@johnvanreenen discusses the Economics of #Brexit
10 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in economics, Euro crisis, international economics, macroeconomics Tags: Brexit, Common market, EU
@BernieSanders just wants to build a different type of wall to @realdonaldtrump’s
09 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, development economics, growth disasters, growth miracles, industrial organisation, international economics, labour economics, labour supply, politics - USA Tags: 2016 presidential election, antiforeign bias, economics of immigration, left-wing popularism, Mexico, NAFTA, right-wing popularism, The Great Escape, trade agreements
Top 10 Infamous Barrier Walls Throughout History
07 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in defence economics, economics, international economic law, international economics, International law, law and economics Tags: economics of borders
@BernieSanders @realdonaldtrump want to reverse The Great Escape in developing countries
07 Apr 2016 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics, development economics, economic history, growth disasters, growth miracles, industrial organisation, international economics, politics - USA, Public Choice, rentseeking, survivor principle Tags: absolute poverty, extreme poverty, tariffs, The Great Escape, trade agreements, trade liberalisation
Source: TRANSCRIPT: Bernie Sanders meets with News Editorial Board – NY Daily News.
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3854986/UN-report-poverty.0.png)
Source: If you’re poor in another country, this is the scariest thing Bernie Sanders has said – Vox.
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/6104377/Screen%20Shot%202016-02-25%20at%2011.48.27%20AM.png)
Source: If you’re poor in another country, this is the scariest thing Bernie Sanders has said – Vox.
.
@Greens @sarahinthesen8’s solution to boat people drowning
04 Apr 2016 1 Comment
in economics, Economics of international refugee law, international economics Tags: boat people, economics of migration, refugees
About 1200 people drowned under Labour’s boat people policies. That would have put the percentage at risk of death in the low single digits. Taking a boat to Europe is very dangerous in comparison.
Source: Another way for refugees | Australian Greens.
Arriving by boat in Australia does not increase the size of the refugee quota. It just changes who gets to the head of the queue and how many died trying to get to the head of the queue.
Source: Kiwiblog.
There is nothing compassionate about rewarding people for risking their lives. The chances of dying while attempting to come to Australia by boat are about 2%.
The recent experience in Europe confirms that just letting large numbers of refugees come to your country hardens the attitude of the majority of voters in that country to admitting refugees in general, much less more than their current quota.
Political bias, free trade and @berniesanders @realdonaldtrump
31 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, economics of media and culture, industrial organisation, international economics, politics - USA, Public Choice, public economics, rentseeking Tags: 2016 presidential election, antiforeign bias, antimarket bias, makework bias, pessimism bias, rational irrationality
The 1st @Paul Krugman (1994) on “Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession”
24 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in international economics, politics - USA Tags: anti-foreign buyers, anti-market buyers, Leftover Left, Paul Krugman, public intellectuals, rational ignorance, rational irrationality, renegade Left
Rothbard on Balance of Trade “Deficit”
23 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics, international economics Tags: trade balance
The 1st @PaulKrugman on globalisation & development @harleyhs #TPPANoWay
22 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in development economics, economic history, growth disasters, growth miracles, international economics Tags: anti-market bias, antiforeign bias, GATT, gender analysis, gender wage gap, makework bias, NAFTA, pessimism bias, preferential trading agreements, rational irrationality, TPPA, WTO
Source: Paul Krugman (1997) Enemies of the WTO.
This visiting American education professor who specialises in globalisation, claimed in the linked radio interview that real wages had fallen in the USA and Mexico. Even for the bottom 20% of the USA, their after-tax household incomes increased by 40% since 1979, with most of that after the signing of NAFTA.
Everything that is bad in crony capitalist Mexico is the fault of NAFTA if our visiting academic is to be believed despite trade tripling and investment increasing 600% because of NAFTA.
Women’s earnings growth has been perfectly fine over the last 40 years despite the horrors of NAFTA and the attack on unions and workers rights by a top 1% emboldened by NAFTA and globalisation, if our visiting academic is to be believed.
Gender analysis, gender analysis, where is his gender analysis of NAFTA? Few labour market statistics make sense without being broken down by sex because of the immense economic progress of women in the last 50 years. Can NAFTA claim credit for that?
Prof Patrick Minford on the EU and trade
22 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics, international economics Tags: British economy, British politics, Common market, customs unions, EU
Creative destruction in car industry market shares
21 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economic history, entrepreneurship, industrial organisation, international economics, survivor principle Tags: creative destruction
Patrick Minford on why membership of the EU is hampering Britain’s trade with the wider world
19 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics, international economics Tags: British economy, British politics, Common market, customs unions, EU
The explosion of lead in the saddlebags of trade agreements @KennedyGraham @DavidShearerMP #TPPANoWay
16 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics of bureaucracy, international economic law, international economics, law and economics, politics - New Zealand, property rights, Public Choice, rentseeking Tags: crony capitalism, customs unions, free trade agreements, international investment law, investor state dispute settlement, preferential trading agreements
@toddmcclaymp #MFAT hasn’t heard of trade diversion? @DavidShearerMP #TPPANoWay @KennedyGraham
15 Mar 2016 Leave a comment
in economics of bureaucracy, international economics, politics - New Zealand, Public Choice, rentseeking Tags: customs unions, free trade agreements, preferential trading agreements, TPPA, trade creation, trade diversion
Trade diversion occurs when preferential trading agreements cause imports to shift from low cost countries to higher cost countries. Rather than gaining tariff revenue from inexpensive imports from world markets, a country may import expensive products from member countries but not gain any tariff revenue. An example of trade diversion is when Britain closed its doors to New Zealand agricultural exports after joining the common market.
Preferential trading agreements are trade agreements between countries in which they lower tariffs for each other but not for the rest of the world. The mass media mislabel them free trade agreements.
Under trade diversion, the partner country benefits from this change as an exporter, but the importing country loses due to this higher cost, as does the third country whose exports fall.
The loss to the importing country is not visible to consumers, who find the higher-cost product cheaper due to the absence of tariff. The country as a whole loses, with that loss being lost tariff revenue – lost to cover the cost of the higher cost imports from a member of the new preferential trading agreement.
It does not take much trade diversion to make a preferential trading agreement welfare reducing because of this switch to high cost producers.
The New Zealand Minister of Trade and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade did not discuss this major risk even from the simplest preferential trading agreement in recent policy analysis of the TPPA as my Official Information Act request has revealed. The term trade version does not appear in any of their analysis.
Adherents of the natural trading partner hypothesis argue that preferential trade agreements are more likely to improve welfare if participating countries already trade disproportionately with each other. Opponents of the hypothesis claim that the opposite is true: welfare gains are likely to be greater if participating countries trade less with each other. The powerful critique by Bhagwati and Panagariya (1996) is now widely accepted and one hears little justification of on preferential trading agreements on the grounds of the natural trading partners hypothesis
Recent Comments