Open thread Jan. 29, 2016 Dan Crawford | January 30, 2016 9:34 am Comments (6) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
MEMORANDUM FOR THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
“…..by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to you the authority to enter into trade agreements…..”
Welcome to Angry Bear
Sorry , Run , that was me.
That’s why I don’t actively trade stocks – fat finger syndrome.
Looks like with the fast track authority the president is going to attempt to ram through the congress and senate a very bad TPP trade deal. Please go see coalition prosperousamerica.org. for much greater enlightenment of the facts. We cannot afford another NAFTA like deal(another Clinton casualty-conundrum) that will cost us billions of economic dollars-wealth and millions of job losses…True reform is a process, not an event. The oligarchs control the government, corporations and news media which is why it will be so difficult to “Make America Better Again”.
More ” long and variable lags ” in mainstream econ:
This isn’t trade specific, but here goes.
In today’s NYTimes. Eduardo Porter tells us about a report put out in December, by a group of conservatives and liberals (so-called anyway), on eliminating poverty. Swell. This bit caught my eye, however, regarding minimum wage increases:
Consider the call to increase the minimum wage. The scholars made note of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s recent assessment that the Obama administration’s proposal to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 from $7.25 and index it to inflation would provide higher pay to 16 million to 24 million workers and lift a million people out of poverty — at a cost of 500,000 jobs over three years and a slight uptick in consumer prices.
We usually hear the right pull out the ‘job killer’ meme anytime raising the minimum wage is spoken of. And studies apparently do show that some job loss happens. BUT, why don’t we see the same wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth when automation eliminates thousands of jobs, or they are moved off-shore to people making pennies a day? (And by the way, did you see the price of Nike shoes fall after they made their famous exit to Asia in the 90s? I didn’t think so.)
It just seems to me that the American Enterprise Institute and their compatriots have a very narrow view of what constitutes ‘bad job loss’ vs. ‘good job loss’, i.e., innovation/automation, etc.