Podcasts about china shock

This week, Noah Smith and Erik Torenberg debunk myths about the American middle class and globalization, analyze historical data on wage stagnation and trade, assess China's technological rise, and discuss U.S. economic resilience and policy responses to protectionism. – SPONSORS: NetSuite More than 41,000 businesses have already upgraded to NetSuite by Oracle, the #1 cloud financial system bringing accounting, financial management, inventory, HR, into ONE proven platform. Download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine learning: ⁠⁠https://netsuite.com/102⁠⁠ AdQuick The easiest way to book out-of-home ads (like billboards, vehicle wraps, and airport displays) the same way you would order an Uber. Ready to get your brand the attention it deserves? Visit ⁠⁠https://adquick.com/⁠⁠ today to start reaching your customers in the real world. – SEND US YOUR Q's FOR NOAH TO ANSWER ON AIR: Econ102@Turpentine.co – FOLLOW ON X: @noahpinion @eriktorenberg @turpentinemedia – RECOMMENDED IN THIS EPISODE: Globalization did not hollow out the American middle class: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/globalization-did-not-hollow-out Noahpinion: ⁠⁠https://www.noahpinion.blog/⁠⁠  – TAKEAWAYS: Debunking the Middle Class Hollowing Myth: Noah challenges the common narrative that trade and globalization hollowed out America's middle class. Manufacturing and Economic Shifts: Noah explains that while manufacturing employment did decline significantly (about 3 million jobs in the 2000s), this didn't correspond with overall middle class decline. The China Shock Reality: The "5% truth" in the middle class hollowing narrative relates to what economists call the "China Shock" - a period in the 2000s when Chinese imports surged rapidly. America's Globalization Status: Contrary to popular belief, America has never been highly globalized compared to other countries. Import penetration (imports relative to GDP) is much lower than in countries like China, France or Germany. Energy Crisis Impact: Noah suggests the oil shocks of 1973 and 1979 had a more significant impact on American manufacturing than trade policies. Sino-Futurism and China's Future: They discuss "Sino-futurism" - the idea that China represents the technological future. Noah argues this perspective is overblown, noting issues with China's rapid infrastructure development (like the durability of construction), urban planning problems, and the cyclical nature of technological leadership.

Episode 77: China's China Shock & Tariff Reality Check ft. Peter S. Goodman Episode Summary: In Episode 77 of Trade Splaining, we dig into China's very own “China Shock,” why Budweiser is going budget in Shanghai, and how the global economy might be looking a lot more like... China's. Plus, New York Times journalist Peter S. Goodman returns for his third appearance to discuss how the ground-level impact of tariffs is changing the game—from Colombian factory floors to bourbon country in Kentucky. We're also talking nearshoring, recession vibes, and why Geneva's exotic bird problems could signal more than just invasive species.

The “China Shock”—triggered by the country's entry into the World Trade Organization—devastated America's heartland, causing a sudden exodus of manufacturing jobs and disrupting the communities that depended on them. Promoters of globalization promised “better” jobs would take their place. Nearly 25 years later, has that happened?David Autor, professor of economics at MIT and co-author of the famous “China Shock” paper, joins Oren to talk about the effects of free trade on America's working class. They also examine Autor's latest paper, which highlights that the new jobs in the hardest-hit communities often don't provide the pay or stability that the jobs outsourced by globalization did—and, even worse, that many former workers lack access to these jobs altogether. Plus, they explore the rise of automation in manufacturing and the implications of AI for American workers.Further reading:"Places versus People: The Ins and Outs of Labor Market Adjustment to Globalization" by David Autor, David Dorn, et al. "The China Shock: Learning from Labor Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade" by David Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon Hanson

Trump's tariffs on China are causing a lot of pain around the world. Products that would've gone to the US are now pouring into other countries, leading to factory closures and layoffs. And this is likely to increase after April 2, when President Trump has promised to put in place a new set of tariffs. On today’s episode of the Big Take, Katia Dmitrieva joins David Gura to talk about the collateral damage from Trump’s trade war with China. Read more: A New ‘China Shock’ Is Destroying Jobs Around the WorldSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trump's tariffs on China are causing a lot of pain around the world. Products that would've gone to the US are now pouring into other countries, leading to factory closures and layoffs. And this is likely to increase after April 2, when President Trump has promised to put in place a new set of tariffs. On today’s episode of the Big Take, Katia Dmitrieva joins host David Gura to talk about the collateral damage from Trump’s trade war with China. Read more: A New ‘China Shock’ Is Destroying Jobs Around the WorldSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

During the first week of March, a major transformation in European economic policymaking took place within the short span of 48 hours. It started in Brussels, where European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced an €800 billion "ReArm Europe" plan that would include the suspension of the European Union's fiscal rules for additional defense spending of up to 1.5 percent of GDP by member states as well as €150 billion in loans to supplement national defense budgets. The funding for the loans would be borrowed by the commission on capital markets and passed on to national governments, only the second time in the nearly 70-year history of the EU that collectivized debt, or Eurobonds, has been used to finance common objectives. The first time it happened, during the COVID-19 pandemic, was supposed to be a historic one-time exception rather than a precedent for future action. On its own, ReArm Europe would have signaled a major shift in thinking about the role of economic tools in advancing the EU's global interests. Yet a second striking contribution to this sea change in European fiscal policy came the following day in Berlin: Friedrich Merz - the leader of Germany's center-right Christian Democratic Union and likely future German chancellor after winning that country's elections in February - called for exempting all national defense spending above 1 percent of GDP from Berlin's constitutionally anchored "debt brake," which strictly limits government borrowing. To accompany this surge in defense outlays, Merz also proposed a €500 billion special fund to finance infrastructure investments. Both plans must still be approved by EU member states and Germany's parliament, respectively, with the latter looking likely to pass as soon as tomorrow. But if they are, they will usher in the emergence of a European defense industrial ecosystem and bring to an end a decade and a half of austerity and underinvestment in Germany in sectors ranging from high-speed internet and telecommunications to rail, road and energy networks. To be fair, this new approach in both Berlin and Brussels does not come out of nowhere. Momentum for reform had been building, albeit slowly, for some months now. Most recently, two major EU reports by former Italian prime ministers released last year were already pointing to the need for increased political courage to break policy taboos that were holding back everything from finance for tech start-ups to more efficient defense spending. The first from Enrico Letta called for further integrating the EU single market while the second from Mario Draghi, who also served as president of the European Central Bank, focused more broadly on EU competitiveness. If there is one lesson that Europe already seems to be learning from this new economic nationalism coming out of Washington, it is that it can no longer afford to anchor its own economic strategy in the institutional status quo. The backdrop to these calls was a combination of internal and external factors that were becoming hard to ignore. While the first "China Shock" immediately after the Beijing's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 primarily affected manufacturing industries in the United States, there is growing concern about a second shock that is already hitting German industries like automobiles, machine tools and renewable energy, where Chinese companies are now strong competitors and in some cases - like electric vehicles, or EVs - industry leaders. In response to Chinese-government subsidized overproduction of EVs, the EU has already imposed countervailing duties last year, and it has a number of new trade tools available to deter or respond to similar actions in the future. Beyond competition from China, the move to break Europe's dependence on affordable supplies of oil and gas from Russia since its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has raised costs for German industry, where energy-intensive sectors saw a decline in production of appr...

How the Trump administration is using tariffs as a negotiating tool to weaken the U.S. dollar and increase the global competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers.Topics covered include:Why U.S. stocks are falling, and recession risk is increasingHow the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency is becoming a burden on the U.S.How the Trump administration aims to reduce its trade deficit and make it less attractive for foreign governments to own U.S. assetsWhat are the risks of trying to weaken the U.S. dollarEpisode SponsorsDelete Me – Use code David20 to get 20% offStawberry.meInsiders Guide Email NewsletterGet our free Investors' Checklist when you sign up for the free Money for the Rest of Us email newsletterOur Premium ProductsAsset CampMoney for the Rest of Us PlusShow NotesStock Market News, March 10, 2025: Nasdaq Falls 4% After Trump Doesn't Rule Out Recession by Caitlin McCabe and Krystal Hur—The Wall Street JournalTrump Says US Economy Faces ‘Transition,' Avoids Recession Call by María Paula Mijares Torres—BloombergIs the U.S. Heading for a Recession? Here's What the Experts Say by Caitlin McCabe—The Wall Street JournalMark Carney Wins Canada Liberal Contest, Will Succeed Trudeau in Days by Brian Platt and Laura Dhillon Kane—BloombergEntering the Fall 2024 | Alarming Signs? - Fireside Chat with Scott Bessent by Simplify Asset Management—YouTubeA User's Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System by Stephen Miran—Hudson Bay CapitalCould Trump devalue the dollar with a "Mar-a-Lago Accord"? by Paul Diggle and Luke Bartholomew—Aberdeen InvestmentsWonking Out: The Mysteries of the Almighty Dollar by Paul Krugman—The New York TimesOn the Persistence of the China Shock by David Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson—NBERManufacturing, value added (% of GDP)—World Bank Data Group | Prosperity Data360Council of Economic Advisors Chair Nominee Stephen Miran's Critique of the Global Monetary System—Part I by Steven B. Kamin—AEIUsing Stock Returns to Assess the Aggregate Effect of the U.S.‑China Trade War by Mary Amiti, Matthieu Gomez, Sang Hoon Kong, and David E. Weinstein—Federal Reserve Bank of New YorkTwo cheers for Germany's fiscal reform by Neil Shearing—Capital EconomicsRelated Episodes404: Why Is the U.S. Dollar So Strong? Will It Continue?322: Why Currency Exchange Rates MatterSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

For market purists, any mention of the term industrial policy used to evoke visions of heavy-handed Soviet-style central planning, or the stifling state-centric protectionism employed by Latin American countries in the late 20th century. But that conversation turned dramatically over the last several years, as President Joe Biden's signature legislative achievements like the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act showcased policies designed to influence and shape industries ranging from tech to pharma to green energy. My guest today, Harvard Kennedy School Professor Ricardo Hausmann, is the founder and director of the Growth Lab, which studies ways to unlock economic growth and collaborates with policymakers to promote inclusive prosperity around the world. Hausmann says he believes markets are useful, but have shown themselves inadequate to create public benefits at a time when public objectives like the clean energy transition and shared prosperity have become increasingly essential to human society. In a wide-ranging conversation, we'll discuss why industrial policy is making a comeback, tools that the Growth Lab has developed to help poorer countries and regions develop and prosper, and the uncertainty being caused by President Trump's pledge to raise tariffs and protectionist barriers.Ricardo Hausmann's policy recommendations:Encourage governments to track industries that are not yet developed but have the potential for growth and monitor technological advancements to identify how new technologies can impact existing industries or create new opportunities.Develop state organizations with a deep understanding of societal trends and industrial potential, similar to Israel's office of the Chief Scientist or the U.S. Presidential Commission on Science and Technology.Encourage governments to develop a pre-approved set of tools—including training, educational programs, research programs, and infrastructure—that can be quickly mobilized for specific economic opportunities.Teach policy design in a way that mirrors medical education (e.g., learning by doing as in a teaching hospital), because successful policy design requires real-world experience, not just theoretical knowledge. Ricardo Hausmann is the founder and director of Harvard's Growth Lab and the Rafik Hariri Professor of the Practice of International Political Economy at Harvard Kennedy School. Under his leadership, the Growth Lab has grown into one of the most well regarded and influential hubs for research on economic growth and development around the world. His scholarly contributions include the development of the Growth Diagnostics and Economic Complexity methodologies, as well as several widely used economic concepts. Since launching the Growth Lab in 2006, Hausmann has served as principal investigator for more than 50 research initiatives in nearly 30 countries, including the US, informing development policy, growth strategies and diversification agendas at the national, regional, and city levels. Before joining Harvard University, he served as the first chief economist of the Inter-American Development Bank (1994-2000), where he created the Research Department. He has served as minister of planning of Venezuela (1992-1993) and as a member of the Board of the Central Bank of Venezuela. He also served as chair of the IMF-World Bank Development Committee. He holds a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University.Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an BA in political science from UCLA and a master's in journalism from Columbia University.Scheduling and logistical support for PolicyCast is provided by Lillian Wainaina. Design and graphics support is provided by Laura King of the OCPA Design Team. Web design and social media promotion support is provided by Catherine Santrock and Natalie Montaner of the OCPA Digital Team. Editorial support is provided by Nora Delaney and Robert O'Neill of the OCPA Editorial Team. 

China's entry into the World Trade Organization, normalizing trade relations with the PRC, was billed to the American public as a rising tide that lifts all boats. But decades later, many of the manufacturing workers who lost their jobs to cheaper Chinese goods have not recovered. And while the first “China shock” left millions of […]

China's entry into the World Trade Organization, normalizing trade relations with the PRC, was billed to the American public as a rising tide that lifts all boats. But decades later, many of the manufacturing workers who lost their jobs to cheaper Chinese goods have not recovered. And while the first “China shock” left millions of textile and low-skill manufacturing workers without a job, Chinese trade practices are now targeting sectors crucial to American prosperity and national security. How can the U.S. protect vital industries from unfair trade practices? And why is it so difficult to help those who lose their job to trade find new work? David Autor is the Daniel and Gail Rubinfeld Professor in the MIT Department of Economics and co-director of the National Bureau of Economic Research Labor Studies Program and the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative. Autor is also an elected Fellow of the Econometrics Society, the Society of Labor Economists, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a Faculty Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab. In 2019, the Economist labeled Autor “The academic voice of the American worker.”Read the transcript here. Subscribe to our Substack here.

On this week's Centre for European Reform podcast, senior research fellow Zselyke Csaky sits down with chief economist Sander Tordoir to discuss President Trump's tariffs and the second China shock. Sander explains which countries and industries Trump is targeting and sets out a series of recommendations to protect Germany's automotive and engineering sectors from Beijing's industrial policies. Sander Tordoir and Brad Setser's recommendations to the German government can be read in full here: https://www.cer.eu/publications/archive/policy-brief/2025/how-german-industry-can-survive-second-china-shock Produced by Octavia Hughes

Hello Interactors,Beneath the surface of election fatigue and endless punditry lies a deeper story — one rooted in the economic geography of this nation. It's a tale of two Americas: the urban hubs thriving on growth and globalization, and the rural heartland struggling to hold on. One of those hubs allowed my career and family to grow and the other allowed me to grow.The outcome of this election is well timed with Interplace's fall theme of economic geography. Let's step back from the noise to explore how decades of policy, technology, and shifting demographics have redrawn the map of opportunity. This isn't just about red versus blue — it's about who we are, how we got here, and where we go next.DIVIDED VOTES, DIVIDED LIVESThe 2024 presidential election highlighted many things, but one that really resonates with me is the growing urban-rural divide in American politics. Trump dominated rural voters and Harris dominated urban centers. This contrast is reminiscent of 2016, but has been building through decades of economic divergence: urban areas thrive on knowledge economies and globalization, while rural regions face stagnation and demographic decline. This enduring divide underscores the differing opportunities and values of urban and rural voters that renders as blue and red election maps.The U.S. operates on division. It's driven by a political and economic duopoly. Two major parties dominate, limiting ideological diversity and reducing complex issues to binary debates. This unfairly ignores the nuanced solutions needed to bridge these yawning economic and human geography gaps. Economically, we can see corporate power's concentrated influence, with dominant industries in technology, finance, and healthcare shaping policy, market dynamics, and communities. Smaller players, including local businesses and alternative voices, are often overshadowed, ignored, or silenced.The effects are visible in places like King County, Washington where I live. Tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon attract and fuel thriving, diverse, and mostly progressive communities. Meanwhile, in rural Adair County, Iowa, where my parents grew up and where I still have relatives, residents rely heavily on government transfers. They're struggling to support growing aging populations and reeling from closures of vital services, including retirement homes. My own uncle faced this fate, forced into a failing trailer home to die after his Baptist church-financed retirement home was sold in 2022 to a private equity firm who promptly and callously shut it down.These rural areas have become Republican strongholds, drawn to promises of reversing globalization, reshaping economic policies, and making their communities great again. With a 75.68% turnout of 5,423 eligible voters in Adair County, Iowa, 71.47% of them went to Trump in 2024. Sadly, their vulnerabilities are exploited by false narratives framing urban elites as adversaries to rural traditions and values. Though, these narratives aren't entirely false. Both parties of our duopoly largely ignore, disregard, or patronize the realities of rural successes, strivings, and struggles — as do most urbanites. ROOTS OF THE RURAL RIFTGrowing up in Warren County, Iowa, in the 1970s and 1980s provided a firsthand view of some of these rural and urban transformations. Suburban to Polk County and Des Moines, Warren County was close to economic growth from finance, insurance, and some manufacturing. My father worked as a financial analyst at Massey Ferguson, while my uncle held a blue-collar factory job, representing the industrial stability of the area at the time.My parents grew up in a far more rural Orient, Iowa, in Adair County where Massey Ferguson tractors had already been hard at work for decades. They shared stories of their little town being a vibrant agricultural hub with a bustling grain elevator next to a train track and a lively Main Street. I saw remnants of this economy as a boy, but by the time I reached high school in the 1980s, it was already in decline. That decline was punctuated on June 10, 2024, when the Orient school board voted to dissolve the school where my parents went and grandmother taught due to ongoing enrollment and financial issues.Orient is not alone; the 1980s marked widespread economic decline across rural America. The so-called "Green Revolution," which introduced advanced agricultural technologies, prioritized efficiency through mechanization and consolidation. While it modernized farming and boosted crop yields, it also drove smaller farms out of business and accelerated rural depopulation as large agribusinesses dominated.Adair County exemplified these changes, losing its economic backbone as family farms were replaced by larger operations, leaving Main Streets struggling. In contrast, Warren County benefited from its proximity to Des Moines' expanding economy and has become one of Iowa's fastest-growing counties in recent years. The disparity between suburban and rural areas continues to grow.I see now how the Reagan era of the 1980s helped to hammer in the political and economic wedge of today's divide.Reagan's economic agenda, focused on deregulation, tax cuts, and free-market principles, favored urban areas that were better equipped to leverage these shifts. Urban centers like Des Moines diversified into finance and insurance, while rural regions like Adair County became vulnerable to agricultural volatility and light-industry manufacturing.This era also saw a transformation in the political alignment of what some call the ‘rural petite bourgeoisie' — also known as ‘small business owners' and local elites rich with real estate capital. These, overwhelmingly men, traditionally held moderate views, blending New Deal liberalism with pragmatic conservatism. Facing economic pressures from rural decline, this group turned towards Reagan's low-tax, deregulatory policies as vital for their small businesses' survival in a challenging economy. Meanwhile, large farm and property owners benefitted from skewed farm bills sponsored by Senator Charles Grassley. “Chuck” was first elected in 1981 and is still in office. He is the longest serving member of congress at age 91. In contrast to urban counterparts who increasingly supported redistributive policies, rural elites opposed government spending and regulations they viewed as threats to their businesses. This shift fostered a rural political identity closely linked to the Republican Party, deepening the divide as local leaders endorsed short-term beneficial policies that often worsened structural challenges in their communities.Reagan's emphasis on reducing government intervention also weakened the social safety net that many rural areas relied on during economic downturns. This period marked significant wealth redistribution away from struggling rural economies, as policies favored global trade and technological advancements benefiting urban industries. Free trade agreements like NAFTA, initiated under Reagan and expanded under Bill Clinton in the 90s, further destabilized rural manufacturing and agriculture.Reagan's rhetoric of self-reliance resonated with rural voters who saw these values reflecting their traditions. However, these policies sowed the seeds of economic decline that later led rural areas to depend on government transfers, especially as populations aged — nearly one quarter of Adair County's residents are over 65. Medicare and Medicaid dominate government transfers in these areas. For those in their prime, the shift towards deregulated markets and globalization has left their economies vulnerable. As the gap between urban and rural widens, questions remain about whether Trump's promise to end NAFTA will improve or worsen their circumstances.PROSPERITY AND PRECARITYThe urban-rural economic and demographic divide was worsened by the "China Shock" of the 2000s, which laid the groundwork for Trump's political strategy. This "China Shock" refers to the economic disruption following China's entry into the World Trade Organization, resulting in a surge of cheap imports and offshoring of manufacturing jobs. Rural communities suffered greatly. They faced accelerated job losses and industries already weakened by NAFTA collapsed. Trump's populist critiques of globalization and free trade, along with his promises to revive manufacturing, resonated with rural voters disillusioned by years of economic decline. His focus on preserving Social Security and Medicare appealed to the swell of aging Baby Boomer populations in rural areas, where government transfers — mostly in the form of medicare and social security — have become vital for personal income.Trump also used immigration as a fear tactic, employing anti-Asian rhetoric to foster suspicion of China and Chinese immigrants while extending this narrative to immigrants from Mexico, and Central and South America. Many of these immigrants fled due to policies supported by Reagan in the 1980s that destabilized their regions. The Reagan administration backed authoritarian regimes and aided military interventions aimed at combating pro-social movements, which led to violence and economic hardship still roiling Central America as effects of climate change ravage.NAFTA further worsened this situation by enabling U.S. companies to exploit workers with low wages and displacing small farmers through large agricultural projects, echoing the impacts of the “Green Revolution.” These policies, together with the effects of a changing climate, have disrupted livelihoods and forced many to migrate north for survival.Trump shifted blame for stagnant wages and reduced opportunities in rural America onto immigrants, claiming they were “stealing” jobs. However, the true issues often stemmed from systemic exploitation and corporate priorities aimed at suppressing wages. Rural workers, predominantly White but also Black and Brown legal immigrants, faced declining opportunities due to U.S. companies' refusal to raise wages. Instead, especially with low-wage agricultural and meat packing jobs, they hired, directly and indirectly, illegal immigrant labor. By framing immigration and globalization as adversaries, Trump obscured the structural causes of economic distress, deepening cultural divides while rallying rural voters with a narrative of racism, grievance, and mistrust.The story of America's divide is not just about economic shifts or political realignments—it's a nation grappling with what it means to belong, prosper, and endure. Beneath the surface lies a deeper truth: the urban-rural rift mirrors our struggles with identity, purpose, and interdependence.I see myself in this divide. Place profoundly shaped my life — not just through opportunities but in the values it instilled and the dreams it inspired. The urban skylines of the Seattle area, driven by innovation, look outward to a globalized future, while the rural landscapes of my childhood, rooted in tradition, look inward to preserve what they hold most dear. These differing perspectives underscore the ugly and unjust tensions and diverse and defining beauty of America's existential, albeit bewildering, struggle.Can we rediscover the common threads that bind us? The prosperity of the metropolis cannot endure without the resilience of Main Street, just as rural values lose meaning without the context of a connected world. Division is not our destiny — its what forces our decisions.But the contours of our physical, human, and economic geographies, though disparate, need not dictate our future.Like Iowa's farmlands, where soil renews through struggle, and Seattle's economy, thriving on adaptability, our future can grow stronger through enduring hardship and embracing a transformative, just, and inclusive tomorrow. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

In today's episode, Noah Smith and Brad DeLong tackle pressing topics such as the potential for a 'China Shock 2', the effectiveness of missile defense systems, and the shifting role of economists since the Great Recession. They also explore the nuances of economic theory, policy implementation, and real-world outcomes, particularly in a fast-paced information age.  --

Tue, 02 Jul 2024 08:50:28 +0000 https://berlinsideout.podigee.io/32-season-finale 9b84c47864bb929d9fcb11e4591b5c6d Wrapping up season 2 of BerlinsideOut, Ben and Aaron give listeners their take on what to watch out for in international security this summer – particularly at the upcoming NATO Summit in Washington, November's American election, and the incoming European Commission. The hosts talk about the significance of Kaja Kallas' nomination as the new EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and explore the state of German politics after the European Parliament Elections. They also discuss their own highlights of the season, its most important lessons – and give you a taste of what's next for BerlinsideOut. Resources: The US Presidential Election 2024 – Two Outcomes, One Set of Challenges, Andrew A. Michta, DGAP Commentary The World Needs to Win in Ukraine, Chris Alexander, The Globe and Mail Kaja Kallas: The Russia-defying Estonian PM poised to lead EU foreign policy, Patrick Wintour, The Guardian Europe's Response to China Shock 2.0: Hold China Closer, Tom Fairless and Bertrand Benoit featuring comment by Noah Barkin, The Wall Street Journal Step Aside, Joe Biden, Eliot A. Cohen, The Atlantic Germany has One Year to Replace Olaf Scholz, Paul Hockenos, Foreign Policy Letter: Forget half-measures, G7 must confiscate frozen Russian assets, Letter to Financial Times by Michael Roth, Benjamin Haddad, Rihards Kols and others The West Should Use Frozen Russian Billions to Fund Ukraine's Victory – Fear is the Only Thing Holding Them Back, Aaron Gasch Burnett, Byline Times Military Mobility: Getting Germany's Infrastructure Up to Speed, Jannik Hartmann, DGAP Policy Brief Ukraine-Krieg: Umfrage zur militärischen Unterstützung durch den Westen im Juni 2024, Statista Neue Umfrage zeigt deutliche Veränderung: Immer mehr Deutsche wollen stärkere Ukraine-Unterstützung, Lisa Schmedemann, Merkur Follow DGAP & the hosts on social media: Dr. Benjamin Tallis Aaron Gasch Burnett DGAP on X DGAP on Instagram DGAP on LinkedIn full no Benjamin Tallis, Aaron Gasch Burnett 2959

China's share of manufacturing exports rose from just over 1% of the world's total in 1990, to almost one-fifth today. Research by Gordon Hanson and his co-authors documented how the 'China Shock' led to factory closures and job losses in places that had been producing apparel, shoes, furniture, simple electronics, and other goods that China now exported. Tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018 and 2019 did not reverse these effects and lead to job recovery. But, despite this, Hanson shows there was a political benefit to these trade restrictions. Gordon is the Peter Wertheim Professor of Urban Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, where he co-directs the Reimagining the Economy Project.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comOren is a writer and policy advisor. In 2012, he was the domestic policy director for Romney's presidential campaign, and in 2018 he wrote The Once and Future Worker: A Vision for the Renewal of Work in America. In 2020, he founded the think tank American Compass, where he serves as executive director. He's also a contributing opinion writer for the Financial Times.For two clips of our convo — on how China cheats at free trade, and the possibility of Trumpism without Trump — pop over to our YouTube page. Other topics: growing up in a stable family in suburban Mass; both American parents grew up in Israel; Oren's progressive charter school; turning to conservatism at his very liberal college; studying political economy; working at Bain; the gap between wealth and happiness; the stagnant protectionist UK before Thatcher; Brexit; how London is almost unrecognizable to older Brits; Adam Smith and David Ricardo; how no one predicted the fall of the Soviet Union; Tiananmen Square; neoliberalism's obsession with GDP growth; NAFTA and the WTO; the China Shock; how the success of the free market swung the pendulum too far; the meaning of populism; Oren working for the Romney campaign after the Great Recession; the growing trade deficit; Biden following the Trump playbook on tariffs and industrial policy; semiconductors in Taiwan; the CHIPS Act; the left's disdain for patriotism; the cheap labor of open borders; E-Verify; how the college-for-all model is a “toxic disaster”; Biden's loan forgiveness; Trump's advantage in the 2024 election; his growing multi-racial coalition; his tax cuts and their looming expiration; Republicans rethinking labor unions; reformicons like Reihan and Ross; and me calling out Yglesias for never paying for The Weekly Dish. (Subscribe!)Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Nellie Bowles on the woke revolution, Noah Smith on the economy, Bill Maher on everything, George Will on Trump and conservatism, Lionel Shriver on her new novel, Elizabeth Corey on Oakeshott, and the great Van Jones! Send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Populism—the political term that describes a group of self-described common people who oppose elite—has turned up in what for many is an unexpected place: the push for a worldwide transition to clean energy. Even though they're vital to preventing the most catastrophic consequences of the manmade global climate crisis, clean energy measures are encountering pushback from multiple sources ranging from local citizens groups, to cost-conscious consumers, to self-styled conservationists, to right-wing politicians, and to corporate boardrooms. Harvard Kennedy School Professor Robert Z. Lawrence and Professor Dustin Tingley from Harvard's Department of Government say a number of forces are shaping the new clean energy pushback, including genuine popular resentment in some communities left over from economic transitions like the loss of manufacturing jobs due to globalization. Robert Lawrence is a former member of the President's Council of Economic Advisers and an economist who studies trade policy. Dustin Tingley is a political scientist researching the politics of the climate crisis and co-author of the new book “Uncertain Futures: How to Unlock the Climate Impasse.” With time running out for the world to make significant reductions in fossil fuel use, they join PolicyCast host Ralph Ranalli to discuss strategies and policy ideas to keep the momentum going toward a sustainable energy future.Policy Recommendations:Robert Z. Lawrence's Policy recommendations:Move away from protectionism and use international open trade to create opportunities for developing countries to contribute to the energy transition and grow economically.Accelerate investment in clean energy technology development to ensure that green energy solutions are significantly more cost-effective than fossil fuel alternatives.Replace current incentive-based government programs to encourage clean energy development with a carbon tax to bring in increased revenue and fund clean energy research and infrastructure changeover.Exempt imported steel from current U.S. tariffs when it is used in making clean energy infrastructure such as wind turbines.Dustin Tingley's policy recommendationsAt the federal level, systematically analyze the public finance challenge that states and communities are going to face from the clean energy transition and plan supportPrioritize transparency when making green investments in communities, to ensure they are effective and that companies are playing by the rules.Pass legislation to share revenue from wind and solar project leases on federal lands with state and regional governments in the same manner those governments receive funds from oil and gas leases.Encourage clean energy technology companies to get more civically involved with the communities where they are located.Episode Notes:Robert Z. Lawrence is the Albert L. Williams Professor of International Trade and Investment at HKS, a Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. His research focuses on trade policy and he currently serves as Faculty Chair of The Practice of Trade Policy executive program at Harvard Kennedy School. He served as a member of the President's Council of Economic Advisers from 1998 to 2000 and has also been a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. He is the author or co-author of numerous books, including “Crimes and Punishments? Retaliation under the WTO;” “Regionalism, Multilateralism and Deeper Integration;” and “Can America Compete?” Lawrence has served on the advisory boards of the Congressional Budget Office, the Overseas Development Council, and the Presidential Commission on United States-Pacific Trade and Investment Policy. He earned his PhD in economics at Yale University.Dustin Tingley is Professor of Government in the Government Department at Harvard University and  Deputy Vice Provost for Advances in Learning. His research has spanned international relations, international political economy, climate change, causal inference, data science/machine learning, and digital education, with most focus now on the politics of climate change and energy transitions. His new book with Alex Gazmararian, “Uncertain Futures: How to Unlock the Climate Impasse,” was published with Cambridge University Press. The book features the voices of those on the front lines of the energy transition -- a commissioner in Carbon County deciding whether to welcome wind, executives at energy companies searching for solutions, mayors and unions in Minnesota battling for local jobs, and fairgoers in coal country navigating their community's uncertain future.  His book on American foreign policy with Helen Milner, Sailing the Water's Edge, was published in fall 2015, and was awarded the Gladys M. Kammerer Award for the best book published in the field of U.S. national policy.He teaches courses on the politics of climate change and the environment, data science, and international relations. In the fall of 2023 he is teaching a new course called Energy at Harvard Business School. He received a PhD in Politics from Princeton and BA from the University of Rochester.Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an AB in Political Science from UCLA and an MS in Journalism from Columbia University.Editorial assistance for PolicyCast is provided by Nora Delaney, Robert O'Neill, and Jim Smith of the Harvard Kennedy School Office of Communications and Public Affairs. Design and graphics support is provided by Lydia Rosenberg, Delane Meadows and the OCPA Design Team. Social media promotion and support is provided by Natalie Montaner and the OCPA Digital Team. 

There's a lot going on in currency markets and global trade at the moment. The Japanese yen has been falling, even after authorities seemed to intervene to try to arrest the slide. Meanwhile, weakness in the Chinese yuan has helped boost that country's exports and is fueling talk of a new "China Shock" for the rest of the world, even as its economy continues to grapple with slower economic growth and excess capacity. In this episode of Lots More, we bring back Brad Setser, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, to walk us through these developments, along with his new paper, "Power and Financial Interdependence." We also talk about what China's excavator exports can tell us about its economy.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Brad Setser, the Whitney Shepardson senior fellow at CFR, sits down with James M. Lindsay to discuss the causes and consequences of China's export surge.   Mentioned on the Episode    David H. Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson, "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review   Volkmar Baur, Brad W. Setser, and Michael Weilandt, "China's Record Manufacturing Surplus," CFR.org    James M. Lindsay, "Election 2024: The United States Is Facing a Second China Shock," CFR.org    Zongyuan Zoe Liu, "Beijing Needs to Junk Its Economic Playbook,” Foreign Policy   Brad W. Setser, "China Needs More Progressive Taxes and More Spending on Public Health," CFR.org   For an episode transcript and show notes, visit The President's Inbox at: https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/second-china-shock-brad-setser

What's going on in Global Trade this Week? Today Trade Geek Pete Mento & Doug Draper of Inland Star Distribution cover: 2:15 -General Systems of Preferences Coming Back? 4:34 -ELDs & Loopholes 9:50 -Baltimore Update 11:57 -Halftime 18:21 -Inflation Taking Longer Than the Fed Thought 20:55 -China Shock 2.0   www.capwwide.com/international-insights/4/24/24/gttw-podcast-episode-145 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ls4RNw2ORM  

แนะนำหนังสือ China Shock เล่มใหม่ของ อจ.อาร์ม ตั้งนิรันดร #4

แนะนำหนังสือ China Shock เล่มใหม่ของ อจ.อาร์ม ตั้งนิรันดร #3

แนะนำหนังสือ China Shock เล่มใหม่ของ อจ.อาร์ม ตั้งนิรันดร #2

แนะนำหนังสือ China Shock เล่มใหม่ของ อจ.อาร์ม ตั้งนิรันดร

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is in China trying to discourage government officials and business leaders from flooding the world with cheap goods. WSJ's Andrew Duehren is traveling with Yellen, and explores how her thinking on China has changed with shifting global market forces.   Further Listening: - Janet Yellen on Inflation and the U.S. Economy  - How China's BYD Overtook Tesla  Further Reading: - Janet Yellen Missed the First ‘China Shock.' Can She Stop the Second?  - China Shock 2.0 Sparks Global Backlash Against Flood of Cheap Goods  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Weekly recap of all the daily videosIn this Episode:- Feds Now Spend Twice What They Collect in Taxes- Uniparty Pays Itself Another $1.2 Trillion- $175 Trillion Shortfall in Social Security- The World is in for Another "China Shock"- Fiscal Collapse AcceleratesRead the full article “Fiscal Collapse Accelerates" at www.profstonge.com.Visit our Lead Sponsor: Unchained Keep bitcoin secure and minimize the tax you owe on it. Use code PETER for $100 off a Bitcoin IRA.Visit our Sponsor: ITM Trading A secret war on your retirement is here. Call 866-414-1366 to get your free in-depth report.Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the show

One of the first thing that economists are taught is the Free Trade is a Good Thing. One thing that economists don't speak too much about is that free trade creates both winners and losers. Arguably, not nearly enough attention has been paid to the losers.Whether or free trade is always a net positive depends on many factors. And the alternatives to free trade - the choices made by politicians about things like protectionism - can be even worse. That said, China's accession to the World Trade Organisation was a huge shock and wiped out huge swathes of manufacturing industry and jobs throughout the developed world. Too much too soon seems have been the case. Those left behind communities became the hunting ground for Trump, Brexiteers and populists. They stil are - and there is a distinct possibility of a second China shock coming our way. What will be the results this time?Irish SMEs complain about government inspired costs and regulatory burdens. Are they right to moan? A lot of SMEs are either failing or in danger of going bust.Interest rates: the new normal isn't too far away from where they are now. Discuss. Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/the-other-hand-with-jim.power-and-chris.johns. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Walter and Jeremy talk Super Tuesday results, Benny Gantz's visit to Washington, the threat of another China Shock, and why environmental movements are losing ground across the world. Each week on What Really Matters, Walter Russell Mead and Jeremy Stern help you understand the news, decide what matters and what doesn't, and enjoy following the story of America and the world more than you do now. For more, check out tabletmag.com/what-really-matters. You can read Walter Russell Mead's Tablet column here, and check out more from Tablet here. Connect with us Follow the podcast on Twitter Follow Walter on Twitter Follow Jeremy on Twitter Email us: wrm@tabletmag.com

Show is Sponsored by The Ayn Rand Institute https://www.aynrand.org/starthereandExpress VPN https://www.expressvpn.com/yaronJoin this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/@YaronBrook/joinLike what you hear? Like, share, and subscribe to stay updated on new videos and help promote the Yaron Brook Show: https://bit.ly/3ztPxTxSupport the Show and become a sponsor: / yaronbrookshow Or make a one-time donation: https://bit.ly/2RZOyJJOnline War; Continue the discussion by following Yaron on Twitter (https://bit.ly/3iMGl6z) and Facebook (https://bit.ly/3vvWDDC )Want to learn more about Ayn Rand and Objectivism? Visit the Ayn Rand Institute: https://bit.ly/35qoEC3#chinaeconomy #artificialintelligence #openai #elonmusk #capitalism #Economy ​#Objectivism​ #AynRand #politics #elections2024

On this episode of Talkin' (Policy) Shop, Oren and Chris discuss China's “permanent normal trade relations” (PNTR) status and the case for revoking it.Granting PNTR to China as part of its ascension to the WTO was supposed to grant American firms and workers comparable benefits in the Chinese market. But the experts were wrong. The “China Shock” cost millions of American jobs, reduced domestic investment and innovative capacity, strained many communities' social fabric, and contributed to a surge in “deaths of despair” concentrated among middle-aged Americans without college degrees.Further ReadingAmerican Compass policy brief: End “Permanent Normal Trade Relations” with ChinaSearching for Capitalism in the Wreckage of Globalization (Oren Cass, American Compass)“Where's the Growth?” (American Compass)“The Balancing Act” (American Compass)“China Trade Relations Act of 2023," Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR), Rick Scott (R-FL), Ted Budd (R-NC), and J.D. Vance (R-OH)“Ending Normal Trade Relations with China Act,” Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO)

On this episode, our hosts Bethany McLean and Luigi Zingales sit down with renowned MIT economist David Autor to discuss the impact of technology, labor markets, and immigration on wage inequality and the economy at large. Autor is best known for his work on the "China Shock," the impact of rising Chinese exports on manufacturing employment in the United States and Europe after China's accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001. His most recent work sheds light on which groups have seen the largest nominal wage gains during the COVID recovery, the connections between wage growth and inflation, and more. Autor discusses how advances in technology have disrupted traditional labor markets, how to make better policy choices about the future of work, and the challenges and benefits of immigration in a globalized economy.Show Notes:Revisit our conversation with R. Glenn Hubbard, which is referenced in the interview with David AutorRead the Autor's paper discussed in the episode here.

