What's missing here, crucially, is that absent the post-1980s globalization not only would income be lower in both developed and developing countries but GLOBAL inequality would be much HIGHER. via
Paul Krugman admits he was wrong about globalization, then argues this has ABSOLUTELY ZERO important implications. You decide.
highly recommend this article
Interesting for two reasons: 1) big name mainstream economists now openly saying “we got it wrong” and 2) the odd “end of history” style conclusion: the global production and trade system has now reached its end state.
Krugman just came out and said he massively underestimated the impact that globalization and free trade would have on harming the workers!
``While the 1990s consensus on globalization hasn’t stood the test of time, its shortcomings don’t make a case for protectionism now.'' Rapid change now appears to be already behind us. -- via
Lectura imprescindible. Especialmente para quienes nos formamos como economistas en los 80s/90s.
Unusual: Bloomberg has reprinted my contribution to an IMF volume on globalization
Certainly one of the better Krugman articles. Not too partisan. Useful. But I do have a question. While American inequality has gone up, global inequality has smashed down from the same forces. So, Paul, are you saying we should put “America first”?
“Does this mean that Trump is right and a trade war would be in the interests of workers hurt by globalization? No. This answer is based not so much on some rigid commitment to free trade as on the nature of the losses that globalization imposed.”
Surging globalization caused wrenching disruption, but trying to reverse it now would cause more.
What Economists (Including Me) Got Wrong About Globalization. The models that scholars used to measure the impact of exports from developing countries in the 1990s underestimated the effect on jobs and inequality — Paul Krugman
. on what economists missed in 1990s on globalisation’s impact: Globalisation becoming Hyperglobalisation (citing me & : US trade imbalances; regional impacts citing Autor, Dorn, Hanson’s “China Shock” work
Economists thought that the changing trade landscape of the 1990s didn't figure much in rising inequality. revisits their miscalculations, and his own via