Articles:
The real danger in America
01.04.07 Publication: Exame
So far, it has been the scary monster that has stayed in the forest. Economists have been worrying for at least two years, in some cases more, about the potential impact on the world economy of an American recession. Financial markets really began to worry about it only in February, when trouble in the American home mortgage market first emerged and briefly made investors wonder whether they had under-rated the level of risk, all over the world. That is why the International Monetary Fund felt obliged, in the latest edition of its twice-a-year “World Economic Outlook”, to devote a chapter to the possible effect on the rest of the world of an American economic slowdown. Its conclusions were sanguine: as long as that slowdown is not severe, the global impact should also be mild.
That is certainly what the arithmetic seems to say, and the experience of previous American recessions during the past few decades confirms it. Unless the world’s largest economy is slumping for reasons shared with a lot of other countries, such as an oil-price shock, then others should quickly be able to decouple themselves from an American slowdown. Since the current mild slowdown is occurring for domestic American reasons, namely falling residential property prices, the impact on others should also be mild. But, being economists rather than political scientists, the IMF’s analysts may have missed out the most important reason to be rather more fearful. Clues to it lie, nevertheless, in another chapter of the IMF’s “World Economic Outlook”, one devoted to the globalisation of labour. By that, it means the effect on workers worldwide of the arrival of a huge new supply of labour in
How severe that direct effect would be will depend, obviously enough, on how severe
Something else, though, has also got under way in the past couple of months that may portend a less happy set of circumstances. It is the presidential election campaign for 2008 which, in accordance with American tradition, has begun well over 18 months ahead of the actual vote. This campaign is coinciding with an extremely weak incumbent president, one who is struggling to get any of his initiatives through Congress. The effect can already be seen on trade policy. And it is in trade policy that the most worrying linkages between the American and global economies may turn out to lie.
Paper and protectionism
The worst omen during April had a Chinese flavour to it. It was the decision by the White House to take action against Chinese paper exporters to the
This is partly because the Bush administration is so weak, and yet despite its frailty still wants to get trade deals passed by Congress. It has just negotiated, for example, a bilateral trade deal with
Although this explanation is probably true, it is almost certainly inadequate. The mood in
The reason lies in incomes, not in unemployment. As the IMF’s chapter on labour showed, the share of national income going to labour has fallen steadily over the past 15-20 years, under the influence of information technology and globalisation. Skilled workers have not fared badly. But unskilled workers have been hurt, with their incomes flat or even falling. Competition from the huge supply of cheap unskilled labour in countries like
Now, as Democrats struggle to find the right tone of voice and policies to propose on the central issue of American politics, namely the war in
Threats made during an election campaign don’t necessarily matter. But the chances are that the American economy will indeed be slowing down during the rest of 2007 and into 2008, and unemployment will start to rise. That could set a tone for the new administration and new Congress in 2009 that is strongly protectionist; and between now and then, the Republicans will also seek to show that they take tough stands against Chinese unfair trade. It is through such political amplifying mechanisms that a mild downturn in