Harvard Kennedy School Professor Gordon Hanson and Harvard Vice Provost for Climate and Sustainability James Stock say an important part of the green energy transition will be mitigating its effects on employment, both in the United States and overseas. Talking about the clean energy transition can conjure up images of commuters using sleek electric trains and electric cars powered by the sun and wind, and of workers with good-paying jobs installing the infrastructure of the future. But the outlook for communities that are economically tied to the fossil fuel economy that will be left behind isn't quite as sunny.  Stock is director of Harvard's Salata Institute for Climate and Sustainability, which brings together researchers from around the university to collaborate on climate solutions. Hanson is co-director of the Reimagining the Economy Project at the Kennedy School's Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy. They say making the green energy transition is urgent and vital, but to do it successfully will mean planning a different sort of transition for almost a million workers in just the American fossil fuel extraction and refining industries alone—not to mention millions of workers further up the fossil fuel ecosystem. Thanks to previous economic shocks like globalization, automation, and the decline of the coal industry, we've seen first-hand the devastation that large-scale job loss can wreak on one-industry cities and company towns. Hanson and Stock say harnessing the lessons from those prior transitions can help power a future that's both green and inclusively prosperous.Gordon Hanson is the Peter Wertheim Professor in Urban Policy at Harvard Kennedy School. He is also Chair of the Social and Urban Policy Area at HKS, a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Hanson received his PhD in economics from MIT in 1992 and his BA in economics from Occidental College in 1986. Prior to joining Harvard in 2020, he held the Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair in International Economic Relations at UC San Diego, where he was founding director of the Center on Global Transformation. In his scholarship, Hanson studies the labor market consequences of globalization. He has published extensively in top economics journals, is widely cited for his research by scholars from across the social sciences and is frequently quoted in major media outlets. Hanson's current research addresses how the China trade shock has affected US local labor markets, the causes and consequences of international migration, and the origins of regional economic divides.James H. Stock is Vice Provost for Climate and Sustainability at Harvard University; the Harold Hitchings Burbank Professor of Political Economy, Faculty of Arts and Sciences; and a member of the faculty at the Harvard Kennedy School. His current research includes energy and environmental economics with a focus on fuels and on U.S. climate change policy. He is co-author, with Mark Watson, of a leading undergraduate econometrics textbook. In 2013-2014 he served as Member of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, where his portfolio included macroeconomics and energy and environmental policy. He was Chair of the Harvard Economics Department from 2007-2009. He holds a M.S. in statistics and a Ph.D. in economics from the University of California, Berkeley.Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Public Affairs and Communications is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an AB in Political Science from UCLA and an MS in Journalism from Columbia University.The co-producer of PolicyCast is Susan Hughes. Design and graphics support is provided by Lydia Rosenberg, Delane Meadows and the OCPA Design Team. Social media promotion and support is provided by Natalie Montaner and the OCPA Digital Team. 

A flood of imports from China had an unexpected impact on the Peruvian clothing industry while discouraging Peru's women workers.

A flood of imports from China had an unexpected impact on the Peruvian clothing industry while discouraging Peru's women workers.

Just when you thought the relief rally could be trusted, a new threat emerges.Check The Lead-Lag Report on your favorite social networks.Twitter: https://twitter.com/leadlagreportYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/theleadlagreportFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/leadlagreportInstagram: https://instagram.com/leadlagreport                Sign up for The Lead-Lag Report at www.leadlagreport.com and use promo code PODCAST30 for 2 weeks free and 30% off.                Nothing on this channel should be considered as personalized financial advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any securities.                The content in this program is for informational purposes only. You should not construe any information or other material as investment, financial, tax, or other advice. The views expressed by the participants are solely their own. A participant may have taken or recommended any investment position discussed, but may close such position or alter its recommendation at any time without notice. Nothing contained in this program constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial instruments in any jurisdiction. Please consult your own investment or financial advisor for advice related to all investment decisions.See disclosures for The Lead-Lag Report here: The Lead-Lag Report (leadlagreport.com)Being an EngineerIndustry knowledge & best practices that will accelerate your engineering learning curve.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify Dirt Road DiscussionsAnything and everything about agriculture. We talk to captivating people who are...Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify

China's financial capital is locked down.Read the article: https://www.weekinchina.com/2022/04/shock-in-shanghai/Narrated by Sylvia Franke.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Pranab Bardhan is a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He has undertaken pioneering research on international trade, the political economy of development policies, decentralised governance, and the political economy of development in China and India. His latest book, A World of Insecurity: Democratic Disenchantment in Rich and Poor Countries, is scheduled to be published by Harvard University Press later this year.Host:Professor Dan Banik, University of Oslo, Twitter: @danbanik  @GlobalDevPod

Special Guest Dr. Gordon Hanson, co-author of On the Persistence of the China Shock,  joins us to discuss his research. He's looked at the Chinese economic transformation from 1990 onwards and has discovered fascinating insights into what the U.S. got wrong in dealing with it -- and what we can learn from those mistakes. One big finding is that the impact was, and still is, very different depending on where in the U.S. you live.Next, a new Pew Research study of 17 countries with advanced economies and how their citizens view different aspects of America. Some of the highlighted topics in the study are our healthcare system, model of democracy, discrimination, military, and approval of the President. Spoiler alert! It ain't pretty.Finally, our fun fact is just in time for Thanksgiving! You are definitely going to want to stay to get a piece of this one!Dr. Gordon Hanson is the Peter Wertheim Professor in Urban Policy at Harvard Kennedy School. He is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, a life member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and co-editor of 3 publications, including the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Find more of his research here.Follow Dr. Gordon Hanson on Twitter: @gordon_h_hanson About Poll HubEach week, Poll Hub goes behind the science to explain how polling works, what polls really show, and what the numbers really mean. Poll Hub is produced by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, home of America's leading independent college public opinion poll, the Marist Poll.Lee Miringoff (Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion), Barbara Carvalho (Director of the Marist Poll), and Jay DeDapper (Director of Innovation at the Marist Poll) dig deep to give you a look at the inner workings of polls and what they tell us about our world, our country, and ourselves.

Trade with China made American goods cheaper and lifted millions of Chinese people out of poverty. At the same time, it devastated communities across America's heartland. What have we learned from the "China Shock"? And what can we do to prevent something like it from happening again?

Media Watch 2021 Episode 23: Pfizer spin; UNESCO, the reef & China; Shock jock coup; Choc top media.

Continuing with my series on conservatism, I note again that far from standing firm on timeless principles, conservatives have in fact changed their mind on many of the most basic elements of society. This includes civil rights and the nature of gender and the family.If they themselves say that they were wrong about such fundamental things, why would anyone believe they are right about anything else? Certainly, we should be open to rethinking many other conservative dogmas, including free trade.Economists have long argued that free trade is close to a free lunch, an unambiguous win-win in which any negative disruptions it causes will be modest and short lived.  In this podcast I look at those arguments, going back in time to the era in which NAFTA and the Uruguay Round of global trade talks were taking place, and China was preparing for entry into the global trading framework. The economic predictions of the free traders were wrong and the critics completely vindicated. The future course of events was accurately predicted by critics of dogmatic free trade, something it look nearly two decades for the economists to admit was true.Global Squeeze: The Coming Crisis for First World Nations (1998): https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0809229749/ref=as_li_qf_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=theurban-20 The China Shock: https://www.nber.org/papers/w21906Vox interview with an author of the China Shock study: https://www.vox.com/new-money/2017/3/29/15035498/autor-trump-china-trade-election

Scott Lincicome is a senior fellow in Economic Studies at Cato Institute where he writes on international and domestic economic issues, including international trade, industrial policy and manufacturing and global supply chains. Scott joins David on Macro Musings to discuss what we've learned so far about the so-called China shock and where we are today in the trade war. Specifically, David and Scott discuss the historical rise of Chinese exports, its impact on US labor markets, how certain policies make it harder for US workers to adjust, and whether the Trump administration marks a genuine regime shift in international trade.   Transcript for the episode can be found here: https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/tags/macro-musings   Scott’s Twitter: @scottlincicome Scott’s Cato Institute profile: https://www.cato.org/people/scott-lincicome   Related Links:   *Testing the ‘China Shock’: Was Normalizing Trade with China a Mistake?”*by Scott Lincicome https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/testing-china-shock-was-normalizing-trade-china-mistake#:~:text=However%2C%20champions%20of%20the%20emerging,with%20China%20for%20particular%20scorn.&text=It%20finds%20that%20PNTR%20and,that%20PNTR%20critics%20now%20repeat.   *Clashing over Commerce* by Douglas Irwin https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo24475328.html   *Audaciously Hopeful: How President Obama Can Help Restore the Pro‐​Trade Consensus* by Dan Ikenson and Scott Lincicome https://www.cato.org/publications/trade-policy-analysis/audaciously-hopeful-how-president-obama-can-help-restore-protrade-consensus   *The 'China Shock', Exports and U.S. Employment: A Global Input-Output Analysis* by Robert Feenstra and Akira Sasahara https://www.nber.org/papers/w24022   David’s Twitter: @DavidBeckworth David’s blog: http://macromarketmusings.blogspot.com/

Were economists and others wrong about China with respect to trade? Cato's Scott Lincicome is author of "Testing the 'China Shock.’" See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In the fourth episode of Heartland Mainland, we pull apart the history of Iowa’s manufacturing sector and its relationship to China. To do that, we take you to the city of Davenport on the banks of the Mississippi River, along the state’s eastern border with Illinois. There we visit Isabel Bloom Inc., a local studio with a long history of producing concrete sculptures and Christmas ornaments. Isabel Bloom was founded by its namesake nearly 70 years ago in Davenport, and it steadily grew from a one-woman art studio into a thriving business with loyal customers across the region. But after China entered the World Trade Organization in 2001, things began to shift. Imported Chinese goods began filling up the shelves of big box stores and small gift shops across the country, putting major pressure on American manufacturers who competed with them. Job losses in manufacturing extended across the industrial Midwest, including in cities in the manufacturing-heavy eastern border of Iowa. Economists estimate over the course of a decade, these added up to over 1 million jobs lost in American manufacturing. They dubbed this phenomenon, “the China Shock.” In this episode, we explore the impact of the China Shock in Davenport, looking at the decision by Isabel Bloom’s owners to move production to China. That decision threw Isabel Bloom into the middle of a local uproar. The company was flooded with angry letters, op-eds in the papers lambasted the decision, and angry locals even boycotted the store. So what led an Iowa business to have to choose between its local heritage and the promise of lower costs? How did it pan out for the workers at Isabel Bloom, and residents of Davenport? And how has the China Shock shaped American politics and the recent US-China trade war? We dig into all that and a whole lot more in this episode of Heartland Mainland.

Answering the question of whether Germany's export-driven model will ever change, and whether Germany's obsession with saving and budget surpluses will ever change. And how to say "Groundhog Day" in German. Wade Jacoby of Brigham Young University and Megan Greene of Manulife Investments join FTAlphaville's Brendan Greeley and Mark Blyth from the Rhodes Center. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In the second of a two-part look at global inequality Kate & Luigi talk about the downside of globalization. A listener's email sparks a conversation about what's driving the growing wage gap within the U.S. We survey the latest research on the lingering effects of the 'China Shock' and debate how to reverse the trend before the people revolt.

Don Boudreaux is a professor of economics at George Mason University as well as the co-director of the Program on the American Economy and Globalization at the Mercatus Center. He joins the show today to talk about the future of trade and globalization. David and Don also discuss the history of protectionism in the US, President Trump’s trade policies, and why the China Shock thesis may signal bad economics. Don’s blog: https://cafehayek.com/ Don’s Mercatus Profile: https://www.mercatus.org/donald-j-boudreaux Related Links: *Clashing over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy* by Doug Irwin https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo24475328.html *Tariffs, Immigration, and Economic Insulation: A New View of the U.S. Post-Civil War Era*by Cecil Bohanon and Norman Van Cott https://www.jstor.org/stable/24562083?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents *The China Shock: Learning from Labor Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade* by David Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon Hanson https://www.nber.org/papers/w21906 David’s blog: macromarketmusings.blogspot.com David’s Twitter: @DavidBeckworth

Gordon Hanson and Charlene Barshefsky discuss China’s commitments and market reforms since joining the WTO and the path ahead in the trade relationship between the world’s two biggest economies. They explore the policy and enforcement tools the US has to confront China over the imbalance and lack of reciprocity, and the immediate political pressure on US policy makers to address the loss of jobs due to trade. Ambassador Charlene Barshefsky served as the US Trade Representative from 1997 to 2001, she was responsible for the negotiation of hundreds of complex market access, regulatory and investment agreements with virtually every major country in the world. She is best known internationally as the architect and chief negotiator of China's historic World Trade Organization Agreement. She is currently WilmerHale's Senior International Partner, where she continues her legal career in international litigation, commercial negotiations, investment and regulatory advice, and dispute resolution. Dr. Gordon Hanson is the Acting Dean and Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair in International Economic Relations at the School of Global Policy & Strategy at UC San Diego, where he also directs the Center on Global Transformation. Dr. Hanson specializes in the economics of international trade, international migration and foreign direct investment. His recent research project on the effect of China’s rise on US workers, firms and markets spurred a wide discussion on US trade policy at the height of 2016 US presidential elections that is still being debated. This episode was recorded at UC San Diego Studio Ten300 Host: Samuel Tsoi Editors: Mike Fausner, Anthony King Production Support: Lei Guang, Susan Shirk, Amy Robinson, Sarah Pfledderer, Michelle Fredricks Music: Dave Liang/Shanghai Restoration Project Restoration Project Episode photo credit: CNN Money

Matt, Ezra, and Sarah talk about proposals to eliminate college tuition, the real issues behind Hillary's email server, and a new paper on a small policy change with huge consequences.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices