happening.
Beyond these general principles, the specifics of the US’ economic situation mean that for a time, at least, a Trump administration might actually end up doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
Eight years ago, as the world was plunging into financial crisis, I argued that the US had entered an economic realm in which “virtue is vice, caution is risky and prudence is folly.” Specifically, the US had stumbled into a situation in which bigger deficits and higher inflation were good things, not bad. And the US is still in that situation — not as strongly as it was, but the US could still very much use more deficit spending.
Many economists have known this all along, but they have been ignored, partly because much of the political establishment has been obsessed with the evils of debt, partly because US Republicans have been against anything the administration of US President Barack Obama proposes.
However, power has now fallen into the hands of a man who definitely does not suffer from an excess of either virtue or prudence. Trump is not proposing huge, budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations because he understands macroeconomics. However, those tax cuts would add US$4.5 trillion to US debt over the next decade — about five times as much as the stimulus of the early Obama years.
True, handing out windfalls to rich people and companies that will probably sit on a lot of the money is a bad, low-bang-for-the-buck way to boost the economy, and I have my doubts about whether the promised surge in infrastructure spending will really happen. However, an accidental, badly designed stimulus would still, in the short run, be better than no stimulus at all.
In short, do not expect an immediate Trump slump.
In the longer run Trumpism will be a very bad thing for the US economy, in a couple of ways.
For one thing, even if the US does not face a recession right now, stuff happens, and a lot depends on the effectiveness of the policy response. Yet we are about to see a major degradation in both the quality and the independence of public servants. If the US faces a new economic crisis — perhaps as a result of the dismantling of financial reform — it is hard to think of people less prepared to deal with it.
And Trumpist policies will, in particular, hurt, not help, the US’ working class. Eventually, promises to bring back the good old days — yes, to make America great again — will be revealed as the cruel joke they are.
However, all of this will probably take time; the consequences of the new regime’s awfulness will not be apparent right away. Opponents of that regime need to be prepared for the real possibility that good things will happen to bad people, at least for a while.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry