Jagdish Bhagwati has an excellent piece in the FT today. He argues that America needs a new deal for trade which supports a globalised market without resorting to protectionism. He argues that the Democrats, the worst offenders, and Republicans need to face up to reality and offer plans for restructuring America’s work force (including realigning the education system) rather than just resorting to populist rhetoric. In particular he berates the US for posturing that protectionism is “altruistic”:
This is the crucial point about protectionism – and the only reason that both sides of the political divide in America still dally with it. It is easy and popular to claim you are saving jobs – it’s far more complicated to explain the truth about the damage job protection can cause to the global (and US economy). Hence Obama’s rhetoric:“What is doubly offensive about this exercise of political muscle is that it is advanced in the language of altruism: not by saying frankly that it is because “our unions are worried about competition” but by pretending that it is “in your workers’ interests”. An altruistic hegemon would not be playing these games; a selfish hegemon will do little else.”
Strange that he doesn’t mention that in the last ten election cycles, organised labour has donated $581,225,632 (92% of all its contributions) to the Democrats. There’s nothing benevolent about protectionism: it’s political and popular – not altruistic.“politicians in Washington sign trade agreements that are riddled with perks for big corporations but have absolutely no protections for American workers. It’s bad for our economy, it’s bad for our country, and it will not happen when I am president.”
Comments