Watch any sport and you are treated to instant replays that give you a detailed — often slow-motion — view of important moments. Watch the news, and you could find yourself feeling like you are similarly watching the past on playback.
These replays — of high inflation, soaring public debt, a brutal war in Europe, a new cold war and the rise of potentially destructive technologies — are far from instant, and the stakes are much higher.
I predicted rising inflation and slower growth as early as spring 2021. Former US secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers did so even earlier. Yet today’s inflation — the worst since the early 1980s — caught most people by surprise.
Illustration: Louise Ting
Supply-chain snarls, including energy market and food-system disruptions linked to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, contributed to the initial surge in prices.
However, the main driver of today’s inflation has been profligate monetary and fiscal policies, which were upheld despite quicker-than-expected recoveries from COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.
For example, US President Joe Biden’s US$1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, implemented in March 2021, was nearly three times larger than the US Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the GDP gap that still needed to be closed for the economy to reach its potential.
One cannot but notice the echoes of former US president Lyndon B. Johnson’s use of debt to finance the Vietnam War and the “war on poverty” in the late 1960s.
Meanwhile, the US Federal Reserve kept its target interest rate close to zero for too long, and started to unwind its balance sheet too late — an approach that recalls the monetary policy mistakes it made under former US Fed chairman Arthur Burns in the 1970s.
Central bankers thought that it would not hurt to let inflation run above the 2 percent target for a while before bringing it back down, because they had undershot the target previously.
There are short-term benefits to running the economy “hot.” Just before the pandemic, US unemployment was low, minority groups had the lowest poverty rate in history and wages were rising fastest at the bottom of the distribution. For the first time in decades, inequality was declining.
However, the economic and political price has come due. Core inflation — which excludes food and energy prices — in the US has averaged 5.6 percent for the past 12 months. While it is down a bit from its peak, it has rotated to stickier services prices, and remains almost three times the Fed’s target.
The central bank creed is that the short-run interest rate must run above inflation for some time before inflation — after a “long and variable lag” — falls toward the target rate.
Wages have not kept pace with inflation, and most households — especially those which expansionary policies were supposed to help — have been experiencing a decline in real income for two years. Although unemployment remains very low, and the US economy has outperformed much of the rest of the world, almost half of the US population thinks it is already in a recession, and most Americans expect their children and grandchildren to be worse off than them. This perceived demise of the “American dream” has left the public — and politics — deeply unsettled.
Another replay that caught most of the world by surprise is the ferocious war in Europe. The US’ disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 weakened deterrence.
However, Russian President Vladimir Putin clearly telegraphed his plans for Ukraine. Beyond lamenting in 2005 that the Soviet Union’s demise was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century — worse than World War II, apparently, when 20 million Russians died — he seized part of Georgia in 2008 and annexed Crimea in 2014.
Third, despite all the global economic integration of recent decades, the world seems to be on the brink of a new cold war. China’s increasing economic, diplomatic and military assertiveness, together with its deepening ties with Russia, has raised fears about a realignment in international relations, and even a clash of political systems.
The Cold War pitted totalitarian regimes with centrally planned economies against mixed-capitalist democracies, led by an economically and militarily dominant US. This time, it is autocratic state capitalism versus social-welfare democracies, and the US’ resolve and capabilities are in doubt.
Particularly worrisome, nonaligned actors are hedging their bets — and the US appears to be asleep at the wheel. The China-brokered rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran — a sponsor of terrorism and a supplier of advanced military drones to Russia — stands out. Does this mark a return to traditional balance-of-power geopolitics, or is it a prelude to conflict between the US and China over Taiwan?
Finally, technological advances are disrupting economies and upending expectations about the future. Technology has been transforming economies and displacing workers since well before there was a term — Schumpeterian creative destruction — for the phenomenon.
However, economies have generally adjusted: Computers did not end up causing massive structural unemployment, because the workforce was redeployed to other jobs. In any case, standards of living rose.
Will this be the case for artificial intelligence (AI)? A group of tech leaders, including Tesla Inc and Twitter Inc chief executive officer Elon Musk, are not so sure. In a recent open letter, they called for a six-month — or longer — pause on advanced AI development to gain a better understanding of the risks the technology poses and devise ways to mitigate them.
Musk said that those risks include the destruction of human civilization, and that Google cofounder Larry Page once called him a “speciesist” for wanting to safeguard humanity from AI.
Ultimately, AI is a tool. It can be used for good. For example, to develop new drugs and diagnostics.
However, it can also do great harm, such as being used to abet repression in China. I remain cautiously optimistic that the world can overcome — or at least sufficiently manage — these challenges.
However, given widespread nuclear proliferation, the costs of failure could bring the most unwelcome replay of all.
Michael J. Boskin, professor of economics at Stanford University and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, was chairman of former US president George H.W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers from 1989 to 1993.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS