My intrepid Mercatus Center colleague Veronique de Rugy explains that there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Elizabeth Warren’s proposed trade ‘policy’ and the calamity that is Trump’s. A slice:
As a matter of fact, even under less-than-perfect conditions, the voluntary exchange of goods is mutually beneficial— nearly always. It took a long time and numerous costly wars before a global system for governing trade was established that permitted individuals to buy and sell across political borders without significant interference. And once that happened, a sharp rise in global prosperity followed. What barriers now remain should ideally be removed, but history shows that that’s best achieved by working within the system, not by tearing it apart. These two politicians also share the arrogance – pervasive among politicians – that they know better than all of us what is good for us, and that they can overcome the knowledge problem better than the market (paging Don Lavoie).
According to a report by Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, the tariffs imposed by President Trump on Chinese imports into the United States have raised the average tariff to 24 percent from 3 percent at the start of the trade war and “will affect nearly everything Americans purchase from China.”
Here are combined tips, aimed at economists, for writing well. (But don’t miss Deirdre McCloskey’s Economical Writing.)
My Mercatus Center colleague Adam Thierer nominates – with good reason – a new proposal by NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio for what would be the Worst Regulation Ever. (It’s beyond-words frightening that adult human beings actually seriously think – if that’s the word – in the way that Bill de Blasio apparently does.) A slice from Adam’s essay:
Mayor de Blasio’s first idea would be one of the most far-reaching and destructive regulations in American history. A federal agency with “a permitting process for any company seeking to increase automation that would displace workers,” is essentially a political veto over workplace innovations at nearly every business in America. The result would be a de facto ban on productivity improvements across all professions